• 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?

Did anybody read the North American Great Ape blog's explanation?

The mental gymnastics and special pleading is amazing.

The odds of getting a good photo of a sasquatch are stacked against researchers for a number of reasons: There are vast amounts of untamed wilderness in North America. If bigfoots do exist, they have a huge amount of land to occupy. In all of this wilderness finding one of these animals would be beyond difficult. If one was immensely lucky and did find a bigfoot they'd better hope they have a camera with them. They'd also have to have the camera at the ready, be able to focus it, and snap a photo of the animal. (When I say "focus it" I mean manually focus the camera. Auto-focusing is next to useless in dense foliage. I'll touch more on this in the next post.) Considering the difficulty of photographing in forests presented above, the odds of the photo being clear and concise are low. Very low. Also worth considering is the alleged nature of sasquatches. Researchers claim the cryptids tends to avoid humans. This would only further increase the difficulty of getting a good shot of the animal.
 
The odds of getting a good photo of a [bear, deer, rattlesnake, wolverine or mountain lion] are stacked against researchers for a number of reasons: There are vast amounts of untamed wilderness in North America. If [bears, deer, rattlesnakes, wolverines or mountain lions] do exist, they have a huge amount of land to occupy. In all of this wilderness finding one of these animals would be beyond difficult. If one was immensely lucky and did find a [bear, deer, rattlesnake, wolverine or mountain lion] they'd better hope they have a camera with them. They'd also have to have the camera at the ready, be able to focus it, and snap a photo of the animal. (When I say "focus it" I mean manually focus the camera. Auto-focusing is next to useless in dense foliage. I'll touch more on this in the next post.) Considering the difficulty of photographing in forests presented above, the odds of the photo being clear and concise are low. Very low. Also worth considering is the alleged nature of [bears, deer, rattlesnakes, wolverines or mountain lions] . Researchers claim the [animal] tends to avoid humans. This would only further increase the difficulty of getting a good shot of the animal.​

And yet...
 
Roger didn't have any trouble finding one or focusing on it...

Roger that. It always amazes me that the Footers don't see any contradictions with Patty and their convictions that Bigfoot can't be filmed by gamecam or whatever.
 
Roger that. It always amazes me that the Footers don't see any contradictions with Patty and their convictions that Bigfoot can't be filmed by gamecam or whatever.

Most just choose to ignore it with hopes of a better picture someday in the future, the promise made by the so called leaders of the BF charge keep the flock in line with promises and bogus research info.
There are certainly many folks that have given up cause of the lack of a picture and understand why the blurry tactic is used, that's why we are here :)
 
1) I really suck at photography and can barely manage my point-and-shoot Fuji finepix. Other than whatever factory pre-sets are on it, I keep the dial pointed to the "so it doesn't shake all over when I'm taking pictures" setting. I had the thing for 3 years before I figured out what "macro" did.

2) My ineptitude notwithstanding, by taking the radical steps of having a camera with me and pointing it at stuff I'd like to photograph, I have managed to take dozens of decent (and some quite good) photos of songbirds in the wild. Yes that's right: Using autofocus in a dense, forested environment, I manage to take photographs of creatures that are way faster than any bigfoot and often smaller than the leaves they're hiding behind. There's nothing magical about it. It's called "trying."
 
It's called something actually being there to photograph in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Back in the 50's and 60's there was a limited selection of photographic equipment one could use for fast picture taking, add the cost factor to that and i can see why one might not be able to get pictures of an elusive animal.

Fast forward to 2012 ~ We have some mind blowing gadgets that just do it all themselves, even a regular joe like me can snap a dozen good pictures or video in a second with my phone or one of several electronics i own, the excuses for a good picture are gone, this so called animal is known and hunted with the best of equipment, the time has long gone by to put the BF myth to rest.
 
But...but...what if there really is some reason they can't be photographed (channelling Sweaty Yeti)...
 
Roger that. It always amazes me that the Footers don't see any contradictions with Patty and their convictions that Bigfoot can't be filmed by gamecam or whatever.


Modern electronics give out some sort of weird emissions that the Bigfoots can sense whereas the largely mechanical camera that Patterson used was not visible to this super Bigfoot perception.

There you go. The believers can have that one; I'm sure someone can expand on it.
 
my favorite thing about this pic is that not only is the worst photoshop job in footer history, the subject is a composite of a gorilla bottom half and a man in a suit top half.

it's silly.


once on the BFF, I was PM'da picture by a guy who said he thought it was bigfoot, when I pointed out that it was obviously a man in a suit ,and then sent him a link to the obvious halloween costume type suit, he got really mad at me and threatened to report me to the mods for abuse!

people are crazy yo
 
I don't remember the name, so it may have been one of the people who would pop in with their "evidence" refuse to post it on the board so as not to "be attacked by scofftics" but sent it via PM to a few of us.

I think RRS may have had it sent to him too.
 

Back
Top Bottom