Update: New Bigfoot Video from Texas?
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on July 11th, 2007
The news of this supposed Bigfoot video from Texas was posted here on Cryptomundo on June 29, 2007.
As mentioned in that post, there are many dubious characters involved with the video.
See New Bigfoot Video from Texas? for a rundown on the background on the video.
Here is an enhancement of the video footage done by and posted to youtube by Cryptomundo reader Darkwing2006.
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005.
I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films:
OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.
The arms do look very long and ape-like but it’s far too pixelated. No ah, just eh.
Wow, it’s not a blobsquatch, it’s a pixelsquatch.
Honestly, the movements tell me that this is another fake.
Well done on the enhancement.
I won’t knock the footage as I do not have any ‘real’ footage to compare it against. Its just another piece in a puzzle that at sometimes seems harder than it should be.
On a side note, until watching that news report I did not know what Biscardi looked like… he looks… well.. I pictured someone totally different.
Of course it’s strange and probably bogus, but if your not down with Mundo…
A secret, secluded area in north Texas? Don’t sasquatch sightings outside of the Pacific Northwest tend to detract from the seriousness and legitimacy of the search for these creatures? I’m always leery of “sightings” in states that are more developed by civilization, or offer less pristine wilderness for sasquatch to hide in.
I’m sure I’ll get comments from Texans, other southerners and folks east of the Rockies, but that’s my gut feeling when I hear of such reports.
We don’t have to prove that this was a sasquach. All we have to prove is that this wasn’t a human. If no human would go to a remote wilderness location of Texas in the middle of the night then it is safe to conclude that this entity is some form of ape.
I like Biscardi’s claim that there are 3000 bigfoot on the continent.
Let’s suppose Biscardi can prove that this really did take place in a remote location of Texas in the middle of the night. Either it is an ape and we have cryptozoology. Or it is a human and we have cryptoanthropology or the study of mysterious persons walking in the woods in the middle of the night. Which controversial field is more likely?
Thanks for the credit Craig, but I have to let everyone know that MK Davis did the actual animation, I just put it to video format to make it easier to see.
Ho hum. It’s amazing to see how far quality of BF video footage had dropped since 1967…
showme,
All I can say is wow. That is one of the most ignorant posts I read on here for a while.
As for the video, how come the “Worlds Top Bigfoot Hunter” cannot get better equipment?
hey craig very interesting video new update about the texas filmfootage. i hope more people do more inhandsments research etc on the film. or have researchers go to the film location for further field research updates. thanks bill green 🙂
WAY too pixelated.
i was looking at the background and behind it it looked like there was a cave. if thats the “bigfoot’s” nest/den/home, why didnt they get a better camera and film more?
I went back to the original post and that took me to YouTube. There it is posted as footage from Arizona. The quality of the video is very very poor even for a game camera. We have some cheap $100 cameras that shoot better than this even in low light conditions. The enhancement does allow for more detail, but still not good enough to make a difinitive conclusion.
Hmmm, this video went from a totally unidentifiable blur to a blur that looks as though it is supposed to be human shaped. Is it the real deal? Maybe. Is it a guy sneaking around in dark clothes? Maybe. The dubious characters surrounding this video definitely send up red flags.
So much for the “no neck” characteristic of a litany of past sightings. Oh the other hand, if I were a human and wanted to fake a video, I would get the poorest possible camcorder that I could find, and try and do my best knuckle dragging primate imitation, given the restrictions of my anatomy and my own mind. All this in order to make $100,000 off of Fox news, since I currently don’t have the $200 to buy even a used digital 8 or hi-8 camcorder. My inclination is that it is a fake. Even if it was real, it would be effectively worthless for research purposes.
*Select the best answer*
We learn from this video that…
a> mysterious bipedal creatures are a world wide phenomenon
b> people shouldn’t roam the woods at night
c> technology is only as effective as the people who are using it
or
d> pixels ARE bigger in Texas
Methinks Cryptomundo reader showme is not aware of the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy.
Looks like it’s walking like a human to me. The strides are short and it looks tentative like he knows something’s watching him or her. Think there would be more swinging of the arms to support a large bipedal, unless of course it’s a young one. Don’t think anybody with half a brain would post it on youtube because that would only delegitimize such a video. The best sightings I’ve investigated are the ones from law enforcement or the hunting community who are at highest risk of scrutinization. Doesn’t look like anything I have seen in my own encounters, but I have never been to that part of the US and I firmly believe Craig and his organization because they have been and investigated countless sightings in the big thicket of east Texas.
Keep up the good work Craig.
If I had to guess I would say it looks like Gumby!
I’m sure there are bigfoot organizations for a large number of states, but that hardly makes a stronger case for their nationwide existence. I think there have even been sightings of these types of creatures in England, which i doubt is a really promising location to conduct a search. Every state has forests, but do they all contain the necessary ingredients for a large primate to survive and thrive? I agree with showme that the Pacific Northwest, and the more north and west the better, is the most promising locale. I know Texas is big and all, but does it really have the type of inaccessible forests/mountains that Oregon, Washington, and Canada have?
Remember this folks. Most of the “wilderness” east of the Rockies is a recreation consisting of second or even third generation timber growth. An eastern “wilderness” area is much smaller than its western counterparts.
Most areas were logged extensively from the 1870s -1920s and many swamps were drained. For example much of the now lushly forested Ozark hills was once just barren rock. That’s a big part why animals like the ivory-billed woodpecker, red wolf and eastern cougar became reduced to a handful living in the wild. More common animals like deer and turkey had to be restocked after the forestry and conservation movement took hold in the 20s and 30s. Folks today don’t realize how bad off our environment once was.
However, there are vast areas of the Pacific Northwest and the Canadian Rockies that avoided this type of ecological devastation. If sasquatch is to be found, it will be there. Not Ohio, not Missouri or even Texas. There is a lot of concern about the overall environmental degradation and fragmenting of Texas’ big thicket country due to development.
Looks like some guy playing soldier in the woods.
Way more gracile than Patty or other Nape reports.
I’m a Southerner, but I agree with Showme. I’m more skeptical of hairy biped reports the more Eastern they become. At the very least you can see two arms, two legs and a head in this video.
I’ve looked at this thing about 50 times the last couple of days. So I maybe suffering from “blobsquatch-ichitis but I think I see a shadow appear at his feet. After the “creature” climbs out of the ditch, he stand erect and takes 3 steps. This is were I see the shadow. It’s pixeled a bit. Then the thing goes into ape mode by stooping as he takes a couple more steps, then goes sideways a step or two before ducking.
Does anyone else see this? And since I’m not an expert in anything (just really curious) if it is a shadow what caused it? Or could this be from the enhancement process? Also, would there be a hint of eye glint from the IR?
I have lots of other questions but they’ll wait until all you find people decide if I’m just suffering from Bsquatch fatigue.
Thank you
It must have taken months of practice and nights of self-denial to locate and learn to use ANY equipment made since Edison that could produce such crappy images.
Am I too harsh here?
If you are setting a lo-res game camera, do you set it high in a tree looking off in the distance? Or, do you set it close to the ground looking down a trail?
The placement of the camera makes it suspicious to me.
Yes, there are plenty of places for Sasquatch in Texas. East Texas is basically swamp and thick forest. It is also near the Arkansas border where the Legend of Boggy Creek occurred.
(From the TBRC’s new website “FAQs” section, by Alton Higgins and Daryl Colyer, to be unveiled soon).
Question: Isn’t the sasquatch or bigfoot only in the Pacific Northwest?
Answer: It is a common perception that, if the sasquatch exists at all, it lives only in the Pacific Northwest (Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Northern California, British Columbia), since that geographical area is thought to be the only region of North America capable of providing sufficient habitat for such a species to remain hidden and elusive. This line of thinking usually goes hand-in-hand with the notion that there is inadequate forested habitat in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana to allow for a bigfoot population to exist undocumented by science.
As discussed by TBRC Director Craig Woolheater in his piece entitled Bigfoot in Texas?, many who live outside the borders of the Lone Star State, and indeed, many who live within its borders, actually know little of its varied landscapes and environment. Thanks to decades of Hollywood portrayals of the region, many visualize Texas (and Oklahoma) as being arid, desert-like, and complete with abundant saguaro cacti. (The range of the saguaro cactus actually is limited to the Sonoran Desert of extreme southeastern California, southern Arizona and adjoining northwestern Mexico.)
While portions of far western Texas and Oklahoma are certainly semi-arid, the eastern sections of both states receive abundant annual rainfall. These areas are heavily forested and feature an abundance of waterways and lakes; they are very much ecological clones of the two neighboring eastern states of the region, Arkansas and Louisiana.
The combined total amount of forestland in the four-state region equates to roughly 65,000,000 acres, or 100,000 square miles (the size of the state of Oregon). According to The Online Handbook of Texas, there are roughly 22,000,000 acres of forest in Texas alone; per the Arkansas Forestry Association, there are roughly 19,000,000 acres of forest in Arkansas; the Louisiana Forestry Association reports that there are 14,000,000 acres of forest in Louisiana; Oklahoma has approximately 10,000,000 acres of forest as indicated by the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry.
While the forestlands of Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana and Oklahoma may be somewhat more parceled, or discontinuous, than northwestern forests, it is obvious that they are enormous in scope and depth, contrary to the misperceptions of some. Wildlife biologist Dr. John Bindernagel, who visited the region in 2001 and 2002, was struck by the richness and scope of the region’s forests, which are predominantly mixed deciduous, as opposed to the largely coniferous forests of the Pacific Northwest. Dr. Bindernagel recognized the value and productivity of deciduous forests in terms of wildlife habitat and he pointed out that large species of mammals living in the southern forests would almost certainly require smaller home ranges than in northern coniferous forests.
Not only is habitat in the south-central U.S. likely sufficient to support a population of large undocumented primates, but reported observations of sasquatch-like creatures are by no means exclusive to the Pacific Northwest in terms of both historical and contemporary contexts. Indeed, an early journalistic account of such a creature in Arkansas and Louisiana was featured by the Hornellsville Tribune in 1856. The so-called “Wild Woman of the Navidad” (Texas), was reported to have been quite fleet-footed and covered in short brown hair; the reports of the wild woman originated in 1837. The Memphis Enquirer reported of a similar encounter with a “wild man” in Greene County, Arkansas, in 1851. The residents of Gatesville, Texas were reported to be “excited” about the appearance of a large orangutan-like creature in 1871, as reported by the Michigan Argus that same year.
In addition to anecdotal accounts, physical evidence regarding the existence of the sasquatch outside of the Pacific Northwest has been recovered. For example, in 1999, Jimmy Chilcutt, a latent fingerprint examiner and primate dermal ridge expert, studiously examined an alleged sasquatch footprint casting from Georgia, taken by a Pike County sheriff’s deputy. Chilcutt’s conclusion was that the cast contained unique dermal ridge patterns and that the footprint was made by “an unknown primate.” Chilcutt further concluded that the dermal ridge patterns on the Georgia cast matched those of a cast he had examined from Washington.
So, in conclusion, sufficient and appropriate habitat exists to support a population of large primate such as the sasquatch, historical records indicate the presence of the species in Texas and adjacent states, and physical evidence comparable to that collected in the Pacific Northwest has been collected in southern parts of the U.S.
Things that make you say hmmmmm… What I do know is footage from the Patterson film is standing the test of time. The technologies in the 1960’s even in Hollywood (go watch some 60’s films and you will see what I mean) should have made the Patterson film impossible especially given the relative clarity of the images produced.
Today in 2007 where everyone has some sort of camera we produce grainy, pixilated, out of focus, shaky glimpses of something we cant even identify… others have tried to reproduce the Patterson film and have failed, even with today’s technology the Patterson film in an enigma…
Where there’s money there’s dishonesty… people are not has honest today as they once were. Most are out for a quick buck or some youtube fame, some are willing to say or do whatever it takes including hoaxing. If you doubt what I’m saying go watch a little youtube and see just how dumb the general population really is…
Question, why was Paul Freeman (rest in peace Paul) able to find Bigfoot so many times but all of his films are of poor quality?
I don’t know the answers but what I do know is most of the footage people try to pass off as genuine is laughable…
Well, I think it may be genuine. If bigfoot is a mammal, he must have water, hence he is filmed at a lake. Smart place to put a camera
That’s a good point, gaintchaser. In Africa, for example, one only has to wait near the water holes and they will see pretty much every type of animal there is to see there.
I agree about the water theory… most BF sightings happen around or near water sources. Do you think BF is nocturnal?
Daryl: Good response to those who consider the eastern/southern sas unlikely.
Just like Bindernagel, I used to take reports outside of the PNW with a ton of salt; I thought they raised the likelihood that all of it was wishful thinking or people seeing things. The more I’ve learned about wildlife, however, to say nothing of human nature when it comes to observation, the more I – like Bindernagel, who’s a wildlife biologist – have become convinced that it’s truly the most reasonable scenario.
Once again: RSR! (I really do have to get a hotkey for that.) Not only are the wild places of this continent much larger, everywhere, than people give them credit for; there’s also no reason that an animal with the sas’s apparent brains, catholic tastes and ability to move would hole itself up in a corner of the continent that doesn’t even appear to be the best available for meeting its needs. Solitude included.
I first read of bigfoot/sasquatch in the mid 1960s, when it was presented in most reports to be indigenous to the Pacific Northwest and western Canada. I then associated it exclusively with those areas. However, since then, as researchers, and more recently scientists, began to compile databases of various kinds (which rescued the phenomenon form the miscellaneous “a footprint here, a sighting there,” kind of thing), evidence has surfaced that many local regions throughout the US and Canada have long histories of sightings and stories/legends pertaining to a bipedal ape-like creature. Remember, this is a phenomenon that has grown considerably (it’s not even mentioned in On the track of the Unknown Animals). BFRO has screened numerous sightings from almost all the states, with a large number of sightings coming from some eastern states.
Perhaps like the black bear, mountain lion, coyote, bobcat, and other such creatures, this one (Bigfoot) has an extensive distribution.
wbp: as I always say: [hotkey] RSR!
Indeed, the evidence is where it’s found, period. I just don’t think that the urge to Make Stuff Up runs so strongly in the American character, heck, in human nature for that matter, that this sort of thing could get the kind of traction it does on the basis of lies and hallucinations alone. I once thought it could; fortunately, some of us grow up, and learn stuff.
When one RSR, one notes that the same animal, with the expected nuances for individuals, is being seen far and wide. And it’s not a shambling, knuckledragging slowpoke. Harry wouldn’t recognize it, and neither would the Hendersons. In fact, when skeptics lump the sasquatch with paranormal phenomena, this is a critical factor they overlook, because by and large they don’t RSR. Paranormal phenomena are propped up by people with a dire Need To Believe. The sasquatch runs on continued encounters with people who either were sure it didn’t exist, or knew for sure that it didn’t exist in their neck of the woods. But they are unequivocal on what they experienced. And I read report after report, prepared as any skeptic should be to Do The Eyeroll. And time after time I say: wow, another sasquatch. ‘Cause the descriptions don’t stop with big dark and hairy, but persist in moving on to the unmistakable details.
He’s bad. He’s nationwide.
And he’s just a critter, not an Earthshaking Implausibility, which some foks need to just get over.
Well… The claim of 3000 bigfoot on the continent could be a bit…irrational? 300 maybe on the continent. In heavily wooded areas with a fresh water source that is rarely disturbed by humans bigfoot could live. Which would be defined as: A secluded area in north Texas with a lake. As filmed in the video. I Still back this video up as genuine. But I’m no expert.