bigfoot is real I have the proof

It is very clear Dark did not intend to give this a positive reveiw from the start this is evident from this email he sent me before he worked on the pictures .

I have the pics Creek, and will look at them when I get home, don’t want to do this at work. But understand Creek, I will report what I feel I need too, friendship aside, so don’t take it personal if it’s negative on the picture comparison. Just want you to know beforehand that I have to call it like it is.



Darkwing

I admite I made Dark out to be more of an expert then he is . All I can say about his assessement is that at least he was able to open the history on the photos thats a start in the right direction . Someone with more experience will have to look at them there is just to many holes in his review .
 
It is very clear Dark did not intend to give this a positive reveiw from the start this is evident from this email he sent me before he worked on the pictures .

I have the pics Creek, and will look at them when I get home, don’t want to do this at work. But understand Creek, I will report what I feel I need too, friendship aside, so don’t take it personal if it’s negative on the picture comparison. Just want you to know beforehand that I have to call it like it is.



Darkwing

I admite I made Dark out to be more of an expert then he is . All I can say about his assessement is that at least he was able to open the history on the photos thats a start in the right direction . Someone with more experience will have to look at them there is just to many holes in his review .
Rather, I suggest DK has gone significantly out of his way on this and by all appearances done an excellent job at remaining neutral and reporting fact.

However, this entire discussion is more or less moot. You indicated before you had had “experts” (plural) review your picture and attest to its authenticity. If you do not accept DKs assessment, then it should be no problem getting one of the other “experts” you alluded to step up and make his/her comments available.

As a real researcher, you do understand that scientific work is subject to peer review right? This means that analysis is made available for others to review, comment on, etc. Without this, your contention wrt “experts” and your photo can be dismissed as unproven or otherwise false.
 
Now he openly attacks darkwing as having an agenda against him...

It is very clear Dark did not intend to give this a positive reveiw from the start this is evident from this email he sent me before he worked on the pictures
.

And for being unqualified...

I admite I made Dark out to be more of an expert then he is . All I can say about his assessement is that at least he was able to open the history on the photos thats a start in the right direction . Someone with more experience will have to look at them there is just to many holes in his review .

Way to go, creek... :rolleyes:
 
These pitures have been analized by the leading photo experts in the country and have been proven to be legit .

where are your experts . Mine is Dark of the mabrc who are yours ?

All that has been proven here is that Dark and I disagree on his assessment .

I think the best part is that Creek must either be lying or is effectively saying that he doesn't believe the photo is real. Notice - it has apparently been proved real by Dark, but Creek disagrees with him, therefore...

Funniest. Thread. Ever.

For more amusement:
These pitures have been analized by the leading photo experts in the country and have been proven to be legit .
And when it is proven to be real
Bolding mine.
 
Darkwing had hopes at first. We mods were less charitable when we saw the first pic. I'm the one who noticed the outlines are nothing but tree branches; no enhancement needed there.

I don't think much was added unless the chopper was 'shopped. I see no lake nor sign of a bucket. I've watched a helicopter fight a fire and it didn't get that low to dip water.

Only you know the truth on this, Creek, and it doesn't look like you're telling it.
 
I would like to reopen my demand that Creek come clean with us. We shall call this a hoax attempt by Creek, unless he admits that he was fooled by the person who originally doctored the photo. Otherwise we shall referr to 'Creek' henceforth as 'Creak the Hoaxer' and close the thread. By Creek coming clean we would at least know that he admits when he was wrong, and it would give us reason to keep the thread open for his future research.
 
I don't think much was added unless the chopper was 'shopped. I see no lake nor sign of a bucket. I've watched a helicopter fight a fire and it didn't get that low to dip water.

Only you know the truth on this, Creek, and it doesn't look like you're telling it.
I dunno...I still think the chopper was trying to do a Speed Racer with its rotors...perhaps it is really Racer X there to the right?

Ok...joke aside; I'd agree. There is no rotor wash, nothing to fix perspective, and no indication of water (though that could be a perspective/angle thing). Creek could have helped his cause if he had been up front about where this was taken...but doing so now after the fact does no good.

Out of his entire story, the only verifiable fact is there was a fire in the area mid-April '07. Of course, there is now no way of knowing when the pic was taken, where it was taken, who took it, chain of custody, etc. and this late in the game he's tainted the "evidence pool" such to make his photo totally worthless.

Creek - You have either been hoaxed, or are a scammer. I have to be honest...as scammers go, this would have to rank as one of the worlds worst, and overall poorly executed, attempts.

As LAL notes, only YOU know the truth
 
Last edited:
this late in the game he's tainted the "evidence pool" such to make his photo totally worthless.

To be fair, he probably didn't realise he would not be permitted to solicit money on the forum, which was his real intent. Once that aspect was removed, he had to either cut and run, or try and drag it out as much as possible.

I suspect it is amusing to do the latter, to a point.

Personally, I have found the fluctuations in language and grammar particularly interesting to watch.

A note as mod - we tend not to arbitrarily close threads. If they have run their course we expect people to stop posting and allow them to die a natural death.
 
Darkwing had hopes at first. We mods were less charitable when we saw the first pic. I'm the one who noticed the outlines are nothing but tree branches; no enhancement needed there.

What proof do you have of this your statments about them being branches are unfounded lal .Look at the pictures of the area I sent to dark and you will not find any thing that backs your statement up . Dark is protecting your opinion and others on the forum I dont blame him for that its kind of hard keeping a group together on a bigfoot forum . Calling it a hoax is way out of line I would expect more from you .

I don't think much was added unless the chopper was 'shopped. I see no lake nor sign of a bucket. I've watched a helicopter fight a fire and it didn't get that low to dip water.

no lal the choper was not shoped in even darks assesment of the history has made that clear nothing was added to the original or the enhanched version . just becouse you have seen a fire being fought doesent mean you saw this one . the choper is over water the creek is on the other side of the tree line .

Only you know the truth on this, Creek, and it doesn't look like you're telling it.

again unfounded statements
 
To be fair, he probably didn't realise he would not be permitted to solicit money on the forum, which was his real intent. Once that aspect was removed, he had to either cut and run, or try and drag it out as much as possible.

chill do you really think I would go through this much trouble if I wasent telling the truth ? yes lock if this was a hoax it would be a bad one but its not a hoax so I will keep fighting to clear my name .
 
peter wheres is that agreement ? you may get to see it after all I need to know your real name and any other imformation you can provide me . Web sights that have your work ,back ground, military experience ect...
 
To be fair, he probably didn't realise he would not be permitted to solicit money on the forum, which was his real intent. Once that aspect was removed, he had to either cut and run, or try and drag it out as much as possible.

chill do you really think I would go through this much trouble if I wasent telling the truth ? yes lock if this was a hoax it would be a bad one but its not a hoax so I will keep fighting to clear my name .

Yes I do.
I think you are enjoying this game you started.

Now, when you arrived I sent you a PM with links to a help file that explained how to use the Quote function, amongst other things. Read and learn - if you are sincerely participating.
 
I have a friend who lives in Arcadia who's going to head up one weekend shortly and see if he can figure out where the pic was taken. He's tramped all over the state, from the Keys to the Panhandle, and knows just about every alligator-infested swamp in the state. He's got a fishing boat he uses in the Glades, and he's going to try to pick up a camera this week - if he finds a spot that looks similar he'll snap a photo for comparison.

His opinion of the pic that got posted here was that we were looking at burnt tree stumps and seeing gorillas. Now, he's no photo expert, but he's an expert at alligator behavior and activity, and he said if there were such things as bigfoots in Florida, we'd have long ago found their remains or other evidence left behind or in a 'gator. He said they've found evidence and remains for every other mammal that inhabits Florida regularly, from the tiniest mole and mouse to man to wildcats and the very rare bear.

Bigfoot would have left a trace.

Anyway, I'll keep you informed as he lets me know what's what.
 
peter wheres is that agreement ? you may get to see it after all I need to know your real name and any other imformation you can provide me . Web sights that have your work ,back ground, military experience ect...

Needless (and quite simply silly) stalling. The NDA would have his legal name, your lawyer (if so inclined to hire one) would eaisly be able to verify that.

Your library would have books that would help you understand NDAs, and how they work.

You are obviously not being honest; to what end (scam, playing games, etc) only you know the answer to that.
 
His opinion of the pic that got posted here was that we were looking at burnt tree stumps and seeing gorillas.

Yes, creek was supposed to provide DW with an after shot of the same area so he could hopefully rule on such tree stumps. Creek apparently did not provide a shot showing the spot.
 
Z I can save your freind a lot of effort I will take him to the same spot I welcome that as a matter of fact .
 
I admite I made Dark out to be more of an expert then he is . All I can say about his assessement is that at least he was able to open the history on the photos thats a start in the right direction . Someone with more experience will have to look at them there is just to many holes in his review .


Typical. Your expert disagrees with you, your conclusion, he's no longer an expert. It's amazing.
 
Lock I would be a fool if I did not make an effort to confirm this man is who he says he is .And at this point I will go with out a lawyer but I need to know who this man is with out a dout .I have a program at work that will confirm who he is .
 
I dont disagree with all he has said just some of it . And what Ive said I disagree with has not been proven not to be true . I have stated the eyes and face will show up without adding anything to the photo all that has to be done is adjust the colors in the photo . I have done this myself and it is not hard to do .
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom