• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Simple question for Bigfoot enthusiasts: Why no unambiguous photos/videos?

OntarioSquatch said:
But is there a way to actually prove it's real? Someone here claimed they can't trust any photos because of today's technology for making things look realistic.

http://i47.tinypic.com/2u6nukw.jpg

I realized last week that no amount of close up photos would be enough. At the very least it would have to be video that's even closer than what Roger Patterson got.
Click to expand...

We can easily tell if a digital photo is original or if has been enhanced.

What the photo is of is another issue.
 
There is nothing like a signed replica of a fake bigfoot track. I hope they are atleast numbered and come with a letter of "replication authenticity" !

It gives me chills to think that it is a replica of the actual event when someone wearing BF Tracks stood there and made those actual fake imprints ! Can I purchase two and pay extra S&H ?
 
Ok, I found two more pictures that should convince any remaining skeptics. First we have one showing Bigfoot on Mars! (The linked article refers to it as a "female" figure, but the insightful minds at Cracked.com managed to make the obvious proper identification.)

Then, we have a family group in an urban setting. I don't know how anyone could ask for more clear or convincing evidence than this! Of course, the caption suggests that these are Yeti, but the creature's markings, and the too-temperate setting makes it pretty clear that these are really Bigfoot.

With evidence like this, I may have to give up my theory that Bigfoot is really a land-shark. For one thing, I'm not sure how a land-shark would get to Mars. :D
 
OntarioSquatch said:
But is there a way to actually prove it's real? Someone here claimed they can't trust any photos because of today's technology for making things look realistic.

http://i47.tinypic.com/2u6nukw.jpg

I realized last week that no amount of close up photos would be enough. At the very least it would have to be video that's even closer than what Roger Patterson got.
Click to expand...

I know for certain you have been shown that that picture is a hoax.

And I really wouldn't believe anything in a picture.
But the point still remains, why aren't there any unambiguous and clear pictures of figboot that haven't been shown to be fake. Even if no one believed in the picture's veracity, the pictures would still exist. Instead, we have known forgeries and crappy blurry stuff. The pictures would exist if figboot did.
 
Spektator said:
25 pounds of Plaster of Paris at Home Depot - $16.00
Produces approximately 12 casts
Cost per cast = $1.33
Signature - priceless
Click to expand...

Oh hey, thanks Spektator.

I beg forgiveness, I have never casted a single pour, but let's say the mold is already made. It is a sunk cost.

If there is only one mold then drying time is your production constraint. Google says plaster of paris takes 24 hours. So the "garage" level production is one cast per day, but probably less than twenty minutes' labor for mixing, pouring, retrieving the cast, and signing. Even if you have an authenticity letter, that's maybe five cents to produce on your computer, and you can sign that too.

So three casts per hour of labor, but with no idea at all what sales look like. One per month? Five per week? No idea. But it is a materials cost of under $1.50 per unit even if we throw in the letter of authenticity.

Shipping/handling is covered separately by customers. One hour of labor is $50 X 3 = $150 in total revenue and $3 in cost for $147 per hour. Who knows how many hours you put into it per week or month or whatever. Only 3-4 hours a month though and its ballpark $400-$600 a month. A little sideline business to add with book sales, grant money, travel and per diem expense accounts.

Selling one a day is the maximum with one mold. It's an intellectual exercise, not a realistic scenario, but just under $1500 per month. You would make more than one mold if you had sales even half of that, and the boost in efficiency would put you over $200 an hour. There can't be that many empty heads in the country though, can there?
 
Last edited:
Plaster cast of a real animal print 24 hours in the woods , yes. That is about right depending on humidity and the temperature, precipitation. In your basement under a heating lamp with multiple fake print templates to produce those things ? Get out the Sharpies ?!!!$$$$$$$$$$$$$

When my kids were small we would make cast prints of all the animal prints we would find on our Canadian fishing and camping trips.

What was always fun about them was that all of those animals left a hair sample for us.. It would get embeded in the earth and the plaster would pick them up. The guys got a kick out of taking them to school and pointing this out especially with the larger bear casts (hind paw). Also, it is really hard and really would not be something you would bother with.. but it is difficult to make such a cast without pulling up all that stuff.. some leaf litter.. stone impressions.. whatever was between the animal and the earth.

Now that I think about it.. someone wanting to mass produce these things without the original organic material could do so in the oven at a lower temp. Not that the track had any original organic material to begin with ?
 
Last edited:
OntarioSquatch said:
The photo hasn't been proven as a hoax.
Click to expand...

Which is the stance to take with woo, of course: shift the budren of proof to the skeptic, and prove the negative. Prove it is not real. Just like magic fairies and bridge trolls, ESP and ET. :)

Of course, in the real world people have to source their material. What is the provenance? Oh - that's right, let me answer it for you: unknown, and a lame cover story about why it has to be secret instead.
 
OntarioSquatch said:
The photo hasn't been proven as a hoax.
Click to expand...

You haven't proved it's real.

But I do believe it has been pretty reliably shown to be a picture of a suit. If I recall some of the prop guys from the movie it was used in confirmed. The suit was sold on the internet.

Also the story behind it was crap and suspicious. Have you read anything about the picture? Or are you just waving the picture around as absolute proof?
 
Last edited:
AttorneyTom said:
Plaster cast of a real animal print 24 hours in the woods , yes. That is about right depending on humidity and the temperature, precipitation. In your basement under a heating lamp with multiple fake print templates to produce those things ? Get out the Sharpies ?!!!$$$$$$$$$$$$$

When my kids were small we would make cast prints of all the animal prints we would find on our Canadian fishing and camping trips.

What was always fun about them was that all of those animals left a hair sample for us.. It would get embeded in the earth and the plaster would pick them up. The guys got a kick out of taking them to school and pointing this out especially with the larger bear casts (hind paw). Also, it is really hard and really would not be something you would bother with.. but it is difficult to make such a cast without pulling up all that stuff.. some leaf litter.. stone impressions.. whatever was between the animal and the earth.

Now that I think about it.. someone wanting to mass produce these things without the original organic material could do so in the oven at a lower temp. Not that the track had any original organic material to begin with ?
Click to expand...

Hey, great. So just throwing out some numbers here, if you had four to six forms and did two batches a day with low oven heat drying them, and say a couple buck per unit now with drying costs added in there - total revenue is between $400 and $600 and net of cost is $384 to $576 in two hours of work.

So now we're at $192 to $288 per hour of your time with this model, and you've got 8-12 to sell out of a part-day work on a saturday.

I find it hard to believe he's selling many. But I am happy to admit I might have that completely wrong.
 
My guess is that answer is between him and his Accountant. But yeah, It would not be difficult to Bigsploit those items/things ? All the way to the bank.

You should get out and take some prints with your kids ?, ABP

It has been 10 yrs or so.. and I still have the 7 inch rear paw print of a female BB.. and also her fronts.. It is funny how much hair they leave in those prints. Hair samples.. leaf particles and imprints etc..

Everything sheds hairs especially if they can leave an imprint in the soil. It grabs on to their paws. A big Brown Bear would be really awesome ?!
 
Well supposedly there is evidence present that mere mortals aren't privy to so it's possible that hair was in some or all tracks found. But none? wouldn't a hoaxer leave his hair in the track? We loose up to 100 hairs per day. Are they wearing hair nets?
 
Jodie said:
Well supposedly there is evidence present that mere mortals aren't privy to so it's possible that hair was in some or all tracks found. But none? wouldn't a hoaxer leave his hair in the track? We loose up to 100 hairs per day. Are they wearing hair nets?
Click to expand...

Human hair in figboot prints proves figboot is human
 
When you pull .. and I mean pull a splaster track . You get everything that was ever in it. Dirt.. sticks in the impression.. leaf litter. Yes, Hair, I have plaster casts of a Black bear, Raccoon, Mink, Porcupine, with hair attached to the bottom of the cast.

It is a sticky situation ? Anyway.. now .. no BF casts of tracks.. just real animals here.

Hair Nets ? Now that is funny !!

Anyway.. When you cast an animal print within 24 hrs.. Well.. there is hair.

Caveat: Except when they are magical animals that do not exist. They dont leave hair. They leave .. hoax.
 
Last edited:
AttorneyTom said:
Hair Nets ? Now that is funny !!

Anyway.. When you cast an animal print within 24 hrs.. Well.. there is hair.

Caveat: Except when they are magical animals that do not exist. They dont leave hair. They leave .. hoax.
Click to expand...

So if a hoaxer is making tracks a hat or hair net is in order if no hair is found. If it is, then it's human. Got it, just trying to picture a man or woman in a remote area with stompers and a scrub hat on........I'm getting tickled myself.
 
Jodie said:
I would agree.
Click to expand...

Has someone found a hair in a proposed "BF" track" embedded sample ? Come On !

All I am saying is this: There are no hair sample of BF. There are many BF prints. My time in the wilds tells me that animals make tracks and leave some hairs now and then ? It is simple biology.

It is sort of neat to see the bears fur stuck between the toes .
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom