bigfoot is real I have the proof

Locknar said:
I think I'll go with someone that exists; at least that is what Harvey (my invisiable giant rabbit) says I should do.
Click to expand...

Itneresting! ;)
Does Harvey have any comments re "Bigfoot: The Invisible Variety"?

One good thing to come out of this fiasco is that I got to see some beautiful photos of Alaska at PetersCreek's site. Though I have to admit my favourite photo (so far) at PC's site is this one of his dog.
 
CF if the conclusions by PC (and everyone else) are so wrong than you need to explain why they are wrong. Using specific evidence and language tell us where PC went so wrong. Tell us using specifics why this is actually bigfoot and not an optical illusion/hoax. The ball is very much in your court.

If you can not show an analysis of your own photos that clearly demonstrates why this is bigfoot and refutes PC's conclusion than you need to go somewhere else. No one here will accept, "because I sayz so" as evidence of anything.

Good Luck
 
Creekfreak said:
On the other hand my person makes his liveing working with photoshop and other photo programs and is well known to the public . Who are you going to beleave ?
Click to expand...

Is your person darkwing? Because he discredited you too. Not to mention the fact that your "expert" is MEANINGLESS unless you disclose who he is and provide his analysis. Again, put up or shut up.
 
John was the person that enhanced the photo for me . He has never said to me or any one else it is a bigfoot in the picture he just did the work on it . he has stated he did not add or take away anything from the photo . he worked with a copy I might add from the sd card he has never had accress to the card . Only I and cliff have had access to the card .i was with cliff when we made the copy to give to john we did nothing to it then I gave it to john myself . and asked him to clear it up for us so we could see it better he asked me what I wanted him to do to it . I said just clear it up dont add anything becouse no one will beleave it if you do . He brought it back to me about 2 weeks later and in the enhanced photo it looked to me to be a large bigfoot and a small one in front of it . As a matter of fact I have some more he worked on that are much better enhancments but I have not shown them to any one .If you saw them you would understand why I thought and still beleave they are bigfoot creatures . after that its a very long story . so you see folks You have goten all riled up when you dont even have all the facts there is much more . there allways is dont forget that and your egos wont be hurt so bad next time you are proven worng about something .
 
Creek, we haven't been proven wrong on anything. You have.

Please cut the BS with your 'info up my sleeve' M.O. It's old. Time to retire it! Nobody's ego here is hurt by your buffoonery. As far as John's "enhancement" guess what! He DID add something in there and, big shock, nobody believes you!

Again, provide the information on YOUR expert (presumably other than the one who called you on your hoax) or give up.
 
Yes he does take a good photo Ive got to hand it to him there . I wish he would have been there that day with cam in hand . As for his assesment of the photos he has not given a discription of the files that have proven anything was added to this photo. audio I did disclose my expert and yes Dark was considered an expert to me at one time no he has not discredited me all he has done to this point is protect his site .
 
Creekfreak said:
John was the person that enhanced the photo for me . He has never said to me or any one else it is a bigfoot in the picture he just did the work on it .
Click to expand...
I see....so they why did you just claim him as one of your "experts"? In any event, I've e-mailed him and asked about all this stuff. I'll let everyone know what he says.

So if John is not one of your "experts"; then my original comment stands....I'll take PetersCreek analysis over your non-existant "experts" and their non-existant analysis.
 
AudioFreak said:
As far as John's "enhancement" guess what! He DID add something in there and, big shock, nobody believes you!
Click to expand...

Careful - we only have CF's word that John has even seen the photos. And we all know how trustworthy CF's word is.
 
Creekfreak said:
...and yes Dark was considered an expert to me at one time no he has not discredited me all he has done to this point is protect his site .
Click to expand...
Humm.....so, are you implying that if provided with hard core, 100% proof positive of "Bigfoots" existance, DK would deny such evidence in order to protect his site?

That is a rather odd claim, and I also suspect 100% untrue.
 
Creekfreak said:
As a matter of fact I have some more he worked on that are much better enhancments but I have not shown them to any one .If you saw them you would understand why I thought and still beleave they are bigfoot creatures .
Click to expand...
No you don't, or you would have mentioned them long before now in order to "clear your name".
 
Creekfreak said:
audio I did disclose my expert and yes Dark was considered an expert to me at one time no he has not discredited me all he has done to this point is protect his site .
Click to expand...

Then what about his analysis where he says:

darkwing said:
The 'purported' bigfoot in front of the helicopter shows no sign of eyes, as in the enhanced version, so they were placed on the 'purported' bigfoot face by the person who enhanced it.

The second 'purported' bigfoot in the picture is transparent enough to see a tree behind it through the right side of it.

Other facial features are missing from the face area, that is only apparent in the enhanced copy. Cheekbones and a nose are missing from the original, even with brightening and contrasting, nothing stands out.

The comparison pictures cover a large panoramic view of the area, but is missing the key area where the 'purported' bigfoot is supposed to be standing.

By all that I have viewed on the original copy and the enhanced copy, I have come to the conclusion that the enhanced copy has been manipulated to the point that this picture is of no value to bigfoot research. Whoever manipulated it, has created a hoaxed copy of the picture, rendering the original of little value. Whether Creek has been a part of this hoax, I can't say one way or the other, but to continue to push this picture can only create the impression that he is a part of it.

My recommendation is that Creek allow the original and the comparison pictures be released to the general public, and cease trying to sell the pictures. They are worthless since they have been manipulated. By releasing them, specialists in digital photography can go through them better and perhaps something may be salvaged out of it.

But as it stands, hoax.
Darkwing
Click to expand...

*bolding mine*

I'm pretty sure that's discrediting your photos.
 
Last edited:
Snow said:
Careful - we only have CF's word that John has even seen the photos. And we all know how trustworthy CF's word is.
Click to expand...

This is true. That statement should be read under the assumption that CF really was ignorant to this whole thing and is lost in a world of fantasy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

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