Sasquatch Coffee

Comparing Sizes: Georgia Bigfoot Video

Posted by: Loren Coleman on October 21st, 2010

What do you think?

Here are some comments by RWRidley, related to these images:

I didn’t say the area didn’t get much human traffic. The boy’s father did. I actually don’t know where this is other than some place in Georgia. At any rate, I urge you to listen to the footage. It is the country. There are no sounds of the urban or suburban nature.

I’ve examined this footage frame by frame down to the pixel in Photoshop. I can assure you it is not CGI. It’s an actual living creature on a hillside. Is it bigfoot? I have no idea, but the comparison video of a man in the same location indicates that it’s a very large living creature.

This video link shows the comparison video with the actual footage.

Submitted by RWRidley.

About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading. 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.


11 Responses to “Comparing Sizes: Georgia Bigfoot Video”

  1. RandyS responds:

    “I think we can say, with scientific accuracy, that the creature is a heck of a lot bigger [than the man].

    Uh, yeah, you could say that, if you really want to put things in scientific terms.

  2. theprof responds:

    Okay. I know I’ve been looking at/into this sort of thing for decades now but I can’t be the only one who thinks this offers nothing in the way of evidence let alone anything visual? Its awful and looks like another person in a suit walking slowly.
    Unless people forwarding these clips gives full location disclosure and the alleged videographer is willing to talk to serious investigators I’d say watch then dump it.
    You tube and the use of out of focus cameras of all types has single-handedly destroyed credibility in many fields -a friend counted over 100 fake UFO videos,any number of “demons” and as for all types of creature -he gave up.
    I’m still hoping “one day” we’ll get that footage whether trail-cam or other.
    The ever hopeful Prof

  3. Demian66 responds:

    Let’s see what the Erickson Project documentary will show. I am surprised that nobody here at Cryptomundo has mentioned this since the project’s website was launched about two weeks ago. If it is right what they promised (or better: announced) in their trailer, then it could be the biggest thing since 1967, by far.

  4. RWRidley responds:

    I’m not a scientist, and I lend no credibility to the field of cryptozoology. I’m a hobbyist who likes the discussion and wants to have a little fun in life. That’s it. That being said, I see what I see. As far as I know, you don’t need a degree for that. I’ve taken a frame of the comparison footage and a frame of the creature footage and compared the sizes. Here’s what I did with my limited brain power.

    1. I overlaid the frame of the comparison footage to match location and size.
    2. I knew the man was approximately 6′ tall. I enlarged the matched pictures up so that they were both the same size (I did this by matching trees and ground cover around the trees). Measuring the man on his frame, he was 1.1 inches tall. The creature slightly bent and a step back from the man was 1.27 inches tall. So, in the world of the two matching frames, if 1.1 inches tall equals 72 inches in living space, 1.27 equals slightly less than 89 inches in the same living space.
    3. What does that mean? The “man walking in the suit slowly” is 7’4″ tall.

    Is that scientifically accurate? No, I’m just some chump who knows how to use Photoshop, and my math is horrible beyond the basics. If it is even close to accurate, does that make it impossible to fake? No, but it does limit your likely suspects in the state of Georgia quite a bit.

    The original footage is not out of focus and the subject on film moves fairly quickly at one point. I would even used the word swiftly. The video above is enlarged, giving it a distorted look, and I believe he even applied a slo-mo effect to the clip.

    The original video is not conclusive proof, but it does merit closer consideration. There is something there. It’s large. It’s agile. It’s recent. My question – how do we “get serious investigators” involved?

    BTW – I’m sure the family involved is not amenable to making their home address public so that every idiot with a gun will start shooting at anything that moves on their property. They may be willing to talk with a qualified researcher privately, however. Someone who is discrete and respectful. So that leads me to another question. How do we keep Biscardi away from these folks?

  5. proriter responds:

    Ridiculous.

  6. Dr Kaco responds:

    Kudos for trying. I’ll give you that.
    Don’t harsh his mellow people! ;p
    peace!

  7. Mahalo X responds:

    People are so quick to throw video evidence under the bus. Self proclaimed “Scientists” who have poo-pooed this video, and the person who actually has investigated the evidence. It’s good to remain skeptical, but disrespect to other bloggers is not in the interest of cryptozoology, or any other research. I’d like to see the doubters gather evidence that supports their stance. (that means putting down the twinkies, getting off your butts and going outside, not gonna happen)

  8. Fhqwhgads responds:

    “I’m not a scientist, and I lend no credibility to the field of cryptozoology. I’m a hobbyist who likes the discussion and wants to have a little fun in life.”

    Frankly, that admission makes you more honest, and therefore more credible, than most self-described cryptozoologists.

  9. alegler responds:

    Maholo X-

    The person who is submitting the supposed evidence is the one saddled with the burden of proof. It is not up to others to show proof of why the video is clearly a fake or just another blobsquatch.

    This video is typical of most others – out of focus, shaky, pans away at a critical moment – plus the “yoo hoo, Bigfoot!” increases the suspicion that this is probably the father walking down the hill across the way in a monkey suit. The supposed “analysis” of the video above provides no useful information as to the size of the hominid, despite what the narrator says. Most likely this is another case of Homo Sapiens Monkeysuitus.

    I won’t be surprised in we find out Biscardi is somehow involved.

  10. Mahalo X responds:

    If truely there is no evidence of video tampering, then there is a moving object that appears to be a homonid in the footage. I would tend to agree that the video reeks of “blobsquatch”, but feel that it merits investigation before judgment is passed. The ‘burden of proof’ falls on every researcher who hopes to find supporting evidence to their hypothesis. In this case the hypothesis is; that there is an unknown genus/species of homonid living relatively undetected in different habitats world wide. I say “relatively” due to the vast amount of circumstancial evidence. Science seldom ‘proves’ anything.
    I did not intend to generate hard feelings with my posting. I think that it is not in the best interest of this field to immediately discredit video just because it’s blobby, nor do I feel that an investigator should be discredited for gathering evidence, even if it turns up another hoax.
    We’ve ALL been duped before.
    -Mahalo X, Deep in the Oregon Wilderness

  11. RWRidley responds:

    alegler – the problem is that the person who shot and uploaded the original video was an 11-year-old kid who didn’t submit it as evidence. He uploaded it because he thought it was cool. He had no idea that he was subject to ridicule for doing so. Granted, adults have stepped in now and weighed in on both sides, but I don’t think we should slap the kid around because he didn’t do is due diligence to prove his video is authentic. The above video was done by Christopher Noel, and he did the best he could with what he had. It’s a step in the right direction. He’s making an attempt which is what a researcher should do.

    I think that those who either proclaim a piece of evidence like this to be legitimate or a hoax are saddled with the burden of proof.

    Fhqwhgads – Thank you.
    I’m obviously leaning towards it being the real thing, but I can’t back it 100% without supporting evidence. That’s just a thing with me. I agree with Maholo X. It does merit further investigation.



Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|


Cryptomundo Merch On Sale Now!

CryptoMerch

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest

Advertisers

DFW Nites


Creatureplica Monstro Bizarro Everything Bigfoot



Advertisement




|Top | FarBar|



Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.