bigfoot is real I have the proof

[darkwing]

I agree with Locknar's assessment but FWIW I would like to ask darkwing what makes him characterize the low res crop he's seen as "fantasic" and "too good to be true."

K,
I recieved a high res copy of this crop, and when it first popped up on my screen, the initial response was 'whoa', then I started looking at it on the details. When I said fantastic, it was the initial response.

Creek agreed to let me post a lower rez copy of this photo so you folks here could see it. That was stated about 10 pages or so ago when I posted to Creek here that a lower rez copy coould be posted.

 

[kitakaze]

I think Creekfreak has not yet fully understood the problems regarding his picture.

First of all, even if the original EXIF file confirms that only contrast and brightness filters were applied, what he is interpreting as a bigfoot can be only a pareidolia trick. A burnt tree stump would be my guess. Ask the pilots "What have you seen?" and the answer would be "A tree stump". In other words, as evidence, its value is close to zero.

Second, his attitudes were a shot in his foot. He demolished his credibility.

From the beginning, Correa, you have stated pareidolia and I conversely have thought obvious photoshop though I could not stress enough that I have no other qualification than having used photoshop a lot. That said, I've been considering more closely the merits of the pareidolia angle and am starting to think it may very well be that after (if that happens) having seen the original, a doctoring of a pareidolic observation may be evident with the main figure (there is no way that I would conceed other figures being evident) as you have already alluded to.

 

[Creekfreak]

the original photo of the bigfoot creatures and photo of the area taken the next day is being sent to dark at this momment . I have stated before I consider Dark to be a leading expert in this field he can tell you his back ground that is up to him . And I also consider the MAN that did the color enhancing to be an expert also . If you would like to bring in your own experts you are welcomed to but you havent so untell you do then that point is moot also . As far as giveing the name of the MAN that worked on the photo I would have to ask him first if it is ok to name him but untell then this is all your geting .

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.kevinwilley.com/l3_topic04.htm

Perspective compression demo.

 

[kitakaze]

K,
I recieved a high res copy of this crop, and when it first popped up on my screen, the initial response was 'whoa', then I started looking at it on the details. When I said fantastic, it was the initial response.

I see. I'm tempted to ask for further details but respect your effort to remain neutral till proper information is provided.

 

[LTC8K6]

the original photo of the bigfoot creatures and photo of the area taken the next day is being sent to dark at this momment . I have stated before I consider Dark to be a leading expert in this field he can tell you his back ground that is up to him . And I also consider the MAN that did the color enhancing to be an expert also . If you would like to bring in your own experts you are welcomed to but you havent so untell you do then that point is moot also . As far as giveing the name of the MAN that worked on the photo I would have to ask him first if it is ok to name him but untell then this is all your geting .

This doesn't make any sense, as usual.

If experts have already authenticated the photo, as you claim, then let's hear from them.
Why would we value darkwing's opinion over the experts who have already authenticated the original photo? Why would you need darkwing's opinion?

Why does darkwing need to authenticate a photo that experts have already authenticated?

I want to ask darkwing to with hold his opinion of the photo until we have the opinion of creekfreak's experts.

 

[mikeyx]

Creek,
Send me the original copy, like you said you would, and lets get them compared. Otherwise, you are fighting a losing battle here and elsewhere.

I got dragged into this, and now my credibility and that of the MABRC has been questioned because of it. So if you think the world of the MABRC like you claim, send me a copy of the picture without any more excuses and let's compare them like I asked you to do several months ago. Everything is moot on this picture until that can be done. Sorry Creek, but you dragged me into this, and I didn't want to be.

Okay, to be fair, not that I'm holding my breath, but before i say anything further I'll wait to see this original if it's going to be made available. With all the attention drawn to this it should be.

 

[kitakaze]

I have stated before I consider Dark to be a leading expert in this field he can tell you his back ground that is up to him . And I also consider the MAN that did the color enhancing to be an expert also .

Woops. There's the out aaaaand he went for it.

Oh no you don't, freak. Don't even think about getting slippery with this. It is up to you and ONLY you. You sent the ridiculous extortion attempt to the Florida government with the above claims.

You CAN NOT qualify darkwing and nameless dude who photoshopped your image as the leading photo experts in the country and in NO WAY can you say they analyzed and proved its legitimacy when you did nothing to facilitate the possibility.

You are lying. Badly.

My apologies to others for the Sweaty typing.

 

[Correa Neto]

Kitakaze, I'm not a Photoshop expert, since I use Corel... Yeah, yeah, I'm lazy, used to the program, not willing to learn too much new tricks, gotta buy diapers instead expensive software, etc...

Aniway my impression is that its something that was already in the scene, an ordinary object such as a tree stump. After looking at the photo in the computer, Creek and his friend went pareidolic... Happens quite often, how many times we heard "When I looked at the pic, I saw the UFO/ghost/gnome/orb, it wasn't there when it took the photo!".

Creek's friend then altered it, enhancing the propper features, with or without the moneymaking intent. I guess a more work-intensive detailed photoshop job would, most likely, display a better view of the creature. Of course, this could also increase the odds of detecting the hoax. So, we're caught in a circular agument cycle.

Its, of course, just a guess, based on the pic and Creek's description of what happened.

But I may be wrong. Aniway, I doubt its a real bigfoot.

 

[Creekfreak]

I told you Dark is one of my experts the other will remain nameless at this time . find your own experts and bring them in if we all can agree that who you find is the best in the field then I will allow them to look at it untell then your just going to have to take Darks word for what he finds .no it will not be posted on this site but I have given Dark permission to post it in the members section of the mabrc . As far as you seeing it there I dout he would allow all of you to join just to see it .

 

[PetersCreek]

Creekfreak,

As we discussed, I drew up the license agreement last night...but am I correct in understanding that you're now willing to provide the image for evaluation without such an agreement?

 

[kitakaze]

This doesn't make any sense, as usual.

If experts have already authenticated the photo, as you claim, then let's hear from them.
Why would we value darkwing's opinion over the experts who have already authenticated the original photo? Why would you need darkwing's opinion?

Why does darkwing need to authenticate a photo that experts have already authenticated?

I want to ask darkwing to with hold his opinion of the photo until we have the opinion of creekfreak's experts.

Yes, exactly.

1) freak has photo, plans to sell it, tells his bigfoot club about it.

2) Altered copy is provided to club, examined, suspected. Original image, chain of custody, other verifying info is requested, ignored. In lieue of the necessary info, bigfoot club can give no definitive statements.

3) freak sends extortion attempt to Florida F&W Dept. stating he is in possession of images of bigfoot creatures that have been analyzed and proven to be legitimate by the leading photographic experts in the country.

Lying. Badly.

 

[LTC8K6]

Creekfreak,

Why does darkwing need to authenticate a photo that experts have already authenticated?

Did you use darkwing's evaluation of the cropped original you provided to him as a crutch to claim that experts had analyzed and authenticated the photo? Were his expressions of "fantasic" and "too good to be true" the declaration that the photo was legit that you were talking about?

 

[kitakaze]

I told you Dark is one of my experts the other will remain nameless at this time .

No. Busted.

 

[J. Arthur Hastur]

bigfoot is real I have the proof

A picture which you will only show unedited to two people, one of whom you won't name.

Why is this thread still going on?

 

[LTC8K6]

I told you Dark is one of my experts the other will remain nameless at this time .

What are darkwing's photo analysis qualifications, and why does he need to authenticate an authenticated photo?

 

[J. Arthur Hastur]

What I don't understand is that Creekfreak shows up and states that he has blockbuster proof of bigfoot that will make every skeptic a believer, but that he can't show, because he wants to apparently make some money off of his find.

That's fine.

Sell your 'proof' and when the buyer shows it the world in all it's unedited glory then we'll judge it. It's not proof if we can't see it and judge for ourselves. Right now you're just wasting our time and destroying your credibility.

 

[Drewbot]

Creek, you must come clean now.

You took the photo, the photo was altered(with or without your knowledge), you have no intention of sending the original, your plea for money is falling down like a house of cards. Come clean and salvage your dignity, and the dignity of those you say you respect over at MABRC. DW has been nothing but understanding to you in this endeavor, and now you are bringing him in as a world famous photographic expert. I think you need to fess up Creek. There were no World Famous Photographic experts that have analysed this photo were there? Come Clean now, and we'll let you keep this thread open and you can post your future sightings here. Otherwise I think it should be closed.

 

[kitakaze]

Were his expressions of "fantasic" and "too good to be true" the declaration that the photo was legit that you were talking about?

Wait, LTC. I may have missed it but has it been stated anywhere what darkwing stated to freak at the time?

As in:

1) freak sends image to darkwing who says "Wow! That's really something. We need to have a good look at this."

2) freak says "Yay! I've had my image analyzed and proven legitimate by the leading photographic experts in the country!"

freak, this is so simple, it's stupid. You were BSing the commissioner of the Florida F&W Dept. trying to get money for Woods and Wildmen with made up stuff you justified to yourself like a six year old.

 

[GT/CS]

Wait, LTC. I may have missed it but has it been stated anywhere what darkwing stated to freak at the time?

As in:

1) freak sends image to darkwing who says "Wow! That's really something. We need to have a good look at this."

2) freak says "Yay! I've had my image analyzed and proven legitimate by the leading photographic experts in the country!"

freak, this is so simple, it's stupid. You were BSing the commissioner of the Florida F&W Dept. trying to get money for Woods and Wildmen with made up stuff you justified to yourself like a six year old.

Kitakaze, that may be a little harsh. By looking at Creek's writing I think we need to consider his limitations, unless the writing is a ruse.

Creek, one more little suggestion. Please, please, please change "untell" to "until". Thank you.