FB - Find Bigfoot announcement: "HUGE" new video coming Sept 10

What an underwhelming video. I like how the presenter can see muscle movement in 3 frames of video of a blobsquatch.

Why didn't he just go out and video it? Seems like the squatch is just hanging around anyway, so he might have posed for better footage.

reply to post by seabhac-rua



BFRO Claims
***Will require some time devoted to reading through random articles/claims.***

Take it with a grain of salt of course, can never believe everything from the lions mouth. However, I believe that someone that came out has to be telling the truth about the film and they just anted to make a quick buck off the stories being told of giant apes living in the northwest. Could it still be real? Of course it can, but I like to weigh the evidence in each hand and whatever is heaviest that's generally the route I take. Just my take on the film and things being said about it.

About the "Suit"
Take from it what you will of course.


I should have said not proven, but "highly speculated to be hoaxed." I tend to stand on the side of this being faked as there seems to be a little more evidence that it can be faked, and monetary gains would be just cause (again, I personally follow the money trail IF that is an option).


That being said, proven to be hoaxed? That was bad word choice, however, this video has indeed held up against the test of time and it looks like it will for the foreseeable future.


I live in WA and am a strong believer that Sasquatch is roaming these woods. I've dedicated hours coming up with potential ideas of what this creature is, and a handful of friends/family that have made claims of hearing the beast while on hikes or camping in the Olympic Peninsula.


MY reason to believe
This happens to be a claim made by my good friend's uncle, and have talked to him about it...I find to be better proof of existence than anything else. For the simple fact that a discovery channel crew came out, took the story and evidence to look at it. After about a month or so they returned with everything they had taken and considered this to be the real deal, and really had no explanation for what they had witnessed in the photos. It's just my humble opinion, but I'll side with the scientists on this one, and following the money trail (there is none, as the man has made zero money off this)...it's a safe bet that this particular class A sighting, is in fact-- the real deal.


Take it with a grain of salt, until more damning proof is presented would still be the safest bet to make though.

reply to post by ravenshadow13


A quick search reveals a lot of 'real' vs 'fake' videos on youtube.

I found this series by Bill Munns to be very interesting, although I haven't had the time to watch them all.

Here's one where the anatomy of the PG creature is discussed.

reply to post by seabhac-rua


Thanks, it's an interesting analysis, in that video. However, I can't agree on most points with the presenter. His manipulation of geometry of the test subject are far from precise. And the claim that the head on the creature doesn't sit right (compared to a human) is off -- try to tilt your own head forward, chin down, and you'll see that it's not unnatural.

reply to post by buddhasystem



You can simulate this posture, kind of, but the shape and size of the head are off, and when taken in the context of the whole clip, with the gait and the turn to look back the proportions are all wrong for a human. Much has been said about the musculature visible on the creatures back and legs.

Close-ups of the feet show toe movement and the calf muscles are clearly visible, these are not prosthetics in my opinion, the calf muscle is lean and you can see it flex, did the 'hoaxers' glue hair to the actors legs? I doubt it. They could have, but they would've had to repeat the process on the thighs, where we can also see muscle flexing, and this negates the 'guy in a suit' theory as people claim there was padding under the outer shell of the suit.



And here's another video where the author has stabilized an earlier part of the footage that is rarely used for analysis. Again, for me, the 'guy in a suit' thesis falls short here, we can see the creatures back and rear end muscle groups.



Finally, observe the thigh at the :21/:22 second mark. Pay close attention to the rear of the thigh, the hamstring muscles, and especially the 'gracilis tendon' are clearly visible. We can see the tension and release of this muscle group under the skin as the creature extends it's lower leg. I cannot envisage a costume having this level of detail.



Note: my apologies to the OP if this post is too much off topic.

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
Finally, observe the thigh at the :21/:22 second mark. Pay close attention to the rear of the thigh, the hamstring muscles, and especially the 'gracilis tendon' are clearly visible. We can see the tension and release of this muscle group under the skin as the creature extends it's lower leg. I cannot envisage a costume having this level of detail.

Thank you. I find it interesting. But the video is just not clear enough. What you see as "tension" of a muscle can be explained as a bulge on stiff fabric from which the costume was constructed, or some material like neoprene or animal skin.

Have you worn garments made of coarsely treated sheepskin or pelt? I have. When you move around, these tend to produce all sorts of bulges and bends. It's just not flexible enough to drape gracefully.

reply to post by Druscilla


I've been interested in Bigfoot for a very long time, but much like many paranormal and/or conspiracy-related topics,
it is a moneymaker. So, sadly, I have to agree with others that echo the sentiment of having a specimen alive or dead documented and hopefully not the latter.

reply to post by buddhasystem


I know what you mean about stiff garments.

I'm not trying to persuade you it's just that for me the movement of the muscle groups is correct.

Here's a clearer video.

reply to post by Druscilla


S&F

Just posting so I can come back and scope it out later.

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

I know what you mean about stiff garments.
I'm not trying to persuade you

it's just that for me the movement of the muscle groups is correct.
Here's a clearer video.

Thanks, that's indeed a little better. However, don't you see that this "muscle" is contracting at the wrong time? It's actually pretty relaxed (or should be relaxed) when you pull the leg up in the process of walking. If it's flexed, the leg would actually straighten, contrary to what we see in the video. I used to be into weightlifting, and have rudimentary knowledge of anatomy and muscle movement myself.
I'm not trying to persuade you

reply to post by buddhasystem


There are two factors to think about when considering the leg muscle movement of the creature.

One is, proportionately its legs are shorter than a humans, and two is if you observe its gait you will see that it never forwardly straightens its leg out to full extension as a human does.

When you consider this it makes sense that the gracilis tendon is under tension for almost all of a single stride.

In this video you can see the muscles at the back of the thigh are activated toward the end of the extension for a human, the creature's gait is similar but not exactly as it never fully straightens it's leg out.

Makes sense to me.

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
In this video you can see the muscles at the back of the thigh are activated toward the end of the extension for a human, the creature's gait is similar but not exactly as it never fully straightens it's leg out.

Well if I were trying to simulate an ape, I would sure come up with some weird way to walk. And still I don't see how this muscle is needed in that portion of the motion we are talking about.

Thanks again, that's a good discussion.

reply to post by buddhasystem


I agree.

If anything the PG film is certainly very interesting still to this day.

If it was a suit, those guys, in my opinion, deserve serious recognition for still being able to fool people 45 years on.

Personally, I think its real

Thank you too, you got me thinking about biomechanics for a change

Usually, when someone announces "huge news is coming" in the Cryptozoology and UFO fields, it usually falls flat on its face.

With that said, here is hoping this "video" proves that the big fellow actually exists because ive seen one.

Originally posted by seabhac-rua
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

I agree.

If anything the PG film is certainly very interesting still to this day.

If it was a suit, those guys, in my opinion, deserve serious recognition for still being able to fool people 45 years on.

Personally, I think its real

When I first saw the movie "Signs", this portion knocked me out of my chair (almost did, anyway):



Now, note two salient things:
a) the costume is pretty darn convincing.
b) the movement pattern of the actor differs from that of humans, for obvious purpose to create an illusion of the alien

The only other significant difference between the PG clip and this one is that it's shot in HD. By the way, if you enhance it, I don't doubt there will be appearances of bulging muscles etc.

reply to post by buddhasystem


I just realized that it was probably CGI. Duh. Sorry.

I will bump this so I can keep track.
I have a feeling this will not be "HUGE" at all.

Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by buddhasystem

 

I just realized that it was probably CGI. Duh. Sorry.

It most certainly is.

reply to post by buddhasystem


Ahh maaan! I was just about to write a nice reply!

Originally posted by littled16
The film clip was nice, but I didn't find it to be anywhere near conclusive evidence. For the filmer to be so close I would have liked to see a zoomed in shot. As it is I didn't see anything that couldn't have been created by a decent monster makeup artist.

This is exactly my take on it too.

They can talk about the exhale all they like, the person filming it doesn't have to be in on the hoax. If I know where there are people camping, I could easily have someone dress me up as anything from an alien to a Big Foot and walk around there a few times acting.

Footage can always be debunked. It could always be CGI or a person wearing makeup. The only definitive proof would be a body of a Big Foot, scientifically analyzed and researched.

I fully believe that the Big Foot could be real. My instincts and the stories suggest that there has to be validity to it. But in this modern age of camera trickery and effects, nothing is going to convince me that there is 100% irrefutable evidence other than a full body of a Big Foot, dead or alive, able to be independently and scientifically investigated.