Thermal Baby Blobsquatch {Revised}
Posted by: Loren Coleman on July 2nd, 2009
Look, I’m only publishing this video at the end here because it seems to be the buzz of a small group of Bigfootland fanboys.
Oh, my, now another blobsquatch video on the horizon?
Click on the image for a full-size version.
See my “The Short History of Blobsquatch” from 2006, for more of the awful details of the word’s origins. It is also the point in time when I published on my invented word, “blogsquatching.”
If you asked the general public, the only thing Bigfootbloggers are interested in are blobsquatch videos. Give me a break!
The Valley Advocate made a passing reference to “Bigfoot seekers” recently in an article entitled “Art in Paradise: Of Art and Blobsquatch.” It wasn’t about Bigfoot and only a couple sentences mention Bigfoot. The following comment is intriguing, and upon re-reading it, insightful.
Art writer James Heflin wrote: “I’m fascinated by pareidolia, the human ability to see order even when there is none, as manifested by seeing Jesus in your burrito and similar visitations….There is a virtual ‘blobsquatch’ industry among Bigfoot seekers with shaky video cameras.”
Heflin’s right. We all deserve better. I don’t think even viewing the following video is worthy of his, mine, or your time and attention. It is the worst kind of blobsquatch, so blurry that you can hardly see anything for most of the footage, and thus so incredibly stupid for being posted.
It is sad that so much technology is wasted on these few seconds. Someone could have “painted” in the little areas on this piece of blobsquatchery or taken some funny footage of a typical forest critter (raccoon, squirrel, chipmunk, tree otter?). Nevertheless, in terms of my duties of “reporting the news,” here it is.
Seriously, though, don’t even waste your time on this one. Do something else. Go to a beach. Take a walk. Watch MonsterQuest reruns. Read a good book (one suggestion, wink wink). Start a campfire and sing happy fireside songs.
Ah, but you have to watch it now, humm? I warned you. (It’s time to take some more Advil for my foot. Am I cranky or what? I’m going to blame it on the ibuprofen, not blobsquatches.)
About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.
Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct).
Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015.
Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.
Talk about your 5 seconds in the spotlight ( literally ) ! It’s got to be the ghost of blob-squatches past.
But it is a smidge interesting though.
Thanks Loren
Of course Heflin’s serious. Did you see how he casually linked the ‘crazies’ who see an image of Jesus ‘in a burrito’ with the ‘crazies’ who think Bigfoot exists. He then secures his self-righteousness by trotting out the word ‘pareidolia’, a word that has more vowels than consonants, to make himself seem an even higher member of the intellectual elite. I mean, he must be onto something; he’s an art critic, and we all know that those types of people are better than anyone else.
What was the point of the last 41 seconds of the film? To show us trees in the area that didn’t have squirrels hanging on them?
The photo at the very top of this post looks like a hunter in full camo with one of those camo facemasks on that have the top portion around the eyes and nose cut out. That’s just my opinion, but that would be my guess before Bigfoot.
As for the video, it must be a youtube video because I can’t access youtube here at work, they say it kills our bandwidth. All I see above is a white box. But from what Loren said I’m not missing anything by not watching it, so no worries.
Hope you feel better Loren, you may wanna think about visiting the docs office and get something a little stronger than advil for that broken foot, maybe it’ll even help with the grumpies 🙂
Oooookay, they got a high-tech video of a squirrel hugging a tree. I mean, honestly – for it to be that small and still be a Sas, it would have to be either a midget among midgets, or a baby – and babies don’t jump like that.
Careful with those peanuts, guys – Blobsquirrels love them some peanuts.
The head and large ears, and -especially- the way the animal shimmied up a tree– looks like a black bear cub.
They should have just trimmed the last part of the video.
PS. The photo at the top is just pareidolia. It’s a stump. Same coloring etc. as the rest of the dead standing trees.
that to me is a Gorilla..
well it could be. 🙂
Personally I do think there is enough evidence to indicate something called Bigfoot exists. Our Native American traditions are firm on this. Meldrum’s book is good, and the dermatological evidence is especially compelling. I have a master’s in anthropology and am comfortable with the idea we will eventually figure it out.
I have been in the Montana woods all my life (49 years and counting): hunting, working cutting timber as a teen, then as an archaeologist alone in the mountains for a decade. I have had many different odd experiences, once or twice that might even have been a Bigfoot, but was more likely a bear. I have had several encounters with bears, once a mother with cubs, both grizzlies and black bears, in Alaska and Montana.
I still think it’s a stump and a bear cub 😉
HHAHA! Funny vid. Gotta be from BFRO. They were probably trying out their new thermal cam, and caught Moneymaker taking a leak, and said that looks like BF. ROFL
Ok, got that out of my system. Now on to the pic…
Although I don’t know for sure about the diameter of the surrounding trees, I would guess them to be around 4 to 6 inches. That being said, and if that is true, then the blobs head is only about 4 or 5 inches wide, so I agree with LanceFoster that is more than likely the stump of the fallen tree in front of it. MAN, I gotta got take some pics now and look for Elvis. But wait!!! Whats that in the upper right corner, about an inch over? Could be BF waving or BK shooting another crazy commercial. It’s the King!!!
Not to leave ya out: Hope you get to feeling a lot better reallly soon Loren.
Alright, you had to tell me not to, and I did anyway…I’m beginning to think I’m “Oppositionally Defiant”…either way, I’m still sorry I did. Sheesh!
Either that or we have a whole new cryptid…because personally I think what they caught on tape was the Moon Man and he was down here looking for cheese!
Actually it was a tree trunk reflecting moonlight at just the right refracted angle and therefore giving the false impression of a blobsquatch….and since that was a blobsquatch, then all the rest of the sightings and accounts are only blobsquatches…hey, I’m turning into a scoftic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I’m going to go see if I can sign up for the next season of “Is it Real?” On National Geographic….
Wow, is that an otter climbing a tree?
Hmmm, closer look, the blobthermal looks a bit like a bearcub… but there’s that squirrel-like leap to consider, too…
As for the stump-I mean, the photo… Yeah, do I even need to say it? There’s nothing about that one to make it look like a Sasquatch, plenty to make it look like a stump.
Woodman’s comments have been deleted at his request, and thus the responses have been too. This comment will be deleted in a couple hours, as well.
That’s possibly a baby bigfoot.
[open-minded skeptic credentials established]
Can I have my drink now?
I rarely post, but i do say.. i love this Critical and angry Loren Coleman! I am a sceptic of just about everything but i keep myself updated “just incase”
Anyway great to see you ripping stories like this to peices. As a skeptic %99 of articles get this response from me, so seeing you tackle it as hardened and disheartened skeptic is wonderful.
KUTGW!
-Courage: I’m not seeing “hardened and disheartened skeptic” here, nor would I call it wonderful if I did – those have a nasty habit of turning into scoftics. I’m actually seeing “bored and a little grumpy” skeptic, to be quite honest.
But, yeah… stories like this should be rent to pieces, because it’s a stump and a blobbearsquirrelsquatch.
Dear Mr. Coleman:
I was quite shocked to return from vacation and find this. You have wrongly crucified me. The truth is that I have been an avid reader of your site (I visit nearly daily, and comment from time to time as Seamus) for a good while, and have an earnest interest in real cryptozoology, not the kind that blobsquatchers pursue.
My knock on those who draw extreme conclusions from pareidolia is in no way reflective of my views of you, this site, or cryptozoology in general. You have misread me. I said “Bigfoot seekers with shaky video cameras”–please notice the qualifying phrase, which clearly counts you out. I consider you a pursuer of a more empirical brand of research. Pareidolia is the enemy of real cryptozoology, though a feature of the landscape which cannot be avoided, and I think it causes much of the bad publicity the subject receives.
Rather in the vein of pareidolia itself, what you have seen in my words is far different from what I actually believe. If you visit my blog at the Valley Advocate, you will see that I treat cryptozoology as an interesting subject on an ongoing basis. Yes, I am a skeptic—but cryptozoology is a science in search of extraordinary claims, and therefore demands extraordinary evidence. And yes, I am an arts critic, and am prepared to field comments like the above knock on my profession in the comments, misguided and absurd though they can also be.
I am sorry that you have found my words offensive. They were not in any way meant to be so where you are concerned. If they offend some of the many creators of ridiculous fake videos, on the other hand, I am prepared to live with that—that was my intent.
It is not particularly enjoyable to be pilloried for views I do not hold. I wrote an article about abstract art versus representational art, and happened to mention blobsquatches. For that, I am thrown under the bus by people I have considered fellow open-eyed travellers among the strange and inexplicable.
I am not at all certain what to make of your misguided attack on me. I wish you, however, all the best as you pursue your research.
Best regards,
James Heflin
It also probably bears noting that your take on the above video is very much in keeping with precisely the point I am trying to make in regard to pareidolia and blobsquatch videos versus good research. We’re very much on the same side in that regard.
My sincere apologies to Mr. Heflin. I have carefully read his comment, and re-read his article.
He’s right. I misread what he wrote, and thus I have revised my blog posting above to reflect a more grounded reading of his observations.
It’s no excuse, but I actually have experienced mood modifications (grumpiness) with the equation of *pain* (due to my broken foot) + *Advil* (I don’t take anything heavier, unless in a hospital), unfortunately.
In this case, straight out, I’m incorrect, and I extend a big “sorry” to Mr. Heflin, whom I was happy to hear from for the first time ever in email form, not as Seamus.
Thank you for revising your original statements about my article.
best regards,
James Heflin
And now that you have added a comment as well, I very much appreciate your apology. All’s well that ends well.
James