The BIGFOOT Thread

This is the perfect Christmas gift to give, and no I don't own stock in the company:

That last post reminded me of the comic book "Sasquatch".
Comic artist John Byrne created a Canadian superhero group called Alpha Flight. The ever-popular character of Wolverine was supposed to be a member of the group (but he joined the X-Men). Another character was Sasquatch. Similar to the Hulk, Sasquatch had a human form that could transform into the giant, hairy beast. Sasquatch's alter ego was Dr. Walter Langkowski (so, perhaps we could call him "Dr. Squatch" also).

There are certainly authentic clips. By this I mean recordings made by people who aren't orchestrating a hoax. Every single person who's ever caught a creature on film that can't easily be explained can't ALL be hoaxers, can they? There's got to be some people (a whole lot of people actually) equipped with recording devices who are doing other things rather than setting up an elaborate gag.

Now that's not to say the people making the recordings aren't being hoaxed themselves, but that they are taking "authentic" or spontaneous videos / photos or accidentally capturing things on videos / photos when their intent was to simply film their surroundings.

And of course, there are hoaxes. It's up to us to try to tell the difference.

Tonight, I'd like to talk about the Jacobs / Pennsylvania photos.
These were taken by a trail cam in 2007 that also captured bear and deer.
I don't claim to know what the other thing is, but it certainly doesn't look like any bear or someone in a costume.



I don't know what to make of the 2nd photo (a creature rubbing it's head on the ground?)


Some say both are a bear with mange and the 2nd one is the bear "facing" the camera... but I don't see it.

This site pretty much debunks the bear theory by measuring limb proportions.

https://www.bfro.net/avevid/jacobs/jacobs_photos.asp

Oh this is criminal! Stop trying to keep this thread going! Your hurting our reputation in front of the world wide web.
Shame Captain Steel! And you too Citizen, I know your in cahoots. SHAME!

That's definitely a black bear in those photos, the one in the second photo is even leaning on its leg like a bear(and the flat left foot slightly bent in photo two is the same as the feet in below pics) but it looks so different because it's so thin.

Look at this photo of a very thin bear:



and this is apparently one from Pennsylvania:

From the dawn of time we came, moving
silently down through the centuries. Living
many secret lives, struggling to reach the
time of the honey-ing, when the last few who
remain will battle to the last. No one has
every known we were among you.....until
now.

B E A R L A N D E R

What reputation?

I can't speak for @Citizen Rules, but I think he probably has a view of this topic similar to your own, Tongo. But Rules respects my right to post about whatever I want (as long as it adheres to the site's guidelines). So I can assure you that he's not in "cahoots" with me, but rather participates on the topics he chooses, and politely contributes his own opinions and various trivia pertaining to this subject when or if he chooses to check in here.

P.S. I sense humor in your replies, so I am replying in kind.

I guarantee you that if some definitive evidence of Bigfoot were to be dragged out of a northern forest like some woodland Coelacanth, everyone here would immediately flip the script and start talking about how "evidence was suppressed' and "hoaxsters derailed us from confirming this sooner" and how "It's nothing amazing as an organism, but rather a confirmed species of hominid not unlike many others."

Nothing sucks the joy out of life and the magic out of living faster than understanding. Some things are too pure for explanation and too wonderful for mundane existence. The next person who tells me that "love is just the brain on dopamine and oxytocin" is going to get stabbed in the neck with a fork.

Stay hidden Bigfoot.

People finding you out would be like explaining a magic trick to an ungrateful audience who would say "Well, of course, that's really obvious and dumb!"

Maybe someone can help me out with this... I don't think I understand trail cameras.

I know there's kinds that take only photos and kinds that take videos (and maybe ones that do both).
I've heard it explained that when their motion detectors are set off they either start snapping photos or filming.
The way I understand it is that they'll keep snapping or filming until the motion stops. Is this really the case?

Now, if they work with film, then, just like any film camera, their photo number or video time will be limited, but if they are digital, then they could potentially take hundreds or thousands of photos. (I have no idea what the limit on video time is for a digital camera.)

I've seen TV shows where they say trail cams captured dozens of photos of wildlife taken of various critters that set off the motion detector in a single session (as long as the animals were moving).

But here's the thing... with every single set of alleged Bigfoot photos taken by trail cams (that I know of anyway) they always seem to be limited to only one or two.

Or if it's video it's always a couple seconds long and then cuts off. (I thought these trail cams were supposed to keep filming as long as there's movement?)

So, going back to the Jacob's / PA trail cam photos (as one example)... if that creature, whatever it was, moved in front of the camera, bent over, stretched, sniffed the ground or whatever it appears to be doing (and it obviously wasn't running at Quicksilver speed), why are there only 2 photos of it and not dozens as it moved about the area?

Obvious answer: hoaxes. But has no hoaxer ever thought to have 3 or 4 photos instead of only 1 or 2? (Or how about 8 or 9 for that matter?) If it's too dark and blurry to tell if it's a costume or not, then what's the difference? Same with videos. So why is it almost always ONLY 1 or 2 photos or seconds of video?

Less obvious answer: Bigfoots effect electronic equipment. This rumor's been going around since anyone tried recording a Sasquatch. But if that's the case, then why would there be any photos or videos at all (no less something as clear, sustained and studyable as the Patterson film)?

There's so many things about this (on either side of the debate: real vs hoax) that doesn't make sense.

Thanks Captain for the kind words and for the case of beer you sent I'll certainly keep supporting your thread

@TONGO you were joking right? I hope so otherwise it would be a case of conspiracy about a thread, about Bigfoot I'd call that ironic No my shaggy gorilla friend who happens to look more like Bigfoot than any of us, there's no cahooting going on!...Captain Steel is a good friend that I've known before I even joined MoFo, so when I see one of his threads I try to post to it, if the subject is something that intereste me...And Bigfoot interest me because he's like my state's unofficial mascot and something I grew up with, well not literally!

Cap, when are we getting that Life on Mars? thread

Mars is a topic rife for discussion.
There are Mars movies (probably the most visited planet in all of cinema... at least during the sci-fi "B" movie era).
Then there are all the plans of sending a manned mission to Mars.
And of course loads of speculation about what's on the surface, below the surface and what the future may hold for man and Mars.
So we might see a Mars thread soon (just need to decide what aspect to focus on).

Too bad Venus is such a hell-hole, otherwise I believe we'd have at least some sort of equipment stationed there already (it takes a lot less time to get there, but the heat, acid atmosphere & incredible pressures make landing unfeasible).

I'm very interested in Mars, it's a fascinating world that we know so little about but has potential for huge scientific discoveries. I've pondered about the possibilities of terraforming Venus, in theory it should be easier to do than terraforming Mars...but still one hell of an undertaking!

I've seen the photos, but I'm still not convinced Mars exists. There's always those people saying "Oh look, you can see Mars peeking around the moon - you can see the top of it's icecap!"
But I'm like, "Yeah, or that could be one of a zillion stars coming out from behind the moon! Every clear night sky is full of twinkling points of light and they can't all be some elusive nearby planet roaming aimlessly around the solar system, no less an 'intelligent' one that somehow has the ability to turn off telescope-cams right before they get a clear shot of the object."

So, without further proof, I just don't buy it.

Ha! We can debate Mars existences in that future thread

I don't know if I read this somewhere, but I think you're right that scientists think Venus would be more easily terraformed... something to do with the fact that it's hot and there's already a ton of carbon in the atmosphere. They say that Venus is very much like Earth before life showed up - so I guess it's like "ripe" for terraforming? It's almost like a twin, but at a different stage of gestation right now.

Where as Mars is much different (smaller with lesser gravity, much farther away from us, no moisture that we know of, dry, cold, desolate, etc.)

This just in... the unidentified DRONE invasion in New Jersey has led some to believe the flying machines are being operated by a clan of intelligent Bigfoots located in the NJ Pine Barrens who are allied with Iran and are in communication with the Iranian mothership (not to be confused with the "Mother Wheel" as described by Louis Farrakhan).

Had to post this video. It's pretty hilarious (in a sardonic, sarcastic sort of way) but despite the comedy, it contains a lot of info too.
I didn't even finish watching it... but I will.