New Bigfoot Footage?
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on July 7th, 2006
New footage posted to YouTube was brought to my attention this morning by Cryptomundo reader smit833.
I do not have any details regarding the footage, but here is the link to it on YouTube.
Is it legit? I can’t imagine that the first place it would show up would be YouTube if it was. I have contacted the person who uploaded it to TouTube and asked for details and any other information regarding the footage. I will let the readers of Cryptomundo know ASAP.
Watch it and decide for yourself…
_______________________________
Update
This information has been added to the the YouTube page with the video.
1992 film in the Atwood Lake area, Ohio.
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.
Uhhh… not.
Though some of the other Bigfoot/Sasquatch vids on that same section of YouTube are pretty awesome! 😀
I have to agree with gridbug… the sasquatch/man-in-a-suit moves too mechanically, like a robot or… umm…. someone walking through the woods in a bigfoot suit. =1
Its pretty blurry, but its pretty fake too. The “bigfoot” seems to be taking intentionally strange strides, maybe to look like the Patterson film. Maybe Monty Python’s Ministry of Funny Walks will hire him.
Way to blurry to say it is anything but a try at a hoax.
I will not make any judgements until I see a clearer version of the footage.
This is obviously a hoax. The first thing that hit me as I watch it was that the gait not only appears unnaturally and ungainly, but it doesn’t even come close to the natural movement witnessed in credible footage. It distinctly looks like someone ‘ape-ing’ movements for the camera.
Also, despite the lack of clarity, some frames actually depict what clearly appears to be a bulging from the left hip down to the leg, which is commonly seen in someone wearing a loose fitting suit, or even baggy pants.
I wish hoaxers would just get bored with the subject of the Sasquatch, so that legitimate reasearchers can conduct their business without being directed toward dead ends.
To be certain, I speak from the perspective of someone who believes in the Bigfoot/Sasquatch phenomenon.
I had to change to full screen to see anything.
Nope, shoulders ar far closer to human size than three foot spread noted in reports. Think proportions
**cough, hoax, cough**
The people that made this film must not know much about Sasquache. I think I could do better with the hide of a scottish highland steer and help from one of my native neighbors. I don’t have a camera.
Doesn’t anyone know how to focus a camera?
The camera has a decent zoom ratio to get so close so fast, so it’s not a camera phone, but no audio (ok Larry step left really fast) and no focus??? HOAX
Or, if I had authentic bigfoot footage, I wouldn’t compress it beyond comprehension to get it to youtube…
Who’s camera these days takes such pixelated images?
I suggest this explanation: an old VHS video, taken in the early 80’s, had been found behind the entertainment center and mailed to Don Monroe, who gave it to Biscardi.
ROFL… the camera shake could not look more intentional, because it obviously IS.
I’ll give it a half point for kitsch, out of five stars. Unless we’re scoring for kitsch only. In which case I’ll score it the OTHER half point!
It might fool a debunker, however!
So many purveyors of the Patterson film, just need Bob Saget to narrate them all. I think the animal wouldn’t move as much as people think.
I like how Bigfoot seems to stick to the trail path. Why bust his butt moving trudging the woods ahd brush when humans have already cut an easy walking trail? Bigfoot ain’t no sucker.
Did anyone else notice Harley Hoffman’s Bigfoot video is on YouTube as well? (It’s the one called “BIGFOOT Video WTF Insane!!!”) I’d never heard of it until today… personally, it reminded me of the Freeman footage, though I was immediately struck by how much it reminded me of the Patterson/Gimlin subject. If it’s a guy in a suit, it’s a pretty good job.
Anyone got the lowdown on this one? 🙂
it has the “Patterson arm swing” which tells me- NO
If there’s any validity to the IM index studies that have been done with the Patterson footage subject, that alone would indicate this is clearly a hoax.
(And is that a Steelers jacket the subject is wearing?) 😛
hey craig & everyone this could be a authentic or hoaxed bigfoot filmfootage but more research needs to this fimfootage. it does look very interesting indeed. did anyone try to email the person who to this videofootage of the possible sasquatch. the film is realy shakey. the forest area where the this possible creature is walking does look like good habitat. which state was this new possible sasquatch videotaped at. more research needs to be done to this filmfootage. thanks bill
In my opinion, the gait, stance and cadence of the arm swings all say HUMAN to me. This statement is NOT made as a comparison to any other existing footage of alleged bigfoots. It’s based on my personal knowledge of how humans move.
Looks like a certain camera man has had way too much coffee
The first impression I got from this film was this image.
Let me just play the devil’s advocate here for a moment if I may. Certainly we all have our own opinions & I am not trying to sway anyone. But we must recognize the fact that the entity captured on film by Patterson is not some type of ‘model’ where if something does not fit that ‘image’ then it cannot possibly be a hairy biped.
If we are to have preconcieved notions on what this being looks like then certainly the genuine article will slip past our hands.
Let me ask you this. What if this were to be the first acclaimed bigfoot film? I am sure most would rule out Patterson’s as a complete fraud because this ‘image’ of bigfoot has been in the world’s eyes for far too long.
Do not act like you have observed this creature on a daily basis! What type of judge are you to say that this is the genuine article?
What is our actual objective?
It does not take any effort to write down the words, “HOAX” & dismiss everything as lies.
When I see this video, I see a hairy bipedal. This is acclaimed as real & so I accept it as real. I am trusting the owner of the film in the same manner that I would trust the genuine nature of a person’s report.
It is far easier to dimiss this film as a hoax because he looks ‘HUMAN’. I wonder how many reports I have read about wildmen & human apes.
That is to be expected.
Where do we go from here? Now that we have another film.
This is what I gained from it.
1) That there are more than ONE type of hairy bipedal creature that exists.
2) I can take note of the type of habitat which this man ape was filmed in.
3) What would I do different in an encounter such as this?
The distance seems very plausible & the shaking of the camera only tells me that the camera man was probably afraid.
It is amazing that anyone even comes forward with video when everyone is mocking & immediately dismissing it as a farse without any evidence themselves!
Lets be logical & not jump to conclusions. Lets work with what materials we have because to be quite frank these are hidden animals.
What would happen if we assumed this was real? Where would we go from there?
What good is any video footage for that matter? Why even bother going out & filming the real deal when people will call out, ‘man in suit’ or ‘fake’?
It is only when we as a community of scientists become extremely welcoming to any & all evidence that we will actually begin to move forward in a radical way.
Until then we will be forever STUCK in our ‘PATTY’ narrow minds, throwing anything else aside because it quite doesn’t fit.
This is about educating & advancing, not condemning & burning at the stake.
Study more before you open your mouth.
I hope you understand this position & my concern from what I have seen.
Thank you.
In simple terms. For me it is not about belief whatsoever. It is all about understanding. Be it fake, genuine, legend or truth. I can learn more.
the “big foot” looked like it was marching. also, from what I have read most big foots don’t walk nice and pretty like when someone is around, they run and/or hide.
One thing I noticed about the camera shaking. It seemed as if the camera man was shaking the camera on purpose. As a former Air Force videographer, it didn’t look like the normal jittering of someone holding a camera. More like they were trying to imitate being scared.
He had some excellent posture, better than mine.
What is with the awful recording?
Like most of these short camcorder clips, it’s simply too blurry and shaky to make any kind of meaningful evaluation, at least without bringing in a lot of preconceived ideas about what an unknown creature “should” look and act like.
The thing that sucks about YouTube is the compression kills the image.
Interesting video, but I need to see a better copy.
Cryptomundo seems to have brought out alot of hoaxers in the short time its been around!
Well, after hearing Alton speak this weekend down in San Antonio I’m going to jump in and say “nah-nay-no” on this one being real. Just look at the arm length. Those arms are VERY human.
Yea, the arms being a bit shorter than mine, as I saw, kinda gives it away.
Now the other video with the speaking, showing the bigfoot walking behind the split tree, is more beleivable.
smit833:
It’s not that we’re pigeonholing everything based on “Patty.” (The Skunk Ape sure isn’t pigeonholed.) It’s just that you have to assess footage based on what you know first. What you’re seeing here — the shake looks faked; the critter walks like a human being; folks (including one guy who’s all over YouTube) are faking this stuff it seems lately day in day out — is just people trying to suss out what seems odd, off or not real.
All of this has been done to Patty too. The difference is that almost 40 years later we’re still talking about Patty.
That’s all.
When I tried to look at it the user took it off, fishy? …