No Independent Analysis of NC Video?
Posted by: Loren Coleman on February 8th, 2010
The validity of the so-called “Thermal Video of a Sasquatch,” allegedly filmed in North Carolina, may never be known, for it appears to have been withdrawn by its owner from scientific analysis.
The following statement has been released by a well-known researcher in the South:
The video is only good if the subject in the video can be verified as a flesh and blood Bigfoot/Sasquatch creature, otherwise it’s just another unknown video. The scientific community would laugh if they examined this “thermal footage of a Bigfoot creature” as it’s being claimed by Mr. Greene and the BFRO. I’ve attempted to purchase a copy of the video directly from Mr. Greene [on Friday, February 5, 2010] so I could forensically enhance it to possibly determine what was filmed. He declined and said the film was no longer for sale. Hmmm? I guess that answered my question!
If you’re going to promote something as evidence of a flesh and blood Bigfoot/Sasquatch creature, be prepared to have the evidence examined by your peers and the scientific community.
I’ve been more than willing over the years to apply my knowledge and provide equipment to help examine evidence just like this video.
Thermal imaging technology will play a significant role in the discovery of these creatures, but the thermal camera can be a double-edged sword in the wrong hands. When a thermal camera is used correctly, it’s a magnificent tool for Bigfoot research, but one must be knowledgeable in its operation. This is why FLIR holds weeklong classes on the cameras operation.
If a thermal camera ends up in the hands of an inexperienced operator, it can turn into Merlin’s Magic Wand where everything you see is a Bigfoot creature. I’ve been using/building thermal cameras since 1998 and I’m still learning something new everyday.
William M. Dranginis
Manassas, VA.
Virginia Bigfoot Research Organization.
Update: For those unaware of the work of Bill Dranginis, who works on government contracts, please see his profile here.
Dranginis monitors his motion-detection camera. (Photograph by Darrow Montgomery)
Dranginis demonstrates his Eye Gotcha invention. (Photograph by Darrow Montgomery)
The Eye Gotcha system includes a camera in a log decoy. (Photograph by Darrow Montgomery)
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.
I could say much here, but will restrict it to a sentence.
BILL DRANGINIS IS RIGHT.
So was it withdrawn from scientific analysis or did Mr Greene just not want to sell a copy to another RO such as William is a part of? Do the two organizations get along? Is William a scientist and therefore qualifies to conduct the correct analysis to reach a conclusion or will it just end up being another opinion? Has he really been building these FLIR’s from the ground up or just buying them and playing with them for 12 years? All important questions really before we make Mr Greene look like a fraud. From what he says and the video we see it seems as if you can get some pretty amazing results by operating one of these things incorrectly.
Not defending Mr Greene or the video (not sure what it is) but this just sounds like someone trying to start more in-fighting in the bigfoot investigative community. That is unless he would like to make a more rational explanation of his attempt to study this video. The above sounds like more of a complaint that he didn’t get his way.
Maybe Mr Greene himself has found something which has made him question it and has therefore withdrawn it from sale. Let’s wait and see what he says.
A review of the video by a peer is not going to ultimately prove or disprove anything but I wish everyone including BFRO and VBRO good luck in their pursuit of the truth.
Hi DWA,
Maybe you can fill in the massive gaps then in his comments and tell us what would happen if BILL got his hands on it and if his qualifications and research methods are enough for all of us to believe his conclusion? This happens a lot with bigfoot people which is why the general public outside of this community finds them hard to understand. By the time this reaches a site like cryptomundo, sides have already been taken and personalities are already involved. I think that is why progress is so slow. The fights start before anything else is achieved.
Thanks for the update Loren!
Loren: your answer suffices for me. Thanks.
I’m curious if Mr Dranginis asked Mr. Green why it was withdrawn from sale. I would also have asked if it was withdrawn for sale in general or just to me specifically. It is an interesting bit of evidence and should be gone over by someone with the knowledge of what it is or could be. Afterall, why copyright something if your not interested in sales of the material. If it was just for the scientific value and no other concern, I would imagine a copyright would be of little consequence.
O.K. , I am not sold on the video, but having said that I also don’t think the withdrawal of a sale is evidence of it being a fraud. I don’t usually watch the videos of the people being interviewed because I prefer to have no opinion prior to seeing the actual video and even then I always watch a video with the sound off the first time I watch it. I do that to prevent any outside influence prior to my seeing, only after that do I begin the other stuff like watching it with sound, looking for stops or edits and last of all I listen to or watch the people involved. As we all know there are a lot of liars out there and some times it’s hard to ferret them out. I had some problems with the video right from the start, most around the 25 to 27 second part where it shows that it has relatively small arms at least not beefy which is what all other bigfoot photos have shown. Later this comes up a few more times, but I am now starting to rethink that position. Right as it is leaving the stump there is a side view that shows a well developed torso and arms. Most creatures, humans included, are creatures of habit. If you can get him to come back on a regular basis and set up some device that could capture some DNA I would be a lot happier.
It is rather strange to put this for sale and then when a scientist wants to analysis tell them no. If I thought I had genuine proof I’d want a scientist in my corner. This to me implies there is something dodgy about the footage and he is afraid it may come out or the other obvious thing greedy is blinkering him. Honestly how much can you make from a thermal image?
I know some guys who search for bigfoot don’t like the idea of scientific involvement, but it is the only way for it to be confirmed.
I’m only training to be an archaeologist, but I can tell you critical analysis is the most important thing to science; so to discount any factors first.
I should add one thing.
Remember Patty? That’s a compelling video, and we know what has happened to that.
You not only have to have a scientist look at this – or any – evidence. You need that person to approach it WITHOUT BIAS. Anyone who knows the history of the forensic evidence presented for review – and there has been quite a bit – can tell you the history of unbiased scientific review. Namely, none.
(Never mind that without a type specimen, nothing but a type specimen will be proof.)
Dranginis not only has technical chops; he’s seen one, and is looking for them. Having met the guy – yeah, I know, isn’t that scientific – I can’t think of anyone more likely to give any piece of evidence a fair look.
I agree Dranginis would make an excellent judge of this.
I also agree that Greene withdrawing the footage is not evidence PER SE of this being a hoax.
Ultimaletely, as has been stated on this site ad infinitum, only a DEAD BODY will ultimately satisfy everybody.
cryptidsrus responds: …I also agree that Greene withdrawing the footage is not evidence PER SE of this being a hoax… Ultimaletely, as has been stated on this site ad infinitum, only a DEAD BODY will ultimately satisfy everybody.
Here in Europe the footage is still available from bushloper.net for $3, so in what sense is it withdrawn? Also, a live one would be quite sufficient for European zoologists – no need to go round killing things.