Sasquatch Caught on Therm by Olympic Project?
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on November 26th, 2013
Photo shared with permission of Derek Randles of the Olympic Project
Click on image for full-size version
This weekend we released an up to the minute research update with the Olympic Project. This we strongly believe is a thermal picture of a very large Sasquatch from the chest up at our current research site in Grays Harbor area in Washington State. It’s between 4′ and 5′ wide at the shoulders. We also have a video that is being stabilized as we speak, and will be released as soon as its done. We believe in sharing evidence as it happens as opposed to sitting on it, so here ya go. The photo is copy written so please ask permission before it’s used.
Thermal picture: Some more info on the thermal image. Been getting questions about video and what happened next. Here are those answers. The people that own the property are the ones that did the filming. We put the equipment in their hands and they have done the work. We are working with them daily, but they are doing the nuts and bolts. We have a recreation with a human in the same spot, but it’s not 100% accurate, but it is very close. Here is a human layover picture. from location. It was crouched partially behind a small ridge looking at the people filming. The bright area to the left is a cow that will be apparent in the video as it walks by. The camera is a Flir BTS series. The camera is new to us and new to them. They had only had it for a couple days and were still learning how to use it effectively. The human in the picture is in pretty good focus, but the camera is not 100% focused on the subject. We are in the process right now of doing more recreations and further documenting this event, and that info will be released as soon as it’s finished. The video is very much like the photo. The creature does seem to move, and with stabilization we hope that becomes apparent. With the Flir camera they were using, it shuts off automatically after running for a time, and that’s exactly what happened during filming, so we do not have footage of it leaving, just sitting there watching the people filming. When the camera was turned back on, the figure was gone. We learned a lot from this, and more equipment will soon be deployed. This is the beginning of this investigation, and we expect much much more as we progress.
~ Derek Randles. OP
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.
am i supposed to just believe a random image like this and say yes this is bigfoot?
cmon.
would you be able to show this in court and have the judge and jury believe you?
no way.
Please. PLEASE.
No stupid “that is sooooooooooooooooo fake” posts unless you can demonstrate what you are talking about. It’s not entertaining – could you at least go for that, for once? – and you don’t sound smart.
That is just what I would expect a FLIR of a sasquatch to look like; markers and apparent sizes line up well with many reports. Field marks are evident.
This doesn’t prove anything. But I’d be willing to bet that’s a sasquatch. It’s a mundane conclusion.
Yours?
Not.
Sure looks like Patty in silhouette to me too.
Provenance is everything in this world of Sas evidence, and the tone of the folks releasing this is very encouraging.
Nothing in a thermal will ever, EVER convince anyone who has made up their minds to the contrary already. I don’t care much to know the opinions of those who feel that way. I only marvel at the world they inhabit and mark myself lucky that I don’t.
dconstrukt:
The point is not whether each thing that shows up here is proof; and thinking it is is missing the point.
If I got that image, I’d consider one intriguing possibility, and I’d target that location for further research activity to maybe find out what that thing is.
Taking each and every thing submitted as “proof? or not?” doesn’t advance the discussion; isn’t how science works (although it is disappointing to see that a lot of scientists – jabronies, if you ask me, although just on this topic mind you – do work that way); and risks tossing babies with bathwater.
Naysaying each thing that shows up – without conclusive proof what it, in fact, is – is all about obsession with winning arguments and looking smart to people who haven’t figured stuff out. It’s not about doing science.
Ploughboy: that, what you said. That world looks none too appealing, all of its inhabitants being constantly in the dark. One never gets anywhere without questioning, querying, and constantly suspending judgment until more is in. Only way to get to enlightenment, on anything.
lol
would you buy a car simply based on seeing a photograph?
i can photoshop this image in less than 10 minutes.
Anyone who’s halfway decent at photoshop can as well.
Without context, that photo means nothing.
yes … target that area… absolutely… but it seems like the level of sophistication of collecting data is suspect.
you can collect dates of sightings, cross reference with other known data… ie when fruits are ripe…. also with weather…. temperatures… etc.
when you use data like that, you’ll find some very interesting patterns… stuff thats not seen to the naked eye.
dconstrukt:
Like I said: missed the point, by a mile.
You can’t Photoshop this in ten minutes. And presuming this guy did – or otherwise faked it – is performing a fatal sin: presuming everyone’s a liar. You couldn’t get through half a day with that as a general principle. The evidence so far says this is authentic; it also says you don’t have enough information to make your judgment. (It also says that if you want to fake somebody, a thermal is not the way to go.)
It is not ‘cool’ to be ignorant what is going on until you finally see the proof. When sasquatch is proven, Ploughboy and I will go: yep, saw this coming, the culmination of many important steps. You will know what is going on for the very first time.
Derek Randles and NAWAC are practicing a welcome trend in the hard sciences: “open science,” the sharing of information so that informed people can provide their input as the process proceeds. It is sophisticated science for sophisticated people. Needless braying by uninformed people delays this process. Or kills it.
NOT cool. Kinda jabroni thing to do. Cut it out.
dconstrukt:
You have an aptitude – for churlishness. It does not serve you well, I must say. Sometimes you take it to absurd extremes.
My initial impression of this was how much it looked like the recent Oklahoma images, in shape and musculature. There’s quite a striking similarity, in fact.
What a pity to choose to live without risk of failure!
DWA, ploughboy: I share your measured interest. Nobody likes to feel burned, but I accept that it necessarily comes with the territory. Both this and the Oklahoma imagery, in my opinion, are very worthy of further investigation.
There. I said it, “investigation”, which is an alien concept to dconstrukt, it would seem. Churlish, meaningless “debunking” based upon nothing more than personal prejudice, is not useful. dconstrukt is not useful; his entire schtick is naysaying; he seems afraid of real research. He may have never gotten his hands dirty.
Real research is being willing to accept mistakes in judgement to the goal of further understanding. Those who refuse to accept risk are never rewarded with true discovery. Could it be that our lad is shy about discovery?
Best evidence 2!!! ;p
And no DWA not trying to get your goat ;p I do agree with you, …but DNA evidence is what we need or an actual specimen. Pics, vids, stories can all be fabricated all too easily these days unfortunately. And it seems this is the new ‘cool’ thing to do. Very frustrating to say the least.
Goodfoot:
“Nobody likes to feel burned, but I accept that it necessarily comes with the territory. ”
Getting burned is part of seeing the light. I’ve been quoting Degnostik a lot lately. Here goes again:
[M]y first thoughts are still that people are honest and know what they are doing and talking about, and wait untill I’m proven wrong, not the other way around. Believe me, it’s faster – foul things get obvious quickly, while the other way keeps you in the dark. History of science is full of examples of manipulation and stolen credits, so you might miss the right thing if your perception and thinking operate in a negative mode. Dealing with frequent disappointments is worth it. As Dr Ian Stevenson once said (not an exact quote): it’s much better to be 51% sure in something important, than 99% sure in something trivial.
Right. Think the way I see some people do too often here, and the only time you know what’s going on is when you see the proof. Think the Degnostik way, and no matter what the answer…you were right, all along.
Thermal blobsquatch.
Is it likely that the shadow across the neck is an excess of hair. Same with the shoulders. I.e, the whitest area are the bare areas with little or no hair?