Page 28 of 40 FirstFirst ... 182526272829303138 ... LastLast
Results 406 to 420 of 597

Thread: Sasquatch Vocalizations 4.0

  1. #406
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    6th August 2015
    Posts
    1,853
    Thanks
    4,608
    Thanked 11,685 Times in 2,094 Posts
    Well in fact the photo's look a bit different to the other day. Unfortunately I cannot save the original image posted and it also is only one on the web page which cannot be zoomed into. So whatever file form it is it is locked from me doing my own investigation of the photo. I am pretty sure there were no 'facial features' there the other day when I first saw this.
    Secondly, if someone takes a photo of such a thing and want's to prove it was an object temporarily inhabiting that space, it seem very obvious to me, to take another photo when it has gone, and have it time stamped.
    Certainly strange because the other day I could zoom in and yes, it just looked like a rock, none of you were mentioning facial features, but instead were just talking about light anomalies where the rock in question was not reflecting like the foreground rocks.

    And rocks don't all glisten the same, it is very common for some rocks to just look dark and flat next to shinier ones.
    Last edited by enjoy being, 9th October 2015 at 23:01.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to enjoy being For This Useful Post:

    bsbray (10th October 2015), Frances (12th October 2015), jimmer (10th October 2015), reno (10th October 2015)

  3. #407
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Location
    Rockies Foothills
    Posts
    4,982
    Thanks
    9,075
    Thanked 18,116 Times in 3,777 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Nothing View Post
    Well in fact the photo's look a bit different to the other day. Unfortunately I cannot save the original image posted and it also is only one on the web page which cannot be zoomed into. So whatever file form it is it is locked from me doing my own investigation of the photo. I am pretty sure there were no 'facial features' there the other day when I first saw this.
    Secondly, if someone takes a photo of such a thing and want's to prove it was an object temporarily inhabiting that space, it seem very obvious to me, to take another photo when it has gone, and have it time stamped.
    Certainly strange because the other day I could zoom in and yes, it just looked like a rock, none of you were mentioning facial features, but instead were just talking about light anomalies where the rock in question was not reflecting like the foreground rocks.

    And rocks don't all glisten the same, it is very common for some rocks to just look dark and flat next to shinier ones.
    reno provided me with the hi-res link.
    the source image was resolute enough to do the posted analysis.

    I did a simple enlargement and contrast enhancement.

    the facial features were always there.
    so apparent, no one even questioned it at the time.

    the file name was changed to protect the setting's location.


  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jimmer For This Useful Post:

    enjoy being (10th October 2015), Frances (12th October 2015), reno (10th October 2015)

  5. #408
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Location
    Rockies Foothills
    Posts
    4,982
    Thanks
    9,075
    Thanked 18,116 Times in 3,777 Posts
    SV4 Saturday Matinee: Sasquatch in Europe

    free popcorn for all!


  6. The Following User Says Thank You to jimmer For This Useful Post:

    Frances (12th October 2015)

  7. #409
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Location
    Rockies Foothills
    Posts
    4,982
    Thanks
    9,075
    Thanked 18,116 Times in 3,777 Posts
    and now the weekend SV4 creature feature: BIGFOOT: WILLOW CREEK

    written and directed by bobcatgothwait, this film got lots of publicity leading to its release.

    this theatrical release takes us back to modern day bluff creek, site of the PG footage.

    more popcorn!


  8. The Following User Says Thank You to jimmer For This Useful Post:

    Frances (12th October 2015)

  9. #410
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    6th August 2015
    Posts
    1,853
    Thanks
    4,608
    Thanked 11,685 Times in 2,094 Posts
    Cool, awaiting the posting of the return to site photo where the object is not there. I'd love to think it is a photo of a sasquatch, but the impetus is in proving it isn't a rock, as I still stand by my own experience and understanding of looking at rocks. Such a shame who ever took the photo didn't zoom in or take more.
    Please don't think I am being... whatever the word is. Mean, or difficult, the everyone has an opinion thing, fine. My opinion tends to sit in the middle often. Rather than hard up against the stopper of "this is a sasquatch". See it works both ways. If it were to be a sasquatch, then that is big news and good evidence. Therefore, if it was me who took the photo, I would be making the effort to return to that place to take the required photo.
    Last edited by enjoy being, 10th October 2015 at 23:00.

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to enjoy being For This Useful Post:

    bsbray (11th October 2015), Frances (12th October 2015), jimmer (11th October 2015)

  11. #411
    Retired Member Germany
    Join Date
    13th March 2015
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    34
    Thanks
    261
    Thanked 254 Times in 34 Posts
    Sorry, seems to be no Sasquatch

    I managed to find another photograph of the same location, that was shot
    * at another day
    * from a slightly different viewpoint

    The image is from an official web page of that area.

    Name:  part of web image.jpg
Views: 122
Size:  20.1 KB
    (sorry, the forum software shrinks the image before storing, so you have to enlarge it to see the structure)

    It shows the same "entity" formation on the right side of the left corner stone.
    So I conclude that it is probably no sasquatch, if the same structure is apparent in different shots.

    Update 2015-10-12:
    Detail enlarged 8x using NNEDI + tonemapped for better clarity
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by Olaf, 12th October 2015 at 08:38.

  12. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Olaf For This Useful Post:

    bsbray (11th October 2015), enjoy being (11th October 2015), Frances (12th October 2015), jimmer (11th October 2015), reno (11th October 2015), sandancer (15th October 2015)

  13. #412
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    6th August 2015
    Posts
    1,853
    Thanks
    4,608
    Thanked 11,685 Times in 2,094 Posts
    Good work Olaf. And darn, I was really hoping to be wrong. It's funny though because I had not noticed the face so clearly until after posting in the thread. I saw the photo when it was first posted and was most sure then. Reminds me of the other times with various things, paintings included, that I have seen people swear to see two different things and when they finally see that which the other person only could see, they then might find the first thing hard to see.

  14. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to enjoy being For This Useful Post:

    bsbray (11th October 2015), Frances (12th October 2015), jimmer (11th October 2015), reno (11th October 2015), sandancer (15th October 2015)

  15. #413
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Location
    Rockies Foothills
    Posts
    4,982
    Thanks
    9,075
    Thanked 18,116 Times in 3,777 Posts
    Quote Originally posted by Olaf View Post

    Name:  part of web image.jpg
Views: 122
Size:  20.1 KB:
    do you have a source link to take a better look at your found image?
    or could you use a service like photobucket to link your image.
    that's what many use to post large, resolute images. (like post #409)

    you could be right about the anomaly being there, but it's very hard to tell from this posted image.

    just wondering how did you found a different image of the same location?

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to jimmer For This Useful Post:

    Frances (12th October 2015)

  17. #414
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Location
    Rockies Foothills
    Posts
    4,982
    Thanks
    9,075
    Thanked 18,116 Times in 3,777 Posts
    olaf was nice enough to PM me with the original image.

    turns out it is the same size as posted.

    conclusion?
    inconclusive. (yet, you could be very right ; )

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jimmer For This Useful Post:

    bsbray (11th October 2015), Frances (12th October 2015)

  19. #415
    Tot Founder England The One's Avatar
    Join Date
    12th September 2013
    Location
    In-Be-Tween
    Posts
    10,964
    Thanks
    26,665
    Thanked 48,690 Times in 10,221 Posts
    Hope this image helps below

    No one person can ever change the truth, but the truth, once learned, can and will change the person

    You must be the change you wish to see in the world when you are through changing, you are through


    theonetruth forum status theonetruth facebook

  20. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to The One For This Useful Post:

    bsbray (11th October 2015), Frances (12th October 2015), jimmer (12th October 2015)

  21. #416
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Location
    Rockies Foothills
    Posts
    4,982
    Thanks
    9,075
    Thanked 18,116 Times in 3,777 Posts
    thanks, malc.

    what we really need is an ultra-hi-res image, like the original posted image.
    that file is huge, allowing lots of enlargement.

    this one, not so much, but thanks for the try.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to jimmer For This Useful Post:

    Frances (12th October 2015)

  23. #417
    Retired Member Latvia
    Join Date
    3rd March 2015
    Location
    Latvia
    Posts
    10
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 37 Times in 9 Posts

  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to leaf For This Useful Post:

    Frances (13th October 2015), jimmer (13th October 2015), sandancer (15th October 2015)

  25. #418
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Location
    Rockies Foothills
    Posts
    4,982
    Thanks
    9,075
    Thanked 18,116 Times in 3,777 Posts
    knowing mike the way we do, I bet the whole thing is bogus.

    he's an honorable fellow.

  26. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jimmer For This Useful Post:

    Frances (13th October 2015), leaf (13th October 2015), sandancer (15th October 2015)

  27. #419
    Retired Member
    Join Date
    13th September 2013
    Location
    Rockies Foothills
    Posts
    4,982
    Thanks
    9,075
    Thanked 18,116 Times in 3,777 Posts
    for your review, thinker thunker analyzes old footage shot at the grand canyon.

    a hoax you say? keep watching.


    Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3JCWAlgG04

    as always, you decide : )

  28. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jimmer For This Useful Post:

    Frances (14th October 2015), reno (14th October 2015), sandancer (15th October 2015)

  29. #420
    Retired Member UK
    Join Date
    12th September 2013
    Location
    UK.
    Posts
    1,815
    Thanks
    19,274
    Thanked 6,600 Times in 1,366 Posts
    I always enjoy Thinker Thunker and his videos.
    You even get to see some videos that you have never seen before.
    Frances.

  30. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Frances For This Useful Post:

    bsbray (15th October 2015), jimmer (14th October 2015), reno (14th October 2015), sandancer (15th October 2015)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •