Saturday, December 17, 2011
Woman Badly Beaten in McDonald's
In this shocking video, two women get into it with an employee at a McDonald's in Greenwich Village when he tries to check their $50 bill to see if it is a fake or not. One of the women attacks the worker and another woman vaults over the counter to chase the worker into the back of the store so she can attack him. The worker grabs a metal rod and beats the woman with it! He was arrested, but a lot of people are coming to his defense. Apparently he has a prison record.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Jacobs Juvenile Bigfoot Photos
Famous photos taken by a deer hunter in western Pennsylvania in 2007. He set up the camera with a salt lick to attract deer. He got some deer, some bears and also apparently a juvenile Bigfoot! The Pennsylvania Department of Fish and Game says that this is a "mangy bear." Many continue to insist that it is mangy bear. However, the limb to torso measurements are completely wrong for a bear, plus bears don't bend down to sniff things the way this thing bends down to smell the salt lick. The way it bends down is typical for an ape.
Bears have limb to torso ratios of 60%. Humans and primates have ratios of 120-150%. This animal has a ratio of 122%.
Juvenile Bigfoots are quadrupedal until they are three or four years old, when they begin to walk bipedally.
Interestingly, the trail cam that took these shots was repeatedly broken and had to be replaced a number of times. There are many reports of Bigfoots destroying trail cams. Few if any other animals routinely destroy trail cams. Bigfoots are apparently upset by the night flash of the trail cams.
Debate continues to rage over these strange photos, with even members of the Bigfoot researcher community saying that it's just a mangy bear.
Bears have limb to torso ratios of 60%. Humans and primates have ratios of 120-150%. This animal has a ratio of 122%.
Juvenile Bigfoots are quadrupedal until they are three or four years old, when they begin to walk bipedally.
Interestingly, the trail cam that took these shots was repeatedly broken and had to be replaced a number of times. There are many reports of Bigfoots destroying trail cams. Few if any other animals routinely destroy trail cams. Bigfoots are apparently upset by the night flash of the trail cams.
Debate continues to rage over these strange photos, with even members of the Bigfoot researcher community saying that it's just a mangy bear.
The Patterson - Gimlin Bigfoot Footage
The Holy Grail of Bigfoot tapes. For a variety of reasons, this clinches the argument over whether or not Bigfoot exists.
In 1967, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin left Yakima, Washington and went to Willow Creek, California. They were both cowboys and worked seasonally. Patterson had been hunting Bigfoot for a long time; in fact, he was more or less a fulltime Bigfoot hunter for half the year. He had also written a book about Bigfoot. Despite all of that, he was just a cowboy, and he was not a particularly educated man.
Patterson brought Gimlin along because he wanted the best horseman he could find, and Gimlin is one of the finest cowboys out there. They went to Willow Creek because many Bigfoot tracks had been seen in the area recently as logging roads were opening up, so they figured it was a good place to look. These tracks were first noted in 1958 by Jerry Crews, a road worker.
The family of a recently deceased man named Ray Wallace has claimed that he created the Bigfoot myth by walking around in the woods wearing wooden shoes. The family has produced the shoes. However, the tracks left by his wooden feet do not match at all to the many known Bigfoot prints on many variables.
On October 20, they went to Bluff Creek, California, near the border between Humboldt and Del Norte Counties. They were riding along a trail along Bluff Creek when they came to an uprooted tree stump as large as a room in a house. As they moved past it, they looked down in the creek bed. There had been huge storms in the spring and much of the tree cover around the stream was washed away. In order to get to the creek, animals had to move across the open creekbed to get to the water.
Both men saw the Bigfoot at once. Patterson's "unspookable" horse spooked and flipped him off of it. Patterson struggled to pull himself from under the horse, which had fallen tot he ground, then to get his camera out of his bag. He then began running across the creekbed pursuing the Bigfoot. He got about 15-20 seconds of the finest footage anyone has ever made of a female Bigfoot, 24 feet of 16mm film with a 16mm Kodak camera.
People went back the next day and made classic Bigfoot casts of the footprints in the soil. Bigfoot footprints have been found all over and many casts have been made. They share common abnormalities that would make them hard to fake. They lack an arch, and have a bone present that is not in a human foot. There are several other ways that they are different.
Mathematical calculations based on the prints showed that "Patty" weighed 550 pounds and that she was 7 feet 6 1/2 inches tall. The prints were 14.5 inches long and 6 inches wide.
Since that time, several people have all come forward with different stories that they wore a monkey suit for the footage. Each person has a different story and some even have the suits. Some keep dragging out new suits every year, trying to make them better and better, since in general, they look nothing like the footage.
Hollywood filmmakers have said it would be difficult or impossible to make a suit like that and that probably no human could be trained to walk the way Patty walks, or if so, only with extensive training. Patty displays a completely non-human method of locomotion would be difficult, if not impossible, for a human to imitate.
Note in the footage where Patty turns to look at the camera. Note how she turns her whole upper body around, including her shoulders, not just her head. A human generally only turns their head, but apes turn their upper body around, since they can't turn just their head. Who would have thought of that?
Note the hairy breasts. Even apes do not have hair breasts.
Movement of thigh muscles can be seen as Patty runs. This movement is perfect, exactly the way a huge thigh would move. The muscle would not be visible under a costume.
Patty has a hernia on her left thigh. A hernia would not be visible under a costume.
Notice the absolutely natural way that Patty walks in a manner of locomotion that is utterly nonhuman.
Notice how long her arms are compared to the rest of the body.
Patty's knee operates at a completely different angle when walking than a normal human knee does - it is not fully extended. This may be an adaptation to supporting a great deal of weight.
Patty has huge shoulders, calculated at 34 inches wide. The average man has shoulders 25 inches wide. A wide shouldered man is 28-29 inches. Humans with shoulders over 30 inches are nearly unheard of. Even Andre the Giant's specs do not match Patty's.
In 1998, the BBC paid special effects people to make a perfect Patty costume, then had an actor run along to imitate Patty. The documentary was billed as destroying the Patterson footage once and for all. The effort failed completely. To this day, no one, not even the finest Hollywood special effects designers, has been able to use an actor and a monkey suit to recreate this footage. Keep in mind that 43 years ago, special effects was still in its infancy and it is orders of magnitude better now than it was then.
No one has been able to prove that this footage is a fake. The worst one can say about it is that it is a mystery.
Patterson died of cancer in 1972. Gimlin is still alive, but he never made a dime off the footage. Both men were of high moral caliber, which cannot be said of the numerous fakers who all said they worse the costume that day.
Here a Hollywood animator says that the footage obviously shows and unknown animal, and that footage could not possibly be faked with a costume and actor via modern techniques.
In 1967, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin left Yakima, Washington and went to Willow Creek, California. They were both cowboys and worked seasonally. Patterson had been hunting Bigfoot for a long time; in fact, he was more or less a fulltime Bigfoot hunter for half the year. He had also written a book about Bigfoot. Despite all of that, he was just a cowboy, and he was not a particularly educated man.
Patterson brought Gimlin along because he wanted the best horseman he could find, and Gimlin is one of the finest cowboys out there. They went to Willow Creek because many Bigfoot tracks had been seen in the area recently as logging roads were opening up, so they figured it was a good place to look. These tracks were first noted in 1958 by Jerry Crews, a road worker.
The family of a recently deceased man named Ray Wallace has claimed that he created the Bigfoot myth by walking around in the woods wearing wooden shoes. The family has produced the shoes. However, the tracks left by his wooden feet do not match at all to the many known Bigfoot prints on many variables.
On October 20, they went to Bluff Creek, California, near the border between Humboldt and Del Norte Counties. They were riding along a trail along Bluff Creek when they came to an uprooted tree stump as large as a room in a house. As they moved past it, they looked down in the creek bed. There had been huge storms in the spring and much of the tree cover around the stream was washed away. In order to get to the creek, animals had to move across the open creekbed to get to the water.
Both men saw the Bigfoot at once. Patterson's "unspookable" horse spooked and flipped him off of it. Patterson struggled to pull himself from under the horse, which had fallen tot he ground, then to get his camera out of his bag. He then began running across the creekbed pursuing the Bigfoot. He got about 15-20 seconds of the finest footage anyone has ever made of a female Bigfoot, 24 feet of 16mm film with a 16mm Kodak camera.
People went back the next day and made classic Bigfoot casts of the footprints in the soil. Bigfoot footprints have been found all over and many casts have been made. They share common abnormalities that would make them hard to fake. They lack an arch, and have a bone present that is not in a human foot. There are several other ways that they are different.
Mathematical calculations based on the prints showed that "Patty" weighed 550 pounds and that she was 7 feet 6 1/2 inches tall. The prints were 14.5 inches long and 6 inches wide.
Since that time, several people have all come forward with different stories that they wore a monkey suit for the footage. Each person has a different story and some even have the suits. Some keep dragging out new suits every year, trying to make them better and better, since in general, they look nothing like the footage.
Hollywood filmmakers have said it would be difficult or impossible to make a suit like that and that probably no human could be trained to walk the way Patty walks, or if so, only with extensive training. Patty displays a completely non-human method of locomotion would be difficult, if not impossible, for a human to imitate.
Note in the footage where Patty turns to look at the camera. Note how she turns her whole upper body around, including her shoulders, not just her head. A human generally only turns their head, but apes turn their upper body around, since they can't turn just their head. Who would have thought of that?
Note the hairy breasts. Even apes do not have hair breasts.
Movement of thigh muscles can be seen as Patty runs. This movement is perfect, exactly the way a huge thigh would move. The muscle would not be visible under a costume.
Patty has a hernia on her left thigh. A hernia would not be visible under a costume.
Notice the absolutely natural way that Patty walks in a manner of locomotion that is utterly nonhuman.
Notice how long her arms are compared to the rest of the body.
Patty's knee operates at a completely different angle when walking than a normal human knee does - it is not fully extended. This may be an adaptation to supporting a great deal of weight.
Patty has huge shoulders, calculated at 34 inches wide. The average man has shoulders 25 inches wide. A wide shouldered man is 28-29 inches. Humans with shoulders over 30 inches are nearly unheard of. Even Andre the Giant's specs do not match Patty's.
In 1998, the BBC paid special effects people to make a perfect Patty costume, then had an actor run along to imitate Patty. The documentary was billed as destroying the Patterson footage once and for all. The effort failed completely. To this day, no one, not even the finest Hollywood special effects designers, has been able to use an actor and a monkey suit to recreate this footage. Keep in mind that 43 years ago, special effects was still in its infancy and it is orders of magnitude better now than it was then.
No one has been able to prove that this footage is a fake. The worst one can say about it is that it is a mystery.
Patterson died of cancer in 1972. Gimlin is still alive, but he never made a dime off the footage. Both men were of high moral caliber, which cannot be said of the numerous fakers who all said they worse the costume that day.
Here a Hollywood animator says that the footage obviously shows and unknown animal, and that footage could not possibly be faked with a costume and actor via modern techniques.
I am a CG animator by profession. As part of my craft I have an intuitive sense of natural human movement. I animate human characters for games.
When I view the Patterson-Gimlin film, I see a mode of movement that is not human, but humanlike. The arm swing and movement of the shoulder girdles are clearly that of a truly massive frame. The musculature of the creature is very thick, but not restrictive to the range of motion in the shoulder joints.
In the trapezius muscle group, the diamond shaped set of muscles that anchor the shoulders, nape of the neck and upper thoracic vertebrae, the contraction of these thick muscle sheets is visible. In the cadence of the walk, and the amount of bobbing up and down, the presence of great and compact body mass is evident.
Also the creatures knee, not reaching full extension, is certainly an adaptation to supporting great weight. A fully extended knee has poor resistance to twisting forces. In conclusion, the reality of the film subject as an uncatalogued animal is self evident.
It simply cannot be a costume, the boundaries of the human form do not even fit within the form of the creature. Furthermore, the mass of the creature is so great and carried with such poise, a man could not even be trained to carry such great weight or walk bearing weight in such a fashion.
The muscle masses, if they had been padding, would have been static and restrictive. The presence of visible muscle contraction, the freedom of movement, the cadence of the walk, all fully support the claim that the footage documents a living hominid outside of the genus of man.
"New York Baby" Bigfoot Footage
Great footage of a baby Bigfoot and climbing a tree in New York. Its parent lifts it up in the tree and then it plays up there for a while. The footage was shot in 1996 by Doug Pridgen in New York state. The nearest town is Poughkeepsie. It takes place at Lembo Lake between Modena and Ardonia near the Catskill Mountains.
The people had no idea of the animals in the background until afterwards when they were transferring the footage onto VHS.
According to prominent primatalogists, the figure in the video is either an exceptionally large gibbon, a small chimpanzee or an unclassified primate species. The possibility exists that someone released an ape into the surroundings. However, this is unlikely, as few people keep apes as pets and it's illegal to do so in most states.
There are many reports of baby Bigfoots climbing trees. Apparently they are typically quadripedal until they are three or four years old when they start to walk upright. At this stage, they have been seen many times in trees. Young Bigfoots are vulnerable to predators, so it's logical that they should be arboreal when young to protect themselves. There is an adult Bigfoot to the right lifting the baby Bigfoot into the tree, but you can't see it very well.
This Bigfoot footage is quite famous now.
The Freeman Bigfoot Footage
More famous Bigfoot footage, probably in the Top 10.
Paul Freeman was a worker for the local watershed district when he shot this footage in 1994 in the Blue Mountains on the border of Washington and Oregon. He saw a Bigfoot in the area previously and reported it, but he was widely ridiculed at work. Thereafter, he swore to always carry a camera with him in the woods.
A while later, he found some tracks and started following them. This is the start of the video. Then he comes upon a Bigfoot and photographs it briefly while he freaks out. At one point, the Bigfoot bends down to pick up a smaller object, possibly a baby Bigfoot. Then it moves off into the woods.
This video is controversial, but I think it is very good. Notice how the creature simply bends aside 10 foot tall pine trees as it moves through the woods. One complaint is that the Bigfoot looks down as it walks. Supposedly a wild animal would never do that. However, a sprained foot would be a serious injury for such a large animal. In the Patterson footage, Patty also looks down at the ground once, so it's possible that Bigfoot, like humans, looks at the ground while it walks to make sure it did not fall.
The video is controversial, as some call Freeman a faker and liar. Supposedly he was so upset at people making fun of him for after he saw the first Bigfoot that he faked this footage to "show them who's boss." I can't comment on that, other than to say that this is a damned good costume. Further tainting Freeman is that he has been proven to have faked some of his evidence, including tracks and hair. Tragically, this calls nearly all of his evidence, tracks, videos, hair, etc. into question. Once you start faking stuff, your credibility is gone forever.
The problem is that some of his tracks are very good and would be very hard to fake. There are a few possibilities. Either he found some real tracks and then started to make fake tracks or he started to fake tracks and then he found some real ones.
A real problem with Freedman is that he was one of those guys who always seemed to be there when a Bigfoot or its tracks showed up. The reason for his problems at work were not so much ridicule from other workers, but instead, right from the beginning, forest workers felt that his sightings and tracks were hoaxes.
Furthermore, tracks were found in the area where Freeman shot this video, and they have been analyzed. There is a deformity between the 2nd and 3rd toes on one of the Bigfoot's feet. Amazingly, footprints with this exact same deformity were found in the same area a while back. Then, a few years later, more tracks were found in the same area with the same deformity.
On the other hand, many Bigfoot researchers feel that this film is a fake. If it is, it's an awfully good one.
But this is definitely a legendary Bigfoot tape.
Paul Freeman was a worker for the local watershed district when he shot this footage in 1994 in the Blue Mountains on the border of Washington and Oregon. He saw a Bigfoot in the area previously and reported it, but he was widely ridiculed at work. Thereafter, he swore to always carry a camera with him in the woods.
A while later, he found some tracks and started following them. This is the start of the video. Then he comes upon a Bigfoot and photographs it briefly while he freaks out. At one point, the Bigfoot bends down to pick up a smaller object, possibly a baby Bigfoot. Then it moves off into the woods.
This video is controversial, but I think it is very good. Notice how the creature simply bends aside 10 foot tall pine trees as it moves through the woods. One complaint is that the Bigfoot looks down as it walks. Supposedly a wild animal would never do that. However, a sprained foot would be a serious injury for such a large animal. In the Patterson footage, Patty also looks down at the ground once, so it's possible that Bigfoot, like humans, looks at the ground while it walks to make sure it did not fall.
The video is controversial, as some call Freeman a faker and liar. Supposedly he was so upset at people making fun of him for after he saw the first Bigfoot that he faked this footage to "show them who's boss." I can't comment on that, other than to say that this is a damned good costume. Further tainting Freeman is that he has been proven to have faked some of his evidence, including tracks and hair. Tragically, this calls nearly all of his evidence, tracks, videos, hair, etc. into question. Once you start faking stuff, your credibility is gone forever.
The problem is that some of his tracks are very good and would be very hard to fake. There are a few possibilities. Either he found some real tracks and then started to make fake tracks or he started to fake tracks and then he found some real ones.
A real problem with Freedman is that he was one of those guys who always seemed to be there when a Bigfoot or its tracks showed up. The reason for his problems at work were not so much ridicule from other workers, but instead, right from the beginning, forest workers felt that his sightings and tracks were hoaxes.
Furthermore, tracks were found in the area where Freeman shot this video, and they have been analyzed. There is a deformity between the 2nd and 3rd toes on one of the Bigfoot's feet. Amazingly, footprints with this exact same deformity were found in the same area a while back. Then, a few years later, more tracks were found in the same area with the same deformity.
On the other hand, many Bigfoot researchers feel that this film is a fake. If it is, it's an awfully good one.
But this is definitely a legendary Bigfoot tape.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
