Squeaky NC Footage Follow-Up
Posted by: Loren Coleman on February 6th, 2010
Interview with Mike Green discussing how he captured the video.
Mike Green’s Thermal Video Recreation of the video event.
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.
Looks fairly human to me, with the exception of around 1:31.
I’d like it to be Bigfoot but he said, “i wouldn’t know how to start to fake a thermal image” It’s simple you get a chunky guy to walk up, he doesn’t even need to have a BF suit as he just needs a convincing bulky outline.
Oh I see–this WAS a human re-creation for comparative purposes. Well I do like the original.
He seems quite genuine, but it always bothers me when someone presenting evidence says “It can’t be fake because …” In this case, “…It can’t be a guy in a suit because it’s thermal.”
Of course you can fool a thermal camera with a guy in a suit, if that’s what your’re trying to do. So he’d have been more convincing if he’d left that part out.
Re: oldphilosopher’s comment.
What I have read on the BFRO site is typical BFRO; they try to be objective and scientific, but they got this IT IS REAL!!!! ant in their pants and they gotta scratch it.
I get it, guys. It’s frustrating. But you need to visit the TBRC website a few times (www.texasbigfoot.org) to get lessons in toning down the enthusiasm. YOU MUST BELIEVE ME! does not work here any more than it does anywhere else. The closed minds in the scientific community must be convinced, and yes, you may have to dump a body on their desks to do so. Problem is: the “this must be, or probably is, a bigfoot” leaves a sour taste in the mouths of the openminded (like me), too.
He seems sincere and genuine but I’d have to disagree when he says his thermal film is persuasive, I don’t think a thermal film by itself will ever be persuasive.
To me the real value of a thermal imager would be using it to detect a sasquatch is frequenting a given area and observing their behavior so you can develop a plan to get more persuasive proof.
Having seen the video: this guy is definitely smart, and he definitely came up with something that might yield some fruit in places where encounters have been reported.
This is called “field research,” and bravo.
Just remember, Mike: you may know. The ones who don’t, need to be convinced. Go slow.
lets see ……it has a visable neck……….thought BF didn’t?
awful skinny……..kinda like him………….look at the arms
and faking it in thermal ……..a skinny guy would cover this one
but I think faking could be as easy as any other fake……….a suit would hold in heat………..so it would show on thermal as a large guy not a guy in a suit
making it actually earier to fake a thermal image………..IMO
I’m a believer……………..but not buying this one
and the bob grimlen comment………….to me its just to ad credablity
you know if bob says its real it must be………poor bob being screwed/used again
To those who say it looks human: IT IS. That’s Mike.
He did this to provide comparison to the original.
What DWA said! Ditto!
Good comments everyone—–especially DWA and Oldphilosopher. Right on.
I’m more open to this being NOT a guy in a suit, but I agree—this is NOT proof.
Cannot blame the guy for wanting to push the footage, though.
As far as the REAL video evidence, it was not that convincing for me. I have watched it a few times now and it just looks like another blobsquatch, but this time in thermal video. I have to agree with DWA though, I wish we had more people like Mike trying new techniques and new video devices to capture evidence of bigfoot. I’m still waiting for the time when someone that is willing to live in an isolated area for a 6 months to a year, with a bunch of high tech motion cameras and audio recorders, with the exclusive purpose of trying to get bigfoot evidence. Most of the “bigfoot expeditions” nowadays are just weekend camping trips.
Why do I think this whole thing is phony? He’s trying to selling it.
From the (appropriately named) MoneyMaker comments:
“You can pay a few bucks to see the entire clip online at http://www.bushloper.net”
“Mike Greene will make the whole clip available for download, eventually, so you can rewind and watch it multiple times. The download will cost a few bucks also…”
From the interview with Mike Greene:
“As soon as I got home and realized what I had I called up my lawyer, and I called up the copyright office, I went online, I copyrighted it…”
If I were to capture video of a sasquatch, I can’t imagine my first thoughts would be to call my lawyer… I don’t know the guy, but if he’s sleazy enough to copyright a video like this and sell copies online, he’s sleazy enough to fake the video in the first place.
With regards to faking thermal images, his very own recreation does a pretty good job of showing that it is possible.
I hope the video withstands scientific scrutiny, I really do, but he hasn’t made it available to be examined, I suppose he’s too busy selling copies on his website.
It just feels like Mike Greene is taking too many plays out of the Tom Biscardi playbook, and we all know that authentic discovery and honesty are not in there.
Just my two cents.
we have all read about how husky Bigfoot are , towards the beginning of this video that is a part where you can very easily see the girth of the arms and frankly that just don’t ,match up with the muscular beast we are all familiar with , especially when you account for fur on the arms that should eclipse any thermal passing through , I don’t think this is even a good fake , that or it’s the first anorexic Bigfoot on record , which could lead to whole new field which would be for Bigfoot mental issues , an enterprising person could set up shop in Washington State and probably just rake it in , that is in big foot dollars and so far were are not entirely clear on the exchange rate
I don’t understand what we are to gain by watching Mike Green film himself, re-enacting the supposed Bigfoot. It would have been great to compare his size with the ‘Squatch, but the camera is set at a different angle and too far to the right. If anything, it appears Mr. Green is taller than the Bigfoot, but it’s impossible to know, because the camera angle is different.
I’m not discounting the fact that Mr. Green may have captured a real Bigfoot on camera, but he didn’t prove anything by filming himself for comparison.
How does he estimate the Bigfoot’s height, when his own video of himself leaves that question unanswered?
I’m just saying, the film is provocative, but I don’t think it is definitive proof of anything.
I agree with “haskins69” – a neck plainly visible and body way too skinny, plus lots of other indicators (arms not long enough, too upright).
At what point does Mike Greene explain that the freely-available sequence shown above is merely a reconstruction using himself? How do the other respondants know? If not, then it is a deliberate attempt at fakery, surely.
The trick will be in using the knowledge and techniques that Mr Greene has developed so that others can record similar phenomonon and use gather supporting evidence.
Do we know if the stump from which the items were taken was prepared so that a few hairs could have been snagged in the process or a handprint left, or whether the ground around the stump able to record a track.
It appears that some kind of habituation process is being attempted to get more imagery. If this becomes a reliable method, it should lead to more kinds of evidence and not just more of the same.
It seems his recreation has confused more people into thinking this is the genuine footage, which can be found in the first report.
If his plan with more cameras had worked surely he’d have more footage by now considering the video says it was filmed in the middle of last year.
yea this confused alot of people. i saw the original. And there alot of people using really cool techniques. One Person i seen on ( Youtube ) is 4jaimeavalos. Thats his Youtube Channel. Check out his channel. Really good stuff. He’s like the Ninja of researchers. He also has vids with Dr. Meldrum. Awesome stories of the Native Americans and Interviews. Again his channel over at Youtube is 4jaimeavalos.
Because of the Georgia nitt-witts last year and you know who,it’s pretty much useless to
try and use pictures,video,thermal,foot prints,hair,eye witnesses etc…
The only thing they might believe is a body.
And I say might because, as sure as god made little green apples,the skeptics
will say bigfoot was genetically engineered in a lab before they would say the crypto community
were right all along.
I expect Mike Green has a lot of expenses related to his search for Sasquatch and he clearly felt he had got a remarkable film so why shouldnt he realise any commercial potential, giving value for money! He seems to have let us see the best part of the film anyway for our interest and entertainment. I am very greatful for that and hope he can continue, not discouraged by what are possibly, in the main armchair critics. That does include me!
One must not be put off by the scepticism of science, that is what science does, sometimes crassly sometimes not. There is a lot of evidence for the reality of Sasquatch, good eyewitness acounts, footcasts, modern and old history, sound recordings, DNA from hair,etc. Only one of these examples has to be true to mean Sasquatch is true and there surely is more than one of example which is 100% true. So take confidence in this do not think because a sceptic can find a hole in a case that does not mean there isnt a case. The sceptic is testing and you fail if you roll over with a lack of conviction forgetting the real evidence.
How this relates to Greens film is that the film has real qualities and opportunities and these should be exploited and not shallowly dismissed. I wonder what enhancement can be made of this type of film, one thing that might enlighten is if the black and white is reversed and then some form of enhancement is attempted. There is some shading on the figure in Greens film which might show up as what I see as a gorilla like figure. With a black figure we are in familiar Sasquatch territory
Photoexpert could possibly advise on this and maybe comment on the potential for this type of photography. I assume the camera does not project infra-red which is under suspicion as giving alarm to Sasquatch.
Paul78: “If his plan with more cameras had worked surely he’d have more footage by now considering the video says it was filmed in the middle of last year.”
Well, that’s making some assumptions I’m not so comfortable making. If I went to that site daily over that period of time trying to get, say, gray fox footage, I suspect I’d almost always be stumped. Even if I’d seen one the first couple of times.
When an animal is as thin on the ground as this one appears to be, I like to be careful making assumptions like “should have,” because we don’t know. One thing I’m sure contributes to its “elusiveness,” other than scientific inattention, is that it doesn’t just hang out for long periods of time in any one place.
Yeah ii was a bit of an assumption, I was just thinking about the food bar he was leaving as an incentive to return. I was thinking of squirrels and other animals that learn from this sort of human intrusion and become dependent on it. Big assumption since it only happened once.
Would have been more prudent to have kept this footage to himself and do what he is doing now to get real footage of the bigfoot.
Something with so many possible holes in it, without real evidence other than a thermal undefined image is bound to cause suspicion.
Good to see that he has night capable recording gear now to film it. Thermal should only be used as a detection device…if an image is close enough and backed up by night vision, the thermal could be used to validate a bigfoot not being a person in a suit provided it’s calibrated to do so.
Good to see him spending the bucks on technology to help in the search. That’s where the real evidence will come from.
Please…nobody put up another thermal of a bigfoot without showing it on night vision also. Even though it’s new to do this, it’s getting a little old if you know what I mean, and proves nothing at all.
Surely these other people with thermal videos had night vision to look at it eh? If not…why not? It’s much less expensive than thermal and you get a very good image!
YowieLover wrote:
February 11th, 2010 at 12:54 am
Please…nobody put up another thermal of a bigfoot without showing it on night vision also.
Looking at the thermal video, what makes you think it was taken at night?
wuffing responds: February 13th, 2010 at 5:58 am
Looking at the thermal video, what makes you think it was taken at night?
Nothing on a thermal video will tell you if it is night or day Wuffing. Mike Green clearly states that he was setting it up at 11:30 at night at 41 seconds into the interview.
That’s what makes me think it was at night.
YowieLover wrote:
Nothing on a thermal video will tell you if it is night or day Wuffing. Mike Green clearly states that he was setting it up at 11:30 at night … That’s what makes me think it was at night.
YL – the last 40 years of cryptozoology have been a catalogue of embarrassment caused by preference for witness testimony over even the most basic forensic analysis of the evidence presented. I’d really like to see bigfoot in the species list, but based on good rigorous study. Witnesses can make mistakes.
You will know that in these thermal images warm things are lighter than cold things. You will also know that in general nighttime is colder than daytime, and thin things lose and gain heat from the environment faster than thick things.
Now go look at the trees in the thermal footage again, and compare them with the recreation video.