Greene Blobsquatch Thermal: My Visual Editorial
Posted by: Loren Coleman on June 4th, 2010
Just when you think you put something to bed by merely showing it (Feb. 4, 2010, here), it comes back.
Press releases and Linda Howe, as Ken Hulsey (here) alerts, all appear to be trying to get some new attention for a piece of footage with dubious value to the field.
It’s high time to utilize the BFCS!
Indeed, the Mike Greene thermal footage may rank only a “2” on the BFCS, the Bigfootage Credibility Scale, with the Patterson-Gimlin “film” being #10, of course. Examples of #1 on the scale might be the infamous Kansas footage of a “Bigfoot” killing a cat, or the horrible classic Ivan Marx moving pictures of a “Bigfoot” taking a shower in a sprinkler system. The Redwoods footage might be an #8 to some, and a #5 to most. Think about where you’d rank some of your favorite Bigfoot clips.
Back to the Greene thermal footage, allow me to give a visual editorial for what I think about this old-new footage:
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.
LMAO! Dang Loren you just made my week!! Too funny bro ;p
~Peace
haha well said. i couldn’t agree more.
That’s what you’d do if you ever saw a real one…but, your zipper’d still be up.
Loren on scale of 1 to 10 where would you rate the Freeman footage? Unlike some ive found this film very interesting.
Agreed Loren!
I don’t know about everyone else, but the video isn’t even worth rating, it doesn’t even make it onto a “1-10 scale”
Ditto aintell. I too would be interested in Lorens take on the Freeman footage.
For me the Paterson/Gimlin footage would be a #10, Freeman footage would be an #8, Redwoods a #6(seems genuine, but some doubt in my mind because taken by a film crew), Manitoba bigfoot a #5(would have been higher if resolution had been better), Hoffman footage a #1(great costume though)
I am not about to rate the Freeman footage on the BFCS, and get in the way of you all having your own opinions on that one. What do you think?
Freeman footage:
*creature appears!*
‘Oh, thar he is!… I better get up close whar I can see him and that… Jeebus…. Dog gone it, I can done see whar he went, consarn it!’
And the prize for least talented supporting actor in a nature film goes to…
Hi Loren,
I would like to ask on your scale is the Patterson-Gimlin footage the only one you would rank 10? Are there any 8s or 9s, or is P.-G. out on its own in your expert opinion?
Cheers!
Unless you attended the Bigfoot round-up in May 2009 you did not need to sit through an hour of Greene patting himself on the back and telling tales of luring the Bigfoot with a Zagnut candy bar placed on a stump. Then we got see the footage. We were promised the “best footage since the PGF” and after wasting 2 hours of our squatching time, now you know how we felt.
IMHO the Patterson-Gimlin film should be given a #9, instead of a 10. To me, a perfect 10 would involve close-ups of the Sasquatch, a steady camera, and at least 10 minutes or more of the creature viewed from many angles.
So, in my view, the #10 is yet to appear.
I think Mr Freeman(RIP) was genuinely shook up and the brief glimpses of the creature(s) resembled more closely to what i saw in 1989 than the PG creature, i think if there was a hoax involved Mr. Freeman was not the hoaxer. Just my humble opinion.
The Freeman footage is HORRIBLE! You can see the “actor” standing still waiting for for the camera to stop panning before he moves. He was waiting for his cue to start moving. Then we get the “oh some dumb and obvious hoax pose” of the “creature” moving, pausing, looking toward the camera and moving on. I would be more impressed if someone got a quick video of “a**hole-and-elbows” as one of these creatures is bounding over a log away from someone rather than obvious craptastic hoax footage like this. It is always discussed how quickly and fluidly these creatures move through the woods, but each video is the same lumbering, slow, “mosey” that doesn’t support other evidence. PG caught the first strides of a creature that then takes off at a fast pace…lending to its credibility. Everyone else is trying to imitate that pose, look, walk etc without a thorough knowledge of the other supporting evidence for the creature and how it moves. Let me say this clearly, Freeman, Redwoods, Memorial Day all HOAXES. Moving on…
OMG!!!! Loren a picture is worth a thousand words. Loud and clear.
I have a question, have u ever seen a “sasquatch” before tropicalwolf? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Fair enough, Loren. The FILM seems convincing, although in terms of Paul Freemans overall honesty, he seemed to be a riddle wrapped in an enigma. He had some heavyweight backers such as Krantz and Meldrum, while others thought he hoaxed evidence (I dont recall with certainty now, but Rene Dahinden may have been in the latter camp).
In any case, the figure in the film looks genuine enough, ditto Freemans reactions. One thing I have realized now that I think about it – the film itself hasnt undergone NEARLY the scrutiny that the Patterson footage has. Does anyone know why?
The Freeman footage I’d seen, but find it far less convincing looking at it again: the guy spends all his time looking at the floor, but the one moment he lifts his camera up – bingo! – a Bigfoot.
I didn’t even have a problem with that scenario – until I watched the ‘Bigfoot’ move like an oversized mentally impaired kid try’n’o make sure he doesn’t step on any pavement cracks.
I’ve never encountered the ‘Bigfoot’ with the cat before, and now I have my eyes feel raped: since when has a Bigfoot moved like a silent movie keystone cop crossed with Curly out the Three Stooges in the days before they invented Immac hair remover?
As for the Ivan Marx stuff: why do all the Bigfoot move like See Threepio out o’ Stars Wars wearin’ a cheap black suede bondage suit, or Vaslav Nijinsky performing Scheherazade while blacked up as Al Jolson? Maybe they’re related and we should dub ’em the Marx Brothers – they’re certainly laughable.
Mr. Greene’s image is not “blobsquatch”. It is obviously as he defines it, a thermal image, and nothing more. And that image depicts a human-like figure wearing no clothing, and displaying the stealthy and quick movements that Bigfoot employ at night when approaching humans. I’m sure Mr. Greene does not imply the image is “proof” of anything. The being in that image is either a Bigfoot, or it is a well done performance by a naked human moving quickly through the woods at night without lighting. Thermal imaging equipment is now a very good tool for field researchers who have the guts to get into the woods at night to use it and learn more about the creatures. Their hard work is to be commended. Their results are are of no value to armchair critics who are clueless.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! Good one Mr. Coleman and you left me without a taste like chicken comment. IMHO I agree with RPJ, except said footage of the big guy/gal would be about 10000 hours of Bigfoot in a cage.
I haven’t seen the thermal footage so I can’t comment on that.
Defactor says,
“The being in that image is either a Bigfoot, or it is a well done performance by a naked human moving quickly through the woods at night without lighting.”
Really? No kidding? Thanks for that info.
Thermal imaging is indeed a useful tool for locating the animal in the darkness, but a thermal image would never be accepted as scientific proof of the existence of this creature. Unless you get a thermal image of a Bigfoot lifting a buick.
And BTW, Greene said he left the thermal imager running and drove away in his vehicle for a short time and then returned. When he returned he discovered that the Big guy loves Zagnut candy bars. So how deep in the woods was he? Last I checked you cannot drive your car in the woods but on a ROAD. He was in a campground on the edge of the woods. Not in the woods. Not that it matters, but you felt the need to insult, so let us be clear about where he was.
Making fun of “arm chair” research is moronic and counter-productive. I get out in the field every chance I get and I have no problem with them. Last I checked NO OF US had any real proof.
Ha, that’s easy, Aintell….no, I haven’t…..SPECIFICALLY not in any of these videos.
I have seen an out of place hominid looking “blob” through an infrared viewer in North Florida. I was on an expedition. Frankly, I did not expect to see what I saw. The figure in the viewer bore no resemblance to any fauna that one can expect to see on the border of Florida/Georgia. I wish I had a recording device attached to the equipment I was using. Had I been able to capture footage of what I saw, I would have handled it differently than Greene.
I, personally, have always liked the Freeman footage. Sure, you can nit-pick it to death to show that it might be a hoax, but you can nit-pick the PG film too, as many have. The Freeman footage just sounds right, I guess. Freeman genuinely sounds frightened, and that’s a big selling point.
Obviously the PG film has to be rated a 10, but only because it is the landmark here. If someone else were to come upon a troupe of dancing Squatchs (I am being facetious, but you know what I mean) and film them, yes, that footage gets bumped up to 10 and the the PG film goes to 9. But until then, the PG footage is at the top of the list and must rate a 10.
The thermal imaging stuff has me seriously bugged. This is coulda/shoulda/woulda technology that seems to hold incredible promise for filming any creature that is nocturnal, yet by the nature of the visual image it captures, it also shows incredible promise as being easy to fake. I have a feeling that any image captured this way can just as easily be labeled a thermal blobsquatch as anything else you want to label it. And so it goes, I guess.
Did you not see the interview? He goes a pretty long way to tell you what you’re seeing in the footage (despite his saying that “since you’ve [the interviewer] just watched it I’m not gonna describe it all again).
Not that I don’t appreciate the effort, but since this guy has his agent and lawyer on hold to copyright material right off the bat, I take it he’s in it for the cash. Not the science. People like that tend to trash the right evidence if only by proxy.