FRONTIERS OF ZOOLOGY Dale A. Drinnon has been a researcher in the field of Cryptozoology for the past 30+ years and has corresponded with Bernard Heuvelmans and Ivan T. Sanderson. He has a degree in Anthropology from Indiana University and is a freelance artist and writer. Motto: "I would rather be right and entirely alone than wrong in the company with all the rest of the world"--Ambroise Pare', "the father of modern surgery", in his refutation of fake unicorn horns.
The uploader writes: "Loch Ness Monster possibly caught on underwater webcam. I took these snapshots on a Loch Ness Monster Underwater Webcam website around the year 2000. I saw a huge form pass in front of the camera and blocked out all view (everything went dark) so I took a snapshot and captured this 1st image. It looks like the fin or flipper of a large creature. I don't think it's just a fish really close to the camera because if you look at a couple of photos from the end of this you can see a small fish close to the camera and it looks very blurry and does not take up the whole screen. Also, there appears to be a ball of light on part of the 1st image which I assume is a light affixed to the camera. If the image was right in front of the camera you would expect to see a big blob of light taking up the whole view but because there is a ball of light on part of the object makes me think that the object is at least several inches from the camera lens. If this is the case then the object would have to be several inches long. If it is close to a foot long then that lends credence to the assumption that the whole body of the creature should be close to 10 or 15 feet in length at least. The remaining photos are of the bottom of the lake (same location) but in a couple of them there is also a strange figure in view. I'll let you ponder what is in front of the camera. I'm not sure what it is but it could be the monster." That 10 to 15 feet would not include the length of either the neck or the tail.-DD
I have some pretty good information that this could be right and there are supposed to be surviving Steller's sea cows in this area. Unfortunately the video isn't clear enough that you can say that is what it shows.
When it comes to gathering evidence of the existence of Bigfoot – few pieces of evidence are as convincing as stable FLIR thermal footage. That footage is vastly more credible when it originates from the Olympic Project in Washington State. The team heard what sounded like a faint knocking sound at 11:00-11:15 pm and immediately began looking that direction with the thermal camera. That is when they saw what would be known as The Ridge Watcher Bigfoot.
photo enhancement by Paul Willison
On October 30, 2013, Derek Randles and the Olympic Project with Sara, Jon, and Ben Brown captured what could be the most legitimate thermal footage to date. A large figure’s heat signature is visible from a distance of 117 feet on the other side of a steep ridge. Enhancements to the footage reveal what could be actual facial features. The eye sockets, nose, mouth, and ears are detectable as well as the large muscle groups of the upper torso.
During portions of the footage it appears to turn it’s head and look in a different direction. A cow is visible walking into frame from just 15 feet away – giving a sense of distance and size for the Bigfoot on the ridge. What is equally impressive is what they discovered the following morning at daylight. On the soil, where the ridge watcher stood, they discovered a set of visible tracks that measured an astonishing 16.5 inches long. Next to one of the tracks was a ridge that appeared to be a knuckle print – indicating that it may have crept up to the ridge on all fours. The footprints all measured the same length and had a stride of 4 feet in a Left – Right pattern indicative of bipedal standing.
The team has released, with express permission to Team-BIG, several exclusive photos of the recreation, size comparisons, and track that was eventually plaster cast. The images below show a daytime image of where the footage was captured – along with an overlay to illustrate the distance and perspective you are seeing in the FLIR images.
On November 26, 2013 several of the teams photos and original raw thermal footage were provided to Carl Olinselot (Team-BIG) for video and photo editing and enhancement. The video below is the result:
To find out more visit The Olympic Project for details. All images and videos are under copyright protection and were used under exclusive privilege by the rightful owners for use in this article.
That thing is Huge!,Look at the size compared to the cow and the cow is probably 20 yds in front of it.the pecks are unbelievable, That Bigfooter could walk on any NFL team and name his price
[-This article is reproduced under the terms of fair use, being reproduced for educational and informational purposes on a Not-for-Profit site. YouTube videos are provided under a creative common license. The exact Fair Use provision covering this situation is as cited below and is reproduced on every single page of this blog
From this thermal image I did a series of comparisons to various possible candidates, results as shown below:
This matches up the distance between the eyes and length of the face to the skull of a robust Australopithecine. The skull fails miserably to match the head in all other respects.
This comparison uses Grover Krantz's reconstructed skull for Gigantopithecus
Two more comparisons follow
This is basically the same problem over again
After several attempts at different candidates I found one really good match out of the control group and that was with the face of a bear. The placement of the eyes, nose and mouth matches exactly. And at that point it also looks like the slope of the shoulders and the way the right paw is held up is also a good match for the bear. There are reasons why the ears might not show-for one thing we are definitely not looking at a clear shot of something taken in broad daylight but by a trailcam that obviously is not showing everything that is already there.
So at this time I'll opt for the bear as the best fit. It was not what I was looking for but there it is. This also has no direct connection to the tracks and the association could be accidental. Or they could be bear tracks, Im not the one determining that part and I make no judgements on the tracks.
Jay Cooney's site Bizzare Zoology covers this story at:
Breaking: Tim Wells Bow Hunter Films Bigfoot,
Hi-Def (Updated: Enhanced)
Tim Wells, while bow hunting with his partner filmed a tall dark figure tree peeking from behind a tree. The two hunters tried to get a better look, but the two seconds they filmed was all they needed to be convinced that it was not a bear. Check out the video below:
An amateur photographer has captured an eerie photo from the shore of Loch Ness which could encourage those who believe in tales of a monster living beneath the surface of the lake.The image was taken by David Elder at Fort Augustus, at the south-west end of the 23-mile-long body of water in northern Scotland. It shows a long bow wave apparently caused by some sort of disturbance on the surface of the loch. Scroll down for video
Mystery: This bizarre picture of an unexplained phenomenon was taken from the shore of Loch Ness
The 50-year-old photography enthusiast insists the only thing that could have caused it is 'a solid black object under the water'. Mr Elder, from East Kilbride in Lanarkshire, was able to take still photos as well as filming a video of the mysterious scene. 'We were at the pier head at Fort Augustus and I was taking a picture of a swan at the time,' he said. 'Out of the corner of my right eye I caught site of a black area of water about 15ft long which developed into a kind of bow wave.
Could this mysterious wave be evidence of Loch Ness Monster?
'I'm convinced this was caused by a solid black object under the water. The water was very still at the time and there were no ripples coming off the wave and no other activity on the water. 'Water was definitely going over something solid and making the wave. It looks like the sort of wave perhaps created by a windsurfing board but there was nobody on the loch at the time, no boats, nothing. 'The disturbance in the water began moving up the Loch sideways. It is something I just can't explain.' The extraordinary picture will doubtless fuel the imaginations of anyone who believes the story that there is a sea creature living in the lake, which is Britain's largest due to its 230m depth. However, sceptics will ascribe the wave to a freak gust of wind or other natural phenomenon.
Iconic: This is the 'surgeon's photograph' taken in 1934 which purports to show the Loch Ness Monster
The story of the Loch Ness Monster goes back as far as the medieval period, but it first came to widespread public attention in 1933. That year a couple named the Spicers claimed to have seen a creature with a large body and long neck jumped in to the loch, causing a national sensation. The next year, the iconic 'surgeon's photograph' was published, purporting to show the creature swimming in Loch Ness with its head out of the water. Although that image has been debunked as a hoax, the search for Nessie has continued, with true believers undeterred by the failure of repeated attempts by scientists to find the creature
This just posted on my Facebook wall by Scott Mardis:
"Could the object in the 2009 Olsen Champ video, commonly interpreted as a head and neck, in fact be a tail with a tail fin?"
Personally I still think it is a swimming moose with the head changing apparent shape because the resolution is poor and the animal is turning its head from side to side. But Scoott has a right to be heard also and it might be he could have a point.
Incidentally this is now the 600th posting on this blog. My other blogs have about 300 postings each.
World exclusive – Justin Smeja of Sierra Kills fame releases a video at midnight detailing how Dr. Melba Ketchum told him to contaminate his Bigfoot steak sample from the Kills! She did so for unknown reasons, most probably so that other researchers would not use it and scoop her on the Bigfoot DNA story. It was a sleazy thing to do, but I think judging from the circumstances, Melba may have been right to make this morally dubious request. I detailed my reasons for that in the last post. Anyway, this is a blockbuster!
The story and video is on the Sierra Site Project website here. The Men In Black (MIB’s) may be after Rick Dyer’s Bigfoot! Texas authorities have noticed [notified?] Las Vegas police about possible criminal or fish and game violations involved in the possible harvest of a nongame animal by Dyer in Texas in September 2012. What all of this means, I have no idea. The people promoting the idea have sources on the SWAT team in Las Vegas and they say that Dyer is hoaxing. If Dyer is hoaxing, why is LE going after him. I hope the MIB’s don’t confiscate the Bigfoot, if it exists! Two shots hit Dyer’s Bigfoot. It now turns that Dyer fired on the Bigfoot two times, once hitting it in the back and the other time hitting it in the back of the head. Michael Merchant is doing some great Bigfoot breakdowns lately! I don’t really like his podcasts too much, as he tears apart everything and everyone, but his breakdowns have a whole different attitude about them. Michael is very bright and very funny when he is good. Michael Merchant breaks down Adirondacks Bigfoot.
This video has never made any sense to me. A friend of mine insisted it was a hoax, and the general view is that it is a hoax. However, this is one of the weirdest hoaxes I have ever seen, if it is a hoax. Look at the huge head! Combined with the small size. It could very well be a juvenile Bigfoot as they have gigantic heads.
Also the ears look exactly like Bigfoot ears, a nice touch that hoaxers almost never get right. It is bending its head back in a very bizarre way, but why would a hoaxer do that. And it goes down on all fours. Why? When do hoaxers ever go on all fours like that. It does look like a gorilla! Very much like a gorilla. All I have to say is that this is one of the weirdest Bigfoot videos I have ever seen! Michael Merchant breaks down Nassau Bigfoot.
I really do think that this is a Bigfoot, and it is definitely going on all fours. Michael Merchant breaks down San Juans Bigfoot.
This video is very strange and I cannot make any sense out of it. Whether it is a hoax or whether it is a real Bigfoot, I have no idea. The general view is it is a hoax, but that could be incorrect. Dr. Melba Ketchum told Justin Smeja that the Bigfoot steak from the Sierra Kills would probably test as “bear” if he sent it out somewhere else! Turns out that Justin et al did send it out elsewhere, and it did test as “bear” from two separate labs. What kind of sense does that make? It makes no sense at all! I am as confused as anyone about this. Ketchum is not hoaxing. One theory is that Ketchum has nothing but samples from known animals and that she has manipulated or misinterpreted those samples in some way as part of a gigantic scientific hoax. The problem is that that is scientific misconduct for sure if she did that. She would also be sued to Kingdom Come and she could be prosecuted by an enterprising DA for criminal fraud.
Ketchum is a rather shady person for sure (but many of the pillars of our society in business, entertainment and government are shady or worse), but she is not hoaxing. I do not believe that she is capable of scientific misconduct. She doesn’t have it in her, she doesn’t want to be sued and for sure she doesn’t want to go to jail or prison.
As far as ethical challenges, many of the greatest men and women in history had some rather remarkable ethical lapses, yet we still consider them great. Let God sort em out!
Another way we know she is not hoaxing is because I know that Adrian Erickson is not hoaxing. Erickson and his team definitely have samples from real Bigfoots. That’s for sure. If Erickson’s samples are real, then Melba’s samples are real. In addition, for sure Derek Randles and his team is not hoaxing, nor is Larry Jenkins, Mitch Waite, Alex Hearn, Stan Courtney, Larry Surface, Henner Fahrenbach, Rob Alley or JC Johnson. As far as the rest of the submitters, I doubt if most of them are hoaxers, but I don’t know them, so they might possibly be. We always have consider all hypotheses in science. Critique of Ketchum’s DNA study. Via Tyler Huggins on Bigfoot Forums, who sent the study to a PhD friend of his:
Huggins: I have another, and seemingly final update from my PhD contact who would prefer not to post here:
PhD: “What my analysis says is that the bear sequences are real bear and not just primate sequences that are homologous to bear. That means that a bear was involved. This is consistent with your and Bart’s reports. It also points to the fact that it’s inclusion in the publication was inappropriate, because it adds more confusion than clarity.
I think this is gonna be it for me on this sample. It’s fairly tedious work. It’s pointing to an artifactual mosaic due to the combining of human and bear sequences along with poor quality control of the output. Here is something that you can post:
______________________________________
Further analysis of the sequence associated with Sample 26 indicates that it is 2.7 million nucleotides in length., which is only about 0.1% of the human genome. It tracks from beginning to end with sequences associated with Chromosome 11. Chromosome 11 is 134 million nucleotides in length. So, this would correspond to roughly 0.2% of the content of Chromosome 11.
There are segments that identify with very high significance to Ursid (bear) sequences. One major limitation related to the analysis is that Genbank is fairly limited in Ursid sequences. Most of the Ursid sequences identify with Panda, but Panda is fairly well represented in Genbank compared to black bear and other bears. The Ursid sequences appear to be mainly from coding regions, rather than structural regions.
It is really impossible to compare the Chromosome 11 structural sequences (non-coding) to similar sequences for bears. So, it is possible that there are bear non-coding sequences, as well. This makes it very hard to decipher what might be going on in terms of the source of the sample vs. the contaminant.
So, are the bear sequences real bear or are they primate sequences that identify closely with bear. A distance tree analysis in BLAST using several sequences that identified as phosphatidylserine synthase-2 like coding regions indicates that the Sample 26 version aligns most closely with Ursid sequence (Panda). A primate cluster (human, gorilla, baboon, chimp, rhesus monkey) are highly homologous but more distantly related. Additional sequences from dog, mouse and galigo (Otolemur) were included as outliers and branch further away as might be expected.
So, the upshot here is that the 2.7 million nucleotide data set for Sample 26 is highly flawed, and, therefore, would be nearly impossible to use to determine whether a non-human primate contributed DNA to the sample.”
Ok, based on that, my reading is that Ketchum’s analysis of the Bigfoot DNA from the Sierra steak makes no sense at all. I do not know what that means. It either means that Bigfoot DNA itself makes no sense or that there was something wrong with her analysis. Craziest Bigfooters of all vindicated by Ketchum DNA study. Via this fascinating webpage of Ketchum’s very unprofessional website (my browsers warned about possible phishing sites due to improper certificates) we see a list of all of the successful submitters to the study. Many are rather unremarkable, but some do stand out.
For instance, Igor Burtsev, widely derided as a kook and quite possibly a hoaxer (he seems to have hoaxed a Bigfoot tour for Dr. Jeff Meldrum in the Kuzbass) nevertheless has 6 successful samples in the study, including one from Russia! 3 of the samples come from Tennessee (Apparently from the Carter Farm!), one from Michigan (Via Robin Lynne’s habituation site no doubt!) and one is from Russia (Which means that Ketchum’s study proves that Yetis are real!)
The Carter Farm is the site of Janice Carter’s story detailed in Mary Green’s book 50 Years with Bigfoot that details Janice’s growing up and living with the Bigfoots on her family farm in Tennessee over the course of a lifetime. It is widely derided as utterly ridiculous, in particular the parts about Fox the Bigfoot, and Janice has been proven to be a hoaxer, at least in part. In one scene, Fox comes to Janice’s door to ask for some garlic, which she gives him!
Janice herself has 7 successful samples in to Ketchum’s study and Melba’s page states that one of the samples was form the late Fox (Fox died in 2010) himself! How she figured that out, I have no idea. Yet the Ketchum study appears to prove that the Bigfoots at the Carter Farm, including the incredible Fox himself, were real, and hence Janice’s story, at least in part, is a true story! Holy Sasquatch!
In addition, Robin Lynne is Melba’s new spokesman and is widely derided as an ultra-kook even in Bigfoot circles. She says there are 10 Bigfoots living in and around her family’s rural property in Michigan. She feeds them fish and blueberry muffins! Once this story got out to the mainstream media, they all had a huge laugh about it. I even thought her story was insane, but apparently Lynne has a successful sample into Ketchum’s study, apparently validating that there are indeed Bigfoots living around her place and that her story is at least in part true. Holy Boogieman!
OK, Now for comments from DD-
I think that the story Melba Ketchum has asked Smeja to deliberately contaminate the samples has arisen because the suspicion now is that Smeja's samples are already contaminated. This could be either Ketchum's actual request or Smeja covering his own ass by pointing fingers and making accusations.
That the differennt law enforcement agencies are snooping around Dyerand checking out his claim means nothing of any especial importance, it need not imply there is an actual body involved: all there needs to be is the report of suspicious activity. Word has also been circulating that Dyer admitted to the hoax on an internet radio broadcast and Bigfoot Evidence has carried that story recently.HERE
I do not endorse any of the videos, but I do not reject them all, either. I do endorse the idea that there is a large apelike creature present in North America, NOT a Bigfoot, which sometimes walks on all fours and which has been identified by Loren Coleman as a North American Ape or NAPE. Some of the reports are definitely runaway lab apes, Coleman has reasons to assume it is a native ape. My data tends to support the idea there is a native ape closely similar to an orangutan, and that certain photographs including the Florida Myakka Ape photos depict it. The "broken back" of the one video creature is very peculiar and I suspect a hoax in that case-from the jerking of the camera around more than the wierd appearance of the creature, actually.
Large Apelike creature in high weeds in US Midwest,
compared to a view of an orangutan from the rear second row.
Below are two extremes in colouration for the Borneo orangutans.
"Bigfoot up a tree, bear on the ground" above and
Below, closeup of the "Bigfoot"
Which also has an orangutan-like look to it
All photos are from Bigfoot Evidence and reproduced here under the terms of Fair Use.
That the anamolous and already-questioned genetic sequences from chromosome 11 come from bears contaminating the sample in Ketchum's study comes as no surprise. When the findings came out and said the results from chromosome 11 were not like other primates and were consistent with each other, bears were the most likely source of contamination and several commentators had guessed that is what the chromosome 11 results came from with no more information than that.
I do not call Igor Burtsev a hoaxer for repeating incorrect information. There is a distinction to be made there, as to whether the misinformation was innocently repeated but incorrect or was maliciously manufactured with intent to deceive. The latter is what is actually defined as a hoax.
Reference to the Russian sample as a "Yeti"is misleading and mistaken. The mistake evidently arises because Myra Shackley said these Russian reports sounded like the Tibetan "Yeti" reports. Actually, "Yeti" is a generic term and does include some reports which sound like the Russian reports, but also other reports which sond like Sasquatches and once again, other reports which sound like orangutan-like apes. The term "Yeti" can equally well be used for any of several kinds of bears. In any event, the term is inappropriate to use for any populations living in Central Siberia because it is non-native to the area and native to Tibet.
The Crazies included in Ketchum's studies were considered to be legitimate. I was given some of the hair samples supposedly from Fox at the Carter Farm: my samples were not analysed but sent away to the CFZ where the samples were discarded by mistake. I had heard that other samples tested out as 99.5% of modern Homo sapiens genetically but that the scientist who made the analysis at that point wanted all the glory for himself and so a dispute arose over proper credit. I was also told (through sources attributing the source as Igor Burtsev) that the DNA matched the DNA as taken from Khvit's tooth. I was quite happy with this result but it seems that this result was subsequently disputed also. I kept the documentation of these notices in my Yahoo Cryptozoology group Frontiers of Zoology. I became a sideline observer of Ketchum's study because I had a vested interest, and my interest was wholly in the DNA analysis and nothing to do with the stories told on the locations or anything else. The story was that Janice had tempted Fox to come close by offering him food and then snatched a handful of hairs off his arm when he came too close. Incidentally Robin Lynn is also a friend of mine on Facebook but Janice Carter has never spoken to me directlly, on facebook or anywhere else, she avoids me like the plague.
I still hold to the information as it was given to me that the Bigfoot DNA is 99.5% of modern human and that it matches the DNA from Russia. My personal conclusion was, as I have subsequently maintained, that Bigfoot was classifiable as Homo sapiens by the DNA, but had some rather obvious external differences, primarily in having a hairy coat. I recognise the fact that the information given me that the samples were 99.5% of modern human were also possibly fraudulent but I have no independant reason to believe so other than the fact the hairs were said to have come from a Bigfoot. I was given this information via email and within the group Frontiers-of-Zoology, where the original messages remain, but I was never shown any hardcopy documentation (ie, published papers including the stated results)
I do allow that there has been local mixing of Bigfoot and Human DNA over time and in different places, and that interbreeding does occur. I do not say that Bigfoot came about from crossing two completely different species with Proto-Bigfoots being the fathers and European females were the mothers, as Ketchum does. Rather I say that they were Homo sapiens (Hairy phase) all along, and interbreeding took place because we were the same species. And that is going by the common taxonomic practice of including Neanderthals and Heidelburgers as "Early Homo sapiens". Ketchum's estimate of protoBigfoots diverging perhaps a million years ago makes no difference because that is still in the Early Homo sapiens time range (this time being the early Heidelburgers sometimes called Homo antecessor) and I personally consider that two species become distinct only once they get beyond that million years of separation mark.
For a reminder: Loren Coleman and Patrick Huyghe's Field Guide To Bigfoot, Yeti, & Other Mystery Primates
Worldwide lists among the terrestrial higher primates covered in the guide the categories True Giant, Neo-Giant, Marked Hominid, Neandertal, Homo erectus, Protopygmy, Unknown Ape and Unknown Monkey. I would combine the first two in a general Giants category and leave off the Monkey category for the moment. The Homo erectus types are necessarily more comparable to Solo Men, and those are more likely another sapiens type than actually erectus. So those middle four categories are all Homo sapiens types and are not unknown animals, they are the same species as us! (The Unknown Apes are also mostly all varieties of orangutans, counting the ones outside of Africa only.) http://www.amazon.com/Field-Bigfoot-Mystery-Primates-Worldwide/dp/0380802635 http://www.csicop.org/si/show/flawed_guide_to_bigfoot
And I reiterate: if Bigfoot (of the EASTERN US kind, which Coleman calls a Marked Hominid) is Homo sapiens, there is no reason to kill any of them to take any specimens. They are the same species as us. To kill one of them is still literally and legally murder. There are no big prizes to be earned, there is no new species and no new unknown species involved (This last statement is possibly even true of the NAPES, because they might be close enough to orangutans to be the same species: they could ALL be Apes Gone Wild from captivity)
For my part, I'd have to agree that everyone is far too relaxed in video, including the dog, and that is suspicious. The figure that runs by and pretends to be an ape (NOT "Pretends to be a Bigfoot") seems to be a person in ordinary clothing before they dash across the opening.
Watch this: Golden Eagle Snatches Kid, Almost Gets Away With The Kid [WTF]
WTF?! This looks like the real deal. A
family almost loses their kid to a golden eagle at a park in Montreal. They were
lucky the eagle decided to drop the baby a few meters away.
Jeffery Meldrum, an associate professor of anatomy and anthropology at Idaho State University, said there “is very little to go on,” to determine whether or not an actual sighting of Bigfoot took place.
“All we really have contextually is the account of the events by the eyewitnesses. I can relate to the emotions of the situation but it would be nice if they held their ground and waited just a little bit longer to capture more of the creature,” Meldrum said. “When it moves, it is really difficult to interpret. The glimpse is slippery. It is hard to discern.” - ABC News
Again...the original media account and telephone interview:
A Utah man camping in Provo Canyon caught sight of – what he claims – was a black creature in the woods.
The video’s description, named “Provo Canyon Bigfood Encounter?” on YouTube [LINK], says the man was camping near Squaw Peak and Little Rock Canyon Overlook when they saw deer up on the hill.
On their way up, the spotted what appeared to be a bear. But when “the monster stood up and looked right at us,” they fled.
“We had actually been standing there for awhile. We had thought it was a bear up to that point but when it stood up and looked at us it was just massive animal,” said the video’s uploader, who goes by the name Beard Card on YouTube. He did not want his real name to be made public.
“We don’t know what it was. I mean none of us really believe in Bigfoot but we’ve talked about it over and over again since then. It happened on Monday and all of us are positive that thing wasn’t a bear.” - Fox 13 Now
CARD: "But when it stood up and looked at us--and we assumed it was a bear up to that point--but, when it stood up and looked at us, it was this massive animal. We don't know what it was. I mean, none of us believe in Bigfoot, so. ...We've talked about it over and over again since Monday when it happened and all of us are positive that thing wasn't a bear."
ROTH: "You're not a Bigfoot guy?
CARD: "Nope...none of us have ever believed in that kind of thing."
ROTH: "So what do you think it was?"
CARD: "I don't know!...We don't know what it was...I don't know if Bigfoot exists or not but that was a huge animal."
NOTE: There have been 9 Class A & B reports of Bigfoot between 1982 and 2005 in the area within and around Provo Canyon according to the BFRO. I'm still not convinced that this was a hominid or Bigfoot-type creature, but the length of the arm and movement of the subject are very curious. A few more seconds of video may have determined what this really was...Lon
Now I'll just go on record and say what I have been saying ever since the footage just came out. It looks to me very much as if a heavily-coated human is squatting to usae the toilet at the onset. It is a black coat and when he is hunched down behind the trees is when he was mistaken for a bear. After a while he finishes, stands up and the shadow becomes dramatically broader. This is what makes me think he is wearing a coat: he throws the coat back so he can pull his pants up and fasten them again. After this is done, a human arm can clearly be made out to the right of the image area. The figure does not have very long arms nor any other identifying features except when he stands up, he looks really very broad in proportion. If anybody else has a better explanation I'd like to hear it.
Reprinted from Bigfoot Field Journal Friday, June 15, 2012 Posted by Joe Black
[I thought the representations of Bigfoot faces made from impressions of videos taken in the Apallachian region were especially good and from the standpoint of classification of these creatures, I have nothing to add. My opinion already stated agrees with the conclusions made here-DD]
Actual Still Capture from Trail
Cam
The two most common questions I get has lately are:
Have you ever seen a Bigfoot and what do they look like? My answer is yes and
just like us. The latter answer still startles many people who ask me this
question, especially those not familiar with the recent developments in Bigfoot
research. "But I thought it was an big ape that walked on two legs", is the
response I usually get in return to that answer.
Still Capture from Trail
Cam
I have made eye
contact twice and captured at least a dozen on video and they look remarkably
"human". Mary Green took heavy criticism in the 80's and 90's because she was
describing them with human features. The "old guard" had trouble accepting they
did no look like a large ape.
Still Capture from
Video
It was not until
David Paulides published his two books "The Hoopa Project" and "Tribal Bigfoot"
that the Bigfoot world started rethinking what a Bigfoot actually looked like.
David recruited Harvey Pratt, an experienced and nationally respected forensic
artist. Harvey then interviewed witnesses and drew what they described without
any interpretation. The results were ground breaking. David had applied good
solid investigative methods to his research and the results were amazing images
of what the Bigfoot actually looked like. To everyone's surprise and amazement
they looked like US!
Still Capture from
Video
The general facial
features vary depending on the region of the country the Bigfoot live in. In
East Tennessee the Bigfoot generally have rounder heads, only a few have a
"dome" or "crest". The noses are very human like in this area. Some are narrow
unlike the flat wide noses described in other parts of the country. The mouth is
wider than what we would consider normal. The teeth are square and human
looking. I know that some Bigfoot have pronounced canines (as do some people)
but in my experience I have not seen any with "fangs". The skin color is pasty
gray or black with a leathery appearance. There are exceptions to this, I once
captured a video of one with very light skin, and his face was remarkably human
looking.
The major
feature that is different from most humans and appears to be very common with
the Bigfoot in my area is what we call the "Goggle Look". They have a pronounced
brow and deep set eyes. This makes them look like they are wearing a pair of
dark goggles. This feature is interesting and makes it difficult to see their
eyes unless you are extremely close.
Still Captures from Videos -
Goggle Affect
"Sneering
Bigfoot"
"Why do you
think they look like us" is usually the following up question. In my area I
think it is because of interbreeding with humans for hundreds of years. The
Cherokee have stories of their women actually taking Bigfoot as husbands and
bearing their children. Unfortunately it is my opinion that women over the past
few centuries have been forcibly taken and children as well. I think they were
integrated into the Bigfoot clans and as a result we have the more human
appearance of the Bigfoot in this area of the country. This Charles Middleton drawing comes very close to
representing the general look of the Bigfoot in my area of the
country.
In conclusion
the Bigfoot are each unique individuals. Their facial features vary but In
general have a remarkably "human" quality about them. That is why I say, we have
met the Bigfoot and he is us.
Below is
a drawing I made based on both my eye witness encounter and video captures. I
believe this to be a young female that I call "Scout". She showed herself to me
briefly and we made eye contact back in 2010.
Drawing of the Bigfoot
"Scout"
Posted by Scott Carpenter on the same blog under "Signs and Wonders":
This one has facial features reminiscent of the "Minnesota Iceman"
Dan22 says: 
