Provo Canyon Bigfoot Video Stabilized
Posted by: Guy Edwards on November 8th, 2012
BLC artist, Guy Edward, doing a liberal interpretation of the Provo Canyon Bigfoot
As an artist, I understand optical illusions…this is more than an illusionGuy Edwards
Editor of Bigfoot Lunch Club
First, we want to say there simply is not enough visual information in the Provo Canyon Bigfoot video to make a definitive determination. With that said, initially we were certain that foliage in the foreground was creating the negative space defining the Bigfoot’s left arm.
We had a feeling that the yellow foliage in the foreground was creating the negative space between the arm and the body. We felt like this illusion added to the eerie-ness to the action of the Bigfoot standing up, which also made this video a must-watch! After we stabilized and reviewed the slow motion, we definitely found foreground foliage was creating some of the negative space, but behind that there is definitive negative space NOT created by the foreground foliage. In other words the gap between the body and the “arm” is most likely there.
We don’t think this was able to conclude until we saw the stabilized version.
We always felt like the reaction of the videographers/hikers were genuine which we think was the second component of this video being compelling.
About Guy Edwards
Psychology reduces to biology, all biology to chemistry, chemistry to physics, and finally physics to mathematical logic.
Guy Edwards is host of the Portland, OR event HopsSquatch.com.
‘Liberal’ is an understatement here, since IMHO what we’re seeing is the back of… whatever that is.
I agree 100% with redpill.. In my humble opinion its back is to the camera when it stands..
I am however leaning towards it being a legit vid.
It would be extremely helpful if someone (original witness) would return to site and put someone in the same spot for scale.. it looks pretty massive but without any reference its hard to tell.. I would also 100% agree that it is not a bear. At the moment thats about all I can say though..
I totally agree with RPJ. The posture and movement appears that it is standing up and moving away, all we see is the back side of it.
looks like a hoax… the way what ever gets up and begins to walk away from the person or persons filming is very human, the movement from the arms and posture while walking…
Could just as easily be a human in a thick black parka wearing a black hood. Bottom line…..INCONCLUSIVE. But I am sure FB and Biscardi will come out and say “this is the real deal folks.”
Given the high number of very probable hoaxes going around, and the natural propensity of young men to want to jump on that bandwagon, I’m not really excited about this one.
I very well remember how frustrated I was as a teenager when my credibility was questioned. Now, looking back on the boy I was, I understand completely why it would have been so. Sorry guys. You may have really filmed a Squatch. Only you know for sure, and that is about all you’re probably going to get out of this one.
(And let me just add: Anytime you need to “edit out negative space” to make something discernible to the viewer…well, you’ve lost considerable evidentiary value before you’ve even shown the first frame.)
Meanwhile, the BFRO database grew by 10 eyewitness accounts since the first of the month. That is a pretty typical rate, of late. And the explanations for these from thems that would say “no evidence….?”
Was it already a complete midwinter scene in Provo Canyon on the date when the video was made?
Seems to me if they were ballsy enough to film (what they thought was) a bear from that close, they could have stayed put while Sasquatch ambled off in the opposite direction… or at least until s/he cleared the thicket, but right as we think we’re going to see something… perfect timing.
Squatchy stories are all the rage lately, kids are dying to create them… literally.
it shows nothing conclusive.
if you had one piece of evidence to prove to the world that bigfoot exists…. would you use this one?
(no, it doesn’t show anything that would lead me to think its a bigfoot)
It’s amazing… when people want to see something… and already have an opinion in their head… the human mind will do anything to justify that position.
you see this all the time with big footers and other crypto stuff… and you’re seeing a perfect example here.
dconstrukt:
“It’s amazing… when people want to see something… and already have an opinion in their head… the human mind will do anything to justify that position.
you see this all the time with big footers and other crypto stuff… and you’re seeing a perfect example here.”
And you also see it on here, all the time, with those who for reasons unknown to those of us familiar with the evidence will grasp at any straw they can – in the absence of a scrap of evidence of their own – to assert that the sasquatch isn’t real.
Just sayin’, not sayin’ you’re one of them, and I don’t know what the heck this video shows, and it really doesn’t matter.
And I agree with Ploughboy that just because you think you filmed a sasquatch – whether you did or not – doesn’t mean you actually have a video worth anything…except, if you did, to you.
Fascinating times we live in. When people provide authentic video of a black smudge, now people online will do the faking for them.
Jocko Wainwright:
Makes one wonder what would have happened were….um….OK, um, never mind…. heh heh….um…naaaaah…
OK, I’ll come clean. I was gonna forward this same video to Cryptomundo as evidence for ropen, and see how that one got dolled up for me.
No kidding. As Ploughboy said on another thread: when the scientific community fails to do its job, this is the kind of world that results.
If we suddenly start seeing mainstream scientists go public saying, and I mean just saying this, they don’t have to do anything else (except actually mean it):
I’m interested in this sasquatch thing, and I encourage any effort, amateur or professional, to get to the bottom of it and figure out what’s causing all this
That will be perhaps the biggest sea change science has seen in the last two centuries, if not more. It will signal that scientists are ready to let science work the way it’s supposed to.
to me, there should be no question about what you’re seeing.
perfect example of how to review evidence is ghost hunters…. they try to disprove what evidence they capture… what they’re left with, is proof.
this needs to be done with these bigfoot videos etc.
this is bigfoot… its not like you’re saying you saw a dog, cat, or cloud in the sky.
this is something that is not supposed to exist.
In science, the burden of proof falls upon the claimant; and the more extraordinary a claim, the heavier is the burden of proof demanded.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.