Pa. hunter's images stir Bigfoot debate

The first two pictures are the ones in question. The third one shows baby bears.
 
LastSunrise1981 said:
It would be nice if people actually discussed this intelligently without being stupid. Many experts on the Bigfoot Research Organization and other scientists compared photos of mangy bears with this one, so far the conclusion is that it's a young primate of some sort.
Click to expand...

However, they're not jumping to conclusions until they find a photo that matches exactly that of the mangy bear or young Bigfoot.
Click to expand...

So which is it? Is the conclusion that it's a young primate of some sort, or are they not jumping to conclusions?
 
Well I'm sure if a hunter can accidently shoot a person and get away with it, they could probably do the same to a bigfoot.
 
Lyme disease?

Wait... This isn't squids. Sorry. :dry:
 
Well bears sure look wicked-cool when they get a severe case of the mange. :up:
 
Kent said:
So which is it? Is the conclusion that it's a young primate of some sort, or are they not jumping to conclusions?
Click to expand...

What I'm stating is several legitimate Bigfoot researchers/research sites come to their conclusion that it's a primate of some sort, but they're not going to say for sure if it is or not, hence why they're asking for more photos of mangy bears to see if it matches with that picture.
 
SUNRYZE said:
As much as I wish it was Bigfoot, it is a bear with mange, especially easy to see when you look at the website that shows all 3 photos, one shows a bunch of bear cubs only in it, lol.

http://www.bfro.net/avevid/jacobs/jacobs_photos.asp
Click to expand...

the cubs were photoed some 30 minutes before the 'bear with mange' even came onto the camera.... it looks creepy to say the least, and mange must suck if in fact it is a bear.
 
AhabTheArab said:
the cubs were photoed some 30 minutes before the 'bear with mange' even came onto the camera.... it looks creepy to say the least, and mange must suck if in fact it is a bear.
Click to expand...


So what if it was 30 minutes prior to that? The fact that cubs were seen in the area provides more evidence that it was more likely to be a bear than a cryptid of which there ie no concrete evidence.

It's just like the freaking coyotes or whatever with mange that everyone thought was a chupacabra. Next thing you know, someone in scotland will see an Alligator with mange and people will swear up and down it's Nessie.
 
what is mange anyway, can anything get it or something? cuz if that thing is a bear with mange, i think some human should volunteer to be injected with it to look freakishly awesome
 
SUNRYZE said:
So what if it was 30 minutes prior to that? The fact that cubs were seen in the area provides more evidence that it was more likely to be a bear than a cryptid of which there ie no concrete evidence.

It's just like the freaking coyotes or whatever with mange that everyone thought was a chupacabra. Next thing you know, someone in scotland will see an Alligator with mange and people will swear up and down it's Nessie.
Click to expand...

im aware... however, since bigfoot has neither been disproved or proved, there is no reason to believe he could not coexist with bears in the same area. that being said i do believe it to be a bear with mange.
 
AhabTheArab said:
im aware... however, since bigfoot has neither been disproved or proved, there is no reason to believe he could not coexist with bears in the same area. that being said i do believe it to be a bear with mange.
Click to expand...

The problem is that it's a horrible picture. The figure is in a position to where it's hard to specify what it really is. It could be Bigfoot and it could be a bear, however, I think it's going to be a photograph that is more or less inconclusive.
 
It looks like a man in a bad costume. :huh:
 
SUNRYZE said:
So what if it was 30 minutes prior to that? The fact that cubs were seen in the area provides more evidence that it was more likely to be a bear than a cryptid of which there ie no concrete evidence.

It's just like the freaking coyotes or whatever with mange that everyone thought was a chupacabra. Next thing you know, someone in scotland will see an Alligator with mange and people will swear up and down it's Nessie.
Click to expand...
I don't think crocodilians exist as far north as Scotland. I'm pretty sure they couldn't handle it, especially as they're oviparous reptiles.
 
The pic looks like a chimp to me.:huh:
 
The only thing making me think its not a bear, is its hind legs are longer than the front legs/arms, bears arms and legs are same length.

also the spine on that creature is ridiculously large.

comparing that to the bear cubs it really looks different, I'm not saying its a Sasquatch, but from what i can tell its not a bear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 1,275 (members: 31, guests: 1,244)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,535
Messages
21,755,193
Members
45,591
Latest member
MartyMcFly1985

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"