The Myakka Skunk Ape photos

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

For the uninitiated, this thread deals with the alleged Myakka skunk ape photographs, which were previously discussed in part at the "How long before this becomes a bigfoot sighting?" and "Most Likely Cryptid?" threads. In that last thread, it was suggested that we move the discussion to its own thread. Here is the last post on that particular matter"

But if you DO I am required to THINK on this further! Which I am not inclined to do, having summed-up my thoughts, as they are, already, which are: I got my Anthropology BA degree (please note that it was NOT a BS) 30-some years ago; it was a GENERAL degree, and if I concentrated on ANYTHING it was Marine Archaeology, human sexuality, and the use of psychedelics in all societies.

(heavy sigh)

Okay, do your damndest--but in another thread.

I will try to Talk Smart, but don't expect miracles.

With that in mind, I have copy-pasted dropzone's most recent comments on the photographs and spliced in my responses:

The recent reaction of Chicago Police to the presence of a puma lurking in an alley did not include darting it and moving it to a zoo or part of its original (as of 1492) range. They just shot it. Bullets carry far further than darts. Cops are generally discouraged from using them unless their lives are endangered, here you go. Granny had a reasonable fear for the lives of her grandkids or other people living not far away in flat (VERY flat) Florida.

The problem with that line of thinking is that if she was afraid of the police going in with guns a-blazing, why did she contact them at all?

About the photos:

1. They may possess poor color correction. The actual color of the subject is unknown, and several different species may be shown, but we can't really say.

Funny you should mention that. According to these sites, Loren Coleman and David Barkasy apparently found that they were developed at an "Eckerd photo lab at the intersection of Fruitville and Tuttle Roads in Sarasota County, Florida." I wonder what that place's reputation is regarding the quality of color correction?

2. The height of the individual described in the report is substantially taller than that of typical saw palmettos. This may indicate exaggeration on the part of the reporter, especially since there was a period of a couple years between the photographs and the report.

Actually, it was only a few months between the two. The letter claims the sighting was in September or October. Speaking of which, the letter itself was written on December 22, 2000 (at least, according to the date on the letter) and arrived on December 29, 2000.

This hypothesis can be supported anecdotally by anybody who has listened to fishermen describe a catch that grew with each telling. A saw palmetto may reach 4 meters, but it can also be much shorter than that. They also grow very slowly, so it is no stretch to assume the saw palmettos might be as short as one meter. Granny could be making stuff up while believing it. This is supported by numerous tests of the usefulness of eyewitness testimony. It's not the last word, but is only useful when compared against physical evidence.

One would think that a quick look at the photographs would have clued her in on any mistakes in height estimation. If we are to believe the picture shows a real orangutan, then it cannot be 6 feet tall while crotching (as claimed by the letter). William Parcher noted that the photographer would be taller than a typical orangutan using this chart. In my opinion, the apparent height of the supposed ape in the picture does not seem to be shorter than the photographer. Let's not forget that the letter makes no reference to the granny bending down.

3. There are features of the creature photographed that may match those of a living species.

They also match up to masks and foam appliances inspired by a living species.

The foam appliances (and some masks) were first noted over at the BFF, I believe in this thread. That type of foam appliance being discussed there allows for great realism. I should note that what is seen in the video is a different kit from a different company. Despite that, I think it nicely demonstrates just how good looking such appliances can look. You can find out more about it here.

The following consists of more reposted information from the previous two discussions of the Myakka photos:

When I found a reference to an Asian costume that supposedly matched up to the subject of the photographs, I just had to see if I could find it. First I tried looking up orangutan costumes and accessories. The best of the bunch (IMO) was this. But as good as it is, it's not a match. Here are some other products associated with that mask.

But while poking around on the site where I found those, I also found a Chimp mask by the same manufacturer. Searching around led me to two other photographs of it. I think the moving jaw and the "beard" vaguely reminded me of the Myakka pictures.

While doing a different search, I stumbled across this gorilla mask, which I get a Myakka-ish vibe from. However, the hair color and nostil size (among other details) rule out using an unaltered version of this mask. On the other hand, it's hard to get a good look at the facial features in the Myakka pictures due to the leaves obscuring the face. Similarly, here's a video with a Bigfoot costume with some "Myakka-ish" facial features (Seen about 1:30 into the video).

Here are some other open-mouthed ape masks.

One thing that didn't occur to me at the time of my search was that "Asian costume" that's supposed to match up with the "skunk ape" could be of the Indonesian/Balinese type. My limited research into that matter found lots of interesting costumes, but nothing that matched.

I linked to the above not to say that I thought for sure that one of those masks was used to create the Myakka subject, but to show how they (or similar masks) could have been cannibalized to create or could have inspired the look of the "creature" in the Myakka photographs. After all, Dfoot made a pretty nifty PGF-esque Bigfoot mask (seen at the bottom of this picture) by cannibalizing several different masks.

As there are no reports of an individual of any of those species that was missing, we have to ask if there might be creatures of this type whose disappearance was not reported. Florida is the winter home of several circuses, and they may feature such creatures, but without a report, or even a rumor, of a missing animal we are grasping at straws.

There don't seem to be any other reports of orangutans (escaped or otherwise) in Florida. Unless, of course, we are supposed to believe that the photographs show a skunk ape. Like William Parcher, I suspect that the hoaxer was trying to popularize the idea that skunk apes are real and that they are an orangutanlike creature. Perhaps this was inspired by the "Bigfoot=Gigantopithecus" theory?

4. It might be a hoax. Without additional evidence this hypothesis is pending as well.

I'd say that the previous discussions (and some of my above comments) had many examples of things that pointed to a hoax. But since you seem to want some new material:

Let's say that Vortigern99's suggestion that the "ape" is holding up/sniffing the leaf frond with its hand. The problem is that it's still got the frond in the same spot in the second picture, when it was supposedly surprised by the flash and reared back. Are we supposed to believe that it didn't drop the leaf in surprise and still held it to its face as it reared back? Although it's not impossible, it does seem very odd.

I also find the similarity of the eyeshine to the eyes of a Halloween mask with light-up eyes to be troubling. If knew for certain that's how the mask's eyes really look when lit up (the photo could have been "touched up" to make it look more impressive), I'd say this was slam-dunk evidence for a hoax.

Oh, and I'd like to thank ColMD for his clarifications in the previous discussion of these photographs.

 

[ElectricVoodoo]

For the uninitiated, this thread deals with the alleged Myakka skunk ape photographs, which were previously discussed in part at the "How long before this becomes a bigfoot sighting?" and "Most Likely Cryptid?" threads. In that last thread, it was suggested that we move the discussion to its own thread.

I'd say that the previous discussions (and some of my above comments) had many examples of things that pointed to a hoax. But since you seem to want some new material:

Let's say that Vortigern99's suggestion that the "ape" is holding up/sniffing the leaf frond with its hand. The problem is that it's still got the frond in the same spot in the second picture, when it was supposedly surprised by the flash and reared back. Are we supposed to believe that it didn't drop the leaf in surprise and still held it to its face as it reared back? Although it's not impossible, it does seem very odd.

I also find the similarity of the eyeshine to the eyes of a Halloween mask with light-up eyes to be troubling. If knew for certain that's how the mask's eyes really look when lit up (the photo could have been "touched up" to make it look more impressive), I'd say this was slam-dunk evidence for a hoax.

Oh, and I'd like to thank ColMD for his clarifications in the previous discussion of these photographs.

In that last thread, it was suggested that we move the discussion to its own thread.
I believe this to be a proper course of action. The other thread had started to dedicate itself to this one particular case.

I'd say that the previous discussions (and some of my above comments) had many examples of things that pointed to a hoax. But since you seem to want some new material:

Let's say that Vortigern99's suggestion that the "ape" is holding up/sniffing the leaf frond with its hand.
Actually, I'm having further problems with this (hands aside). I suggested that its "leaf mustache" could be it eating (partly joking), but what isn't a joke and, after thinking more on it, where I'm having problems is why would it be eating that vegetation when the author of the letters stated quite clearly it was after the apples? Unless it is eating its way towards the apples I see no reason why it would choose what is apparently 'saw palmettos' over apples? This is assuming for a moment this is a real creature.

Oh, and I'd like to thank ColMD for his clarifications in the previous discussion of these photographs.
As always, my pleasure. If I ever do not make sense please point that out and I will restate what I meant. I often find myself writing as I talk, but text is black and white, void of tone.

I'm interested in what you and others have to contribute, your thoughts, et al, as it is surprising two relatively clear photos and a letter have caused such a stir over so many years. This is no PGF.

 

[kitakaze]

We've never had a Myakka skunk ape thread? I thought we did. Wow. I can't believe we haven't had one until now.

 

[WGBH]

This is a hoax. My friend Diane Stocking investigated this case, when she lived in Florida. She told me this:

1. The letter that was sent to the police, gave the address of the house. When Diane went to the house, it was in the middle of a inner city ghetto neighborhood with none of the flora that was present in the picture.
So, the picture was not taken at that address.

2. The costume has been found and identified on the internet. I forgot where I saw it, but it is the same as the "creature" in the photos.

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

This is a hoax.

No arguments here!

My friend Diane Stocking investigated this case, when she lived in Florida. She told me this:

1. The letter that was sent to the police, gave the address of the house. When Diane went to the house, it was in the middle of a inner city ghetto neighborhood with none of the flora that was present in the picture.
So, the picture was not taken at that address.

I'd imagine that defenders of the photograph would argue that the granny gave a fake address in order to stay anonymous. Of course, this wouldn't explain how she thought police would be able to capture the ape if she didn't give them the proper location to look at.

2. The costume has been found and identified on the internet. I forgot where I saw it, but it is the same as the "creature" in the photos.

I think you might be thinking of the claim that an Asian costume matching it was discovered. Perhaps you could e-mail your friend Ms. Stocking to see if she knows any more on that? I would absolutely love to see a picture of the costume if it exists.

 

[WGBH]

No arguments here!



I'd imagine that defenders of the photograph would argue that the granny gave a fake address in order to stay anonymous. Of course, this wouldn't explain how she thought police would be able to capture the ape if she didn't give them the proper location to look at.



I think you might be thinking of the claim that an Asian costume matching it was discovered. Perhaps you could e-mail your friend Ms. Stocking to see if she knows any more on that? I would absolutely love to see a picture of the costume if it exists.

I saw the costume picture posted on one of the many Bigfoot forums, but it was a few years ago. I will attempt to get more info for you or find the photo.

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

I saw the costume picture posted on one of the many Bigfoot forums, but it was a few years ago. I will attempt to get more info for you or find the photo.

I would greatly appreciate that. One last question: Was the picture detailed here and here the one you saw?

I'm really hoping that this isn't another thunderbird photo-style scenario.

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

Actually, I'm having further problems with this (hands aside). I suggested that its "leaf mustache" could be it eating (partly joking), but what isn't a joke and, after thinking more on it, where I'm having problems is why would it be eating that vegetation when the author of the letters stated quite clearly it was after the apples? Unless it is eating its way towards the apples I see no reason why it would choose what is apparently 'saw palmettos' over apples? This is assuming for a moment this is a real creature.

If I recall that BFF thread I linked to correctly, someone found out that a primate center in that part of Florida was giving palmetto fronds to the apes there. I forget whether it was for nutrition or just something for them to work their jaws with, though. However, I don't think that lends anything to the idea of this being a picture of a real animal. I'll get to that a little later...

I'm interested in what you and others have to contribute, your thoughts, et al, as it is surprising two relatively clear photos and a letter have caused such a stir over so many years. This is no PGF.

I think my (and others') opinions have been more or less summed up in the past two threads. There's the height issue, the eyeshine (aren't primates of that size not supposed to have eyeshine?), the lack of similar reports, the movement of the leaves in back of the ape, and probably several other things that I'm forgetting.

Someone at the BFF also made an interesting note regarding the pictures' copyright. As I recall, Coleman and Barkasy claim a joint copyright on them. However, US copyright law states that they wouldn't be able to do that unless they were the ones who took the photographs or if the photographer sold them the copyright. So if we are to believe that they don't know who granny is, they're either wrongly claiming copyright or were involved in the creation of those photographs. Although I doubt this is the case, it would be hilarious if someone checked at the copyright office and found out that the photos were copyrighted before the date on the letter or Barkasy's "discovery" of the photos.

It has been noted that Mr. Barkasy operates an animal-based attraction in Florida. Granted, it's reptile-based, but it is not unreasonable to assume that he has contacts in the animal attraction/trade industry. If he is involved in the hoaxing of those pictures, he definitely would have the knowledge needed to give the Myakka ape some realistic attributes and mannerisms.

Here are some of my old (but previously unseen) notes on the matter:

Here you can find a picture of some cool masks that could be used to make a Myakka-style mask.

Well, a guy accused of being a Skunk Ape hoaxer is definitely involved.

This thread has an interesting claim:

Considering the fact (that's right...FACT) that David Barkasy asked how a bigfoot photo could be faked roughly two months to these two pictures surfacing, and considering the FACT that it was a good friend of Barkasy's who worked for the animal control office and who "obtained" the pictures, I do believe it's safe to say that the photos are most likely crapola.

Someone here claims that the Myakka pictures were actually taken from a show on the Sci-Fi channel (but later posts say it was a different picture).

According to this:

Anyone can purchase contacts that will produce eyeshine. This very forum has posted up incredibly detailed masks that could easily pass as life-like at a short distance. Numerous other sites/forums have covered the anatomical "problems" with the photo, and as one of your own has pointed out there is evidence the entire thing was a publicity stunt. Add to that the fact that the photographer is unknown and there is noone who can back up the story, and you begin to have a very thread bare defense that this is anything but a hoax. Not to mention the fact that 98.7% of all skunk ape sightings do not match the physical description of the subject and that there has never been a report of a grey oragutan and you begin to wonder why anyone is even discussing this anymore outside the realm of failed hoaxes.

This offers a claim that "...the same piece of foliage on its upper lip in both positions" and there's a claim here that the arms are too long.

Here's yet another post claiming that Barkasy was behind the hoax:

"However, yes, I do believe they are a hoax. It's just to coincidental that Dave Barkasy was asking how best to hoax a photo of a sasquatch only a couple of months before these surfaced and the fact that he had a good friend who worked for animal control in Sarasota that originally "obtained" the photos for him."

Here's an interesting note on the arms:

Also, it looks to me like the arms in the *exact same * postion, as is the shoulder *stoop*, as well as the head position. They merely leaned it forward a bit. Anyone could have dyed the hair.

I agree, in that I think fact that the photographer refused to reveal her/himself is very telling, as well."

Here are some comments on the fronds:

IMHO the "fronds" in front of it's mouth, are just that. Couldn't it have been eating them? They DO NOT go with him from one photo to the next...they change. The leaves change position. Look at the motion of the fronds as it pulls it's hand back and moves away. These are 2 camera shots (supposedly) not frames, so you can expect the photographer to move, as well as the subject.

The fronds to the left? These ARE NOT a perfect match! Just the best I could do. Talk about the teeth! The eyeshine! How big are these fronds? etc. etc, etc!

Again, look at the reflection in the frond in front of it's mouth. Notice how the light source follows. The hightlights in the frond change, as well as the singular leaves. It moves many of the fronds as it pulls back...the fronds near it's "pulling arm" they even appear to be blurred in the second photo as they move.

This shows box art from a shady "dollar DVD" featuring "Snowbeast" and "Curse of the Swamp Creature." The art from the Swamp creature part of the box is obviously taken from a piece of merchandise related to DC Comics' "Swamp Thing" character, but I noticed that the art for the "Snowbeast" part of the box looked oddly familiar. I think it looks vaguely like Myakka ape, although it is possible that it's an altered version of the Myakka pictures or one of those masks I linked to earlier.

More Myakka notes.

This might prove to be interesting.

 

[JohnWS]

I'm really hoping that this isn't another thunderbird photo-style scenario.

Off-topic sorry - but I'm one of the people that actually think they remember seeing that picture. I actually started a (dead-end) thread about it years ago on BFF!

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

Off-topic sorry - but I'm one of the people that actually think they remember seeing that picture. I actually started a (dead-end) thread about it years ago on BFF!

Interesting! According to some comments made in the link I post (which was given to me by tube ages ago), it has been suggested that the photograph legend got its start due to either a drawing made to illustrate the story of two cowboys who supposedly killed a pterodactyl in a Ripley's Believe it or Not! comic strip or an illustration from an edition of The Lost World. I suspect that other "sightings" were the result of people seeing hoaxed images, half-remembering artist's interpretations of the alleged photo, pictures of people holding the wings of birds with large wingspans, and fuzzy pictures of hanging, vaguely birdlike things like bearskins and a large manta rays.

Also, here's a quick link to an investigation on the Thunderbird photograph. If there is enough interest in this topic, it might be a good idea to devote a thread to it at some point in the future.

 

[Beanbag]

Slightly off topic, but does anyone know where I could rent, buy, or borrow a skunk ape costume like the one in the picture? All I've been able to find are cheap, Halloween grade costumes that wouldn't fool even a falling-down drunk at twenty feet.

No, it's not for a fake sighting video -- it's for a comedy short I'm working on.

Beanbag

 

[William Parcher]

AMM, you have a bunch of links posted now. I regret that I have not clicked them all. Maybe these are repeats...

David Barkasy posting on Sasquatch Northwest.

I am not implying that these pictures are even real. I do however, import and sell live animals for a living and feel that I have at least a "decent-eye" concerning identifying living creatures. What is in these pictures though, I'm not so sure of.

Stocking Hominid Research...

It was easy enough on my part to contact Sarasota and talk to the records clerk, Bonnie Fay Brenson. The letter and photos are case #01-4986. There was no response on the part of the Sheriff due to the fact that there was no return address and the letter was signed “I prefer to remain anonymous”. When dealing with hoaxes, the anonymous tag is a huge red flag. I asked the deputy about the postmark. On the bottom of the envelope was the bar code 34237-7040, December 22, 2000. I contacted the US Postal Service and talked to the postal carrier for that route. She stated that the area was mainly residential, an older part of town. To her knowledge, there were no homes in that area with palmetto woods, as depicted in the photos.

 

[WGBH]

Thanks William! you are spot on. I was preparing to post that for AMM so he got the exact quote from Diane from her web site. It has been a few years since I discussed it with her and in the "Bigfoot community" the Myakka photos are old news. As far as the picture of the costume, the ones from Cryptomundo are interesting, but I have seen another from (I think Japan) somewhere that was very close to the creature in the photo.I will continue my search for it.

 

[JohnWS]

Interesting! According to some comments made in the link I post (which was given to me by tube ages ago), it has been suggested that the photograph legend got its start due to either a drawing made to illustrate the story of two cowboys who supposedly killed a pterodactyl in a Ripley's Believe it or Not! comic strip or an illustration from an edition of The Lost World.

I've no idea where I got the idea I saw it. The thing is, I never gave it a thought until I read that there was a mystery attached to the photo (around about 1994), then I remember thinking - 'Well I saw it!'.

Later I did some googling without success. If I didn't imagine it and had to hazard a guess, I would say the image may have been in a magazine I used to read as a kid - I don't remember what it was but it was full of lurid 'true life' tales of aliens, bigfoot, yetis etc. With pictures! I can still see the picture of the Flatwoods Monster that scared me as a kid.

The 'thunderbird photograph' may well have been unrelated to the actual mystery thunderbird photograph'.

 

[ElectricVoodoo]

Can we call "hoax" for certain? Also, anyone can stick a © before or after something, so is the copyright legit?

ColMD®™©

 

[dropzone]

Don't matter to me, despite the OP. I lost interest in this topic days ago and only checked in to see if I was mentioned and if the mention required a response.

Could be a hoax. Could be an escaped ape that hasn't been seen for years, so it's probably either dead or recaptured. Either way, we can agree that it is NOT some cryptid living in Florida, which I apparently did not stress hard enough in my first post in the other thread, despite calling it the LEAST likely cryptid.

Hoax or real non-American ape, without somebody jumping up and down screaming, "It's Bigfoot's second cousin, twice removed," I can see why there has never before been a thread on these photos--there isn't any fun in it. C'mon, guys! There is no "there" there. A thread on the (borderline trolling, but the mods should note that I buried its mention far from the correct forum and gave no opinion ) Armenian Genocide would be infinitely more fun.

 

[ElectricVoodoo]

It did grow tiresome quickly, but I never expected any startling revelations about this picture. What I find somewhat confusing is how something like this held up for so long. Then again, I recall seeing videos from the 70's of a man who videotaped "Bigfoot" (ie: his wife) from the PNW to Alaska. In that time period you could get away with something looking like a black outline in broad daylight (PGF notwithstanding) because camera technology was sub par by today's standards and atrociously expensive for anything half decent. Today people expect a little better quality - and yet the elusive BF largely shows up in shaky video and blurry pictures. My cell phone has a brilliant camera on it, though I must admit it takes a good half minute to access that feature. But I digress.

 

[dropzone]

As I mentioned in the other thread, when i first saw the pics quite a few years ago they were low resolution and they could be interpreted multiple ways. They were JPEGs with the associated compression problems and small file sizes because most people were still on dialup. Much like the BF films, lack of image quality contributed to their mystery.

 

[ElectricVoodoo]

There is another photo of an alleged BF that I cannot find for the life of me. I would like to know if it has been deemed without a doubt a hoax. It is supposed to be eating bark in the snow of Oregon (I believe). It's an interesting photo, fake or otherwise (depending on your thoughts of this alleged creature).

 

[JohnWS]

Is this it? The bark is the little thing flying in mid air?

If so I think it is from an Italian horror film. Can't remember where I read that.