| Welcome to The Mountain. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| BIGFOOT?; what do you think? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 31 2007, 08:57 AM (459 Views) | |
| Sunshine | Oct 31 2007, 08:57 AM Post #1 |
Ruler of the Mountain
  ![]](http://z6.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071028/ap_on_...d_bigfoot_in_pa |
 |
 
|
| greatwhiteelkhunter | Nov 1 2007, 02:51 PM Post #2 |
Ruler of the Mountain
|
What do you guys think? is this a bear??? After I see your replies I'll give you my thoughts. Pa. hunter's images stir Bigfoot debate Sun Oct 28, 3:16 PM ET It's furry and walks on all fours. Beyond that, about the only thing certain about the critter photographed by a hunter's camera is that some people have gotten the notion it could be a Sasquatch, or bigfoot. Others say it's just a bear with a bad skin infection. Rick Jacobs says he got the pictures from a camera with an automatic trigger that he fastened to a tree in the Allegheny National Forest, about 115 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, hoping to photograph deer. "We couldn't figure out what they were," Jacobs said of the images captured on Sept. 16. "I've been hunting for years and I've never seen anything like this." He contacted the Bigfoot Research Organization, which pursues reports of a legendary two-legged creature that some people believe lives in parts of the U.S. and Canada. "It appears to be a primate-like animal. In my opinion, it appears to be a juvenile Sasquatch," said Paul Majeta of the bigfoot group. However, the Pennsylvania Game Commission has a more conventional opinion. Agency spokesman Jerry Feaser said conservation officers routinely trap bears to be tagged and often see animals that look like the photos. "There is no question it is a bear with a severe case of mange," Feaser told The Bradford Era.  |
|
|
|
| Herb | Nov 1 2007, 03:54 PM Post #3 |
Ruler of the Mountain
|
I dunno but None of the bears I have ever seen had back legs that long. Looks more like some guy in a bad bear suit. |
|
|
|
| 3006 | Nov 1 2007, 04:10 PM Post #4 |
|
Unregistered
|
I would guess orangutan,or Hillary out for a midnight stroll looking for supporters. |
|
|
|
| legitlinda | Nov 1 2007, 04:38 PM Post #5 |
Ruler of the Mountain
|
The legs look long to me too, and I'm not a believer in the legendary creature. My brother Mark is though. <_< We've gone round and round about Sasquatch. He tells my grandkids about it and I have to tell them I don't believe it. It turned out that picture that we've seen so many times was a big hoax. The person who took it admitted it. Link |
|
|
|
| Almtnman | Nov 1 2007, 06:53 PM Post #6 |
Administrator
|
The body looks just like a black bear, but I'll have to say it's back legs look a little long for a bear or at least all the black bears I have seen. One things for sure, it's not related to Hillary, the legs are not fat enough! 
|
|
|
|
| gobblerblaster | Nov 1 2007, 07:47 PM Post #7 |
gobblerblaster
|
Hey, Thats my Mother in Law. 
|
|
|
|
| Sunshine | Nov 1 2007, 08:07 PM Post #8 |
|
Ruler of the Mountain
|
It looks like Rosie O'Donut getting ready to stand on her head to relieve her depression !!!!    |
|
|
|
| Ali | Nov 1 2007, 09:01 PM Post #9 |
|
Ruler of the Mountain
|
It kind of looks like an ape more than a bear. Maybe it's making its way up to our house! (It heard of 'Ali' Mae Clampet!) Whatever it is, I'll bet it smells real bad! |
|
|
|
| Culture Warrior | Nov 1 2007, 09:33 PM Post #10 |
an Angry American
|
Boy, I hope that BSB knows about this............ Where has that gal been lately anyhow???????? Uh - oh.......betcha this beast kidnapped her........ 
|
|
|
|
| greatwhiteelkhunter | Nov 1 2007, 10:15 PM Post #11 |
|
Ruler of the Mountain
|
OMG STOP THE PRESSES!!!!!!!!! I think your right. If only we could see what it was doing with it's finger that would clinch it!!
|
|
|
|
| greatwhiteelkhunter | Nov 1 2007, 10:19 PM Post #12 |
|
Ruler of the Mountain
|
I have to agree with you. I have seen alot of bears in Colorado and NONE of them looked like this. The hind legs are WAY TO LONG and it almost looks as if it wants to stand up. Almost like walking on all 4's is not what it wants to do. I say BS that is not a bear but I have no clue what it is either!! I know with that trail Cam it didn't get a second shot but this one is sure strange. I would really like to have had the opportunity to try and do some tracking!! |
|
|
|
| swanj | Nov 1 2007, 10:34 PM Post #13 |
Top of the Rung
|
I tend to go along with the Mangey bear story Folks. If you look real close and at the camera angle, the front and rear left legs look somewhat porportinate in length. Its only the right rear that appears extra long, but its possible the animal has it extended out to the side for some reason or other, therefore making it appear that it is longer than it should be. I feel its all a matter of camera angle. But, of course, Thats OMHO ! Swanj |
|
|
|
| bsb006 | Nov 2 2007, 01:30 AM Post #14 |
Ruler of the Mountain
|
Well, you should have seen my narrow escape - I was held hostage by these critters for months now!!!  I have to admit, though, my blood pressure went down while captured. I think was the absence of MSM and the loony left!!!  These same hunters  released me from their capture - and they weren't bears with Mange!!!!  On the serious side, I had not seen this - Does Mange make them lose weight and make their legs grow longer? That looks like something from the ape family to me....good thing I am not an expert!!! I am not too sure I would put my faith in the Pennsylvania Game Commission!!!! <_< <_< <_< |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 2 2007, 04:12 PM Post #15 |
Duke
|
This is my attempt at making clear what has already been decided and is a "Black Bear with Mange"; Part 1; The first thing I did was look at the pic. in the size posted. I can understand when looked at that size one can first think it may be something from the monkey family, I did at first glance too. I have seen dogs with mange before, but never a black bear, until now. Problems arise when with a little unmerited mythological thought it can seem to be some mythological creature like sasquatch or bigfoot that some seem to be trying to push a bit, but when viewing the pic. closer and with an clear mind one can see that the head looks like a bear's head. I later enlarged the pic. in increments up to 400 times, so I could do a fair report. I then copy/pasted it into my computer for further enlargement, I even shrank it to 50% and that really at first glance looked somewhat monkey, chimp like, not sasquatchy or bigfooty. In enlarging it what I see better is the right hind heel is somewhat visible, it is raised like in walking, this makes that leg look even longer along with the camera angle. (swanj pretty much nailed it in his;"Posted on Nov 1 2007, 09:34 PM".) Also I can see the two other somewhat visible paws tend to fit bear's paws. The pic. in its size as posted on here shows what I described when looked at carefully. The black bear may be a little thin due to weight loss? It also has thinning (some loss) of hair due to mange making it look thin. Ever saw a wet dog or cat that normally has fuffy or long hair? They look strange when viewed wet don't they, some look like wet rats! That poor manged black bear has natural and camera angle reasons for looking the way it does in the pic. In further examination of the enlarged pic. I can see a better shape of the bear's head, it is a bears head with the angle captured by the camera. *edited out paragraph about camera, see note at bot. of this post-Duke ----------End Part 1------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Part 2 NOTE: history, for newcomers to this topic; Sunshine posted the topic first in the "Politics & Hot Topics" section. Her topic was title "Big Foot Sighting in Penn. It may be Obama !!! You never know" then GWEH accidently(didn't know there was a topic already) posted his topic in this section titled "BIGFOOT? what do you think?". They were later logically made into one topic, keeping GWEH's topic name with Sunshine's name on it. Two into one a good idea. --------------end Part two note----------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Part 3; See her link in her first post I now copy/paste the article from with my comments in it in blue: Start quote and comments: Pa. hunter's images stir Bigfoot debate Sun Oct 28, 3:16 PM ET( Associated Press) RIDGWAY, Pa. - It's furry and walks on all fours. Beyond that, about the only thing certain about the critter photographed by a hunter's camera is that some people have gotten the notion it could be a Sasquatch, or bigfoot. Others say it's just a bear with a bad skin infection. The way that is worded seems to want to play into some kind of mythology, in fact what the others say is the truth which with very little research and a good look at the pic. can tell it's a black bear with mange, the " Sasquatch bigfoot" bologna is what has made this story to spread around the Internet, its spreading now and will probably spread more! Rick Jacobs says he got the pictures from a camera with an automatic trigger that he fastened to a tree in the Allegheny National Forest, about 115 miles northeast of Pittsburgh, hoping to photograph deer. "We couldn't figure out what they were," Jacobs said of the images captured on Sept. 16. "I've been hunting for years and I've never seen anything like this." Rick Jacobs owns the PICTURES, notice the word "pictures", yet we see only one pic. so far, I FOUND one more of the same bear taken by Rick Jacobs, I'll post that pic. and link later. keep in mind Rick saw both and anyother(s) the camera may have taken. Apparently some articles have chosen to only print one pic. they chose to print for public viewing, suspcious to me or at least brings questions to mind, mention "pictures" only print one, yeah questions to my mind. Evidently Mr. "I've been hunting for years" Rick Jacobs doesn't know much about what's in the woods he hunts in, huh? He contacted the Bigfoot Research Organization, which pursues reports of a legendary two-legged creature that some people believe lives in parts of the U.S. and Canada. Now there's the logical place to go for a good sound minded person. "It appears to be a primate-like animal. In my opinion, it appears to be a juvenile Sasquatch," said Paul Majeta of the bigfoot group. Go to a nut for answers and you get a nuts' answers, talk about a credibility gap for Rick and the goof Paul Majeta, apparently both like the wrong kind of attention. However, the Pennsylvania Game Commission has a more conventional opinion. Agency spokesman Jerry Feaser said conservation officers routinely trap bears to be tagged and often see animals that look like the photos. "There is no question it is a bear with a severe case of mange," Feaser told The Bradford Era. These are the folks Rick Jacobs should have listened to and also he could have simply got the info that is at our finger tips to get. The Pa. Game Commission could have given him more info on black bears with mange and avenues to get further info. No no no, Rick did what any simpleton could do, play it up, but wind up looking like a nut, ignorant person, attention monkey, or someone trying to use the gullibility of others. He and the printers of some articles just want attention even at the evident risk of being known as using other peoples' gullibilty to get that attention. ---------END part 3----------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Part 4; A little about mange that black bears get; A- mange Demodicosis in the Ocala, Fla. Population, 2000 - Ongoing: Researchers with FWC are looking at demodicosis (mange) problem in black bears on the western edge of the Ocala National Forest. This type of mange is caused by a mite that is not contagious to people or domestic animals. The mites live in the hair follicles and severe infestations result in hair loss. In domestic animals, demodicosis is often the result of immunosuppression and we suspect that the presence of these mites may reflect some type of underlying problem in bears from this region. B-mange Link to DNR about black bears and others with mange in Michigan Mange-( Sarcoptic & Notoedric) Description and Distribution Mange is a skin disease of mammals caused by a tissue-burrowing arthropod, the mange mite. A variety of mange mites exist; the ones most often identified as the cause of mange in Michigan wildlife are Sarcoptes scabiei and Notoedres centrifera. The mites are too small to be seen with the naked eye, but skin changes brought on by infestation can be dramatic. The skin diseases caused by these species of mites are sarcoptic and notoedric mange. Sarcoptic mange has been reported in a wide range of mammals nationwide. In Michigan, sarcoptic mange has been reported in red fox, coyote, gray wolf, porcupine, black bear, cottontail rabbit, and raccoon. Notoedric mange has been reported in North America and in Michigan in the eastern fox squirrel and the gray (black) squirrel. There is some question as to the specificity of the mites causing mange on the various species of wildlife. Some parasitologists believe the mite is specific for the host on which it is found. Other parasitologists challenge this belief because there are records of transfer from fox to wolf and dog, rabbit to monkey, goat to man, dog to man, etc. It appears that sarcoptic mange mites are less host-specific than originally believed allowing for an infestation to occur on a dog that has contact with a mangy wild canid. Notoedric mange mites are host specific for squirrels and are not transmissible to either canid or feline pets. I put that in just for some folks that may not know black bears really do get mange. ----------------------------End Part 4 --------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PART 5 continued in my next post. Thanks, Duke Note on editing: My last edit before this one was (This post has been edited by Duke on Nov 3 2007, 01:53 AM), at that point I was fairly pleased with the rambling info I posted on my research, then later; 3006 Posted Nov 3 2007, 8:44 PM. His post is the best of all posts up to the date of his post. The link he found combines all the pics. of Rick Jacobs' that have been found so far from the night of the "Black bear with mange" pics. that has become infamous because of a very poor job of reporting by the Associated Press and other reporters, bloggers, and the people who feed into the juvenile Sasquatch, Bigfoot silliness. I also edited out of this post of mine one Part 1 *paragraph on cameras that could add to confusion, my question about the camera has been answered-Thanks-Duke. I personally thank 3006 for finding and posting the link that has 3 pics. instead of the one supplied by the poor reporting of Associated Press/AP. What depth of the part Mr. "I've hunted for years" Rick Jacobs the owner of the copyrighted pics. played in playing up a bear w/mange being portrayed as a mystery is not yet clearly known to me?-Duke |
|
|
|
| Wild Bill | Nov 2 2007, 08:25 PM Post #16 |
Deceased Member
|
There is thangs out there in them woods and in this world that few people have ever seen.. Dont be too quick to doubt em !! |
|
|
|
| greatwhiteelkhunter | Nov 2 2007, 11:20 PM Post #17 |
|
Ruler of the Mountain
|
I have to agree with you! Honestly I know people including my mom who have seen animals that they had no idea what they were. The world and our mother, mother nature, is an amazing place. |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 3 2007, 03:01 AM Post #18 |
|
Duke
|
Continued from my last post: PART 5; HERE'S where I need help, I can't get an important pic. to post! http://www.outdoorpressroom.com/ Please click on the link I provided, scroll down until you see the small bear picture you can see the other picture taken by Rick Jacobs' camera. In looking at the smaller cropped pic. one can see better just how bad the mange is at this stage of getting worse. Also the paws show better, the bear is rubbing its head on the ground and next to a rock, black bears like dogs do that. The bear is probably itching like crazy too. In stages of the mange the skin oozes, stinks, and the skin thickens in areas. When I was young I saw one dog that looked so very bad and miserable that I would have shot it to put it out of its misery, but had no gun at that time. After you look at the pic. see the word link below it and see a bigger pic. of the one GWEH posted of Rick Jacobs' and another pic. of a black bear with mange, look at the position of that bears's right hind leg, the back of its heel is up too. In that linked pic. of the bear I can better see what looks like a drop of water in the lens of the camera, it shows in the pic. GWEH posted, but somehow it is clearer in the linked pic. of the same view. That second link leads to this; http://www.bradfordera.com/articles/2007/1...1b265436842.txt I did copy/paste all the pics. to my PC so I could enlarge them for a better examination at several different sizes. I find it very hard to think that after seeing what I provided in my two posts that anyone could even possibly mutter the posibility that there is a "bigfoot or juvenile sasquatch" in there. IF ANYONE will? Please post the 3 pictures that are in the links I provided in this post? I will quote the post you put them in and use them to wind up my report and comments. I really wanted to post them so no one would have to go elsewhere to view them, I'm a bit bothered by that. Thanks, Duke I feel like I failed by not completing my work-Duke |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 3 2007, 05:04 AM Post #19 |
|
Duke
|
I can tell most anyone how to view the pics. in different sizes, but I can't tell you how to show them to the folks on here. Thanks, I appreciate ya'll put'n up with me and my ramblings, Duke Edited in note; I got all my search info by using these words; "Black bears with mange" |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 3 2007, 06:39 AM Post #20 |
|
Duke
|
I deleted this to save space-my question has been answered-Duke |
|
|
|
| 3006 | Nov 3 2007, 09:44 AM Post #21 |
|
Unregistered
|
OK, go to this site and check out all the pictures and make your own call.look at all of it there are some that are stupid. I feel I have found the answer there. http://boards.atlantafalcons.com/lofiversi...hp/t278563.html |
|
|
|
| Almtnman | Nov 3 2007, 11:00 AM Post #22 |
|
Administrator
|
I took a look at all those pics and some of them were kind of stupid like you said. Then the couple of people that had enhanced the pics to where it could be seen a little better, I noticed that the right leg which we thought was too long was showing the bottom of it's foot also while stretching on it's toes which only make the leg look long in the original game cam shot. It definitely looked like a bear with the mange after looking at the enhanced photos. |
|
|
|
| greatwhiteelkhunter | Nov 3 2007, 12:12 PM Post #23 |
|
Ruler of the Mountain
|
Clearly that one picture was used to create this whole Bigfoot issue. If you combine all the pictures and the fact that 2 cubs were there 28 minutes earlier you have to say this is a bear. A STRANGE bear but a bear. |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 4 2007, 04:15 PM Post #24 |
|
Duke
|
3006, Thank you very much for finding and posting that link, it found one extra pic. that exists that I had not found (the two cub bears). I still think there potentiall?y ma?y be one or more pics. from that night. I hold in shame Associated Press/AP, bloggers, the people that only wrote articles with one pic. playing up the juvenile saquatch, bigfoot angle, and the people that played into that mess. If I played into that simple mindedness in any way I most sincerely apologize with shame. 3006, your post tied my post titled Part 5 together so beautifully and more. Without hesitation, I say your find and post is the BEST out of all that has been posted this far and I once again thank you for taking the time and posting it. Definately a Blue Ribbon post, Duke |
|
|
|
| 3006 | Nov 4 2007, 05:13 PM Post #25 |
|
Unregistered
|
Thank you Duke,but honestly it was a blind pig finding a acorn on my part,I deserve no credit for posting. I was just surfing that web site as I do often as a lot of time they prove people are truly nuts with what they find and post. As far as your how much ,how long and what you post, you owe no apologize .I agree with you about 75% of the time and the other 25% I speak up when I want with what I want to say So there is no competition here. The story was misleading but are not about 90% of the stories that way in the media any more? |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 4 2007, 06:48 PM Post #26 |
|
Duke
|
3006, In any case I surely do appreciate you doing a search(s) finding and posting what you found. It did what I was in earnest trying to do for folks. My first search was "Back bears with mange" which I posted a lot of what I found. I just got back from searching "Rick Jacobs", some of what I find say that Rick Jacobs supplied the pic., some say pics., some say he claims to have taken a pic. of a bigfoot or sasquatch. One even said that the Game Commission was skeptical! Then further down they quoted what the spokesman truly, thus proving the writer of that article I found under my last search to be absolutely wrong in his portrayal of what was actually said. Your statement; "The story was misleading but are not about 90% of the stories that way in the media any more?" Has been proven to be creditable, we know the MSM and others play the bias game and misleading tactics, this topic does show that people do that, not just the MSM which are people too and don't seem to be able to truly do articles without biases that aren't always based on truth. I appreciate your humbleness about your find, so please accept this when I put it this way; 3006, Your find and post are "Blue Ribbon" and I personally thank you. Hey, at least you cared enough to know which site to go to as you have before and that means you had found that somehow before, good on you for that too, yes you did do some searching and no matter how short or long it took, it has recognizable value. I hope you will use that site on some other things for us in the future too. Also, thank you for your kind words to me, they mean something to me. Thanks, Duke This is an open thoughts, comments, to all, because of something said "competiton" and is not directed to any one person; I think many subjects on this and other places would be much better if there was a bit of competiton on who can find the best and most definative info. Just maybe it would be nice if a website did have some 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place blue ribbons to place by best contributers' names in some topics? The absolute best thing, is that people would search, because they care about some topics as far as getting real truthful info to their fellow members. Angry American/Beer Nut/Culture Warrior is one of the people that I have learned from in the way he very often gets some real good info to us. Everyone knows I am a wooordy person, but in the few topics that I engage in a fairly detailed way, I'm wordy some just in showing a thought process in hopes that what I've learned from CW and a few others; will show the thought and a bit of the search process for a few people that may not know those few simple things so far and just maybe to inspire others to do some searches also. ( I'm still learning and though I learn slowly I am enjoying it.) I'm wordy also, because of my lack of education, but I am trying, with very little progress it seems.  Thanks, Duke |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 4 2007, 07:57 PM Post #27 |
|
Duke
|
The three pics. shown in the link should prove to any rational person that it is in fact a black bear with the mange. Why folks would NOT take the word of Feaser is fairly evident, they wanted to go sasquatching and bigfoot'n it! See yeeeet again Feaser's knowledgeable statement; "However, the Pennsylvania Game Commission has a more conventional opinion. Agency spokesman Jerry Feaser said conservation officers routinely trap bears to be tagged and often see animals that look like the photos. "There is no question it is a bear with a severe case of mange," Feaser told The Bradford Era." I have questions on my early thoughts on there probably being more pics. that were taken that has been proven by a few webs sites, 3006 and I on here. Thankfully 3006's web link has all 3 pics. I ask anyone that knows military time to put the civilian time next to these pm/night times; 2 cubs w/the licking block completely uncovered, 20:04:23. Blk. Bear w/mange, w/R. Hind leg extended w/right heel lifted, licking block partly covered, 20:32:05 Same Blk. Bear w/mange, w/left paw extended and head on ground, licking block partially covered, 20:32:41 One more detail, does the last two digits in the military time represent seconds? I would do a search, but I know there are a couple maybe 3 in this topic that should be able to put those times in civie and in proper order of pic. taking seguence, I must have them out of order due to the obvious cover on and off the licking block. Without any details we've seen thus far about what particular model Bushnell trail cam or what setting/option Mr. "I've been hunting for years" Rick Jacobs or any website visited or the sorry excuses for so called news articles has revealed so far, that we know of, it is very hard to fully complete my questioning suspicions, but I sure can lay out time lines in comparisons. My suspicions only have the proof of the 3 pics. that were hunted up that clearly proved more than the 1 pic. offered by Assosiated Press/AP and some others. After reading this whole topic I sure hope no one can wonder why I am suspicious and want as much truth revealed as we can get? Thanks for the soon coming help from anyone that will, Duke Edited in Feaser's statement-Duke |
|
|
|
| Almtnman | Nov 4 2007, 09:19 PM Post #28 |
|
Administrator
|
Duke, if you look at the original news site about it, there is mention of pics, not one like was shown but several. There is no reference in the news article about the cubs in the first ones, so I would blame the media for distorting facts all of which they did not print. |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 4 2007, 11:54 PM Post #29 |
|
Duke
|
Almtnman, I used this to compose a reply, but I almost made a serious mistake in time lines. I have decided to send you a PM, instead of leaving my reply to you on here. Thanks for your input on this, Duke |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 5 2007, 03:43 AM Post #30 |
|
Duke
|
Well, this stupid mess is in France and I'm sure is in other countries and will be in even more. Yes, world we got many gullible people in this country too. Here's a video report by a CBS21 an affilliate in Pa. http://www.whptv.com/news/local/story.aspx...ef-a9c0125eeecf Click and then look for the video and watch as they misrepresent what Feaser actually said too. Look at the pic. next to the bear w/the out stretched left front paw, what in the world is that pic. next to it, they sure didn't make that clear to me, I'm thinking that is probably a pic. of what was not taken by Rick Jacobs, but somebody else's view of a bigfoot, watch it and see if they made that verbally clear, or if one is left to just know that already? Then watch what they pass off as getting people on the street's opinion. They even, claim to have done an investigation, baaalogna or I should say baloney maybe. If that is what they have to offer people in their area of TV coverage then those folks need to crawl them about that sorry mess, they probably have done even worse to the folks that have some trust in them!!! What is going on in this country is just plain, em-bear- essing, yes, pun intended, , sorry I didn't look for a laughing bear or bigfoot to post instead of the cat.Duke 
|
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 5 2007, 04:43 AM Post #31 |
|
Duke
|
I will look at the real believers in Bigfoot; http://www.bfro.net/ I encourage anyone that is interested to visit that link to the "Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization". Look it over and be sure to click the word link at the bot. of the mangy bear pic. It will lead you to their other page; http://www.bfro.net/avevid/jacobs/jacobs_photos.asp At the top it HAS ALL THREE of the known bear pics. side by side and in proper time seguence. Those pics. are better than the ones any of us have found so far, they can be enlarged by clicking on them too. I now no longer need anyone to answer my time line questions, but still wonder how the lick block lid was off then partially back on in the sequence, yes, it is possible the bears did it, so I'll let that lay, they do mention the lid/cover to the lick block carrier, but call it a plate. Maybe Rick Jacobs that has hunted for yrs. may get a pat on the back and apology from me yet if he deserves it, at least he did make those pics. available and the copyrighted pics. are advertised on that site. I still haven't found out if he went to The bigfooters or the Pa. Game commission first though, that does make a diffrence to me? I'll do another post below so I don't wear even the interested folks out, Duke Edited in; I clicked on the wrong post to put a link in, I am tired from deliberate lack of sleep, reading, going from web site to website, and back to them getting info to post-sorry. |
|
|
|
| Duke | Nov 5 2007, 05:46 AM Post #32 |
|
Duke
|
My last link I posted just above, I post again; http://www.bfro.net/avevid/jacobs/jacobs_photos.asp In further looking at what they offer in their green section titled: " Debunking the Pennsylvania Game Commission" They do a pretty good job of showing that the PGA has denied sightings of mountain lions. They also in a way shoot themselves in the foot, I'll try to explain my thoughts; Further down in the green backgrounded section they have a word link,"offered a photo of a skinny mangy". This is where the word link leads to; http://www.bradfordera.com/articles/2007/1...1b265436842.txt This is the article in full and I will highlight in red and blue where I think they and others made mistakes in not taking Feaser's statement(s), this article gives some fairly good detail, but not enough for the skeptics and true believers in bigfoot; What is it? By MARCIE SCHELLHAMMER Era Reporter Top photo provided by R. Jacobs and lower photo provided by the PA Game Commission It’s a fisher, a bear with mange, a bear that just took a swim, a dog bear; these are some of the suggestions that flooded into The Era on Friday to define what sort of creature was caught in a photo by a stationary tree camera in the Allegheny National Forest. The Pennsylvania Game Commission also contacted The Era about the photos taken by Elk County man Rick Jacobs’ camera, which had been mounted in September to try to record photos of deer. “I shared the photos with the bear biologist,” said Jerry Feaser of the Game Commission. “There is no question it is a bear with a severe case of mange.” He explained the wildlife conservation officers routinely trap and mark bears, and see the condition often. “When people see something that doesn’t appear normal, they are confused about what they see and mistake it for something else,” Feaser said. He even went so far as to chastise The Era for reporting the story of a questionable photo which some said may be a juvenile Bigfoot. “Somebody may mistakenly identify something and the news media helps spread the rumor causing more concern and panic than necessary,” he said. Feaser explained mange is caused by mites that live in hair follicles or burrow into the skin. If the bear’s immune system is weakened, “these mites can proliferate and mange develops.” It may appear as dry, scaly skin around the eyes, or swollen, hairless, thickened skin, he said. Referring to the first of three photos that are posted together on the Web site for the Bigfoot Research Organization, which contains bear cubs, Feaser said, “It is pretty clear to us this is probably a group of bears, an adult with young.” The third of the group of photos shows the creature with its head towards the ground. “It could be contorted,” Feaser said. “One of the things bears do is they will rub their heads on the ground just like dogs do.” He added that mange is not considered “prolific to the point of concern” at this point, but the Game Commission is studying it. Meanwhile, Matt Moneymaker, head of the Bigfoot Research Organization, said he agrees with Feaser on one point. “Of course we want to know if it’s a bear with mange,” he said. If it’s proven to be such, “OK, then, mystery solved. We were wrong.” So, the organization is setting out to replicate Jacobs’ photos. “The debate now is whether it’s a mangy bear or a primate. There are decent arguments on both sides. “If it’s a known animal, we should be able to replicate it,” he said. In doing so, members of the organization are seeking to obtain photos of bears with mange posed the same as the creature in the photos. “The tale is going to be told in the photos,” he said. “We will have some comparison photos of skinny, mangy bears from behind and chimps and apes from behind. “I think it’s going to be striking how different they are,” Moneymaker said, referring to pictures of bears. Referring to the “Jacobs creature,” he said, “that thing does not have a tail. It doesn’t have any ears. If it was a bear with mange, you’d see that tail a lot more.” From all the comments received via e-mail, the calls to The Era and the talk in the public, it seems that just one thing is certain — whatever it is in the photos, it has made people curious. -End of my quote-Duke I'm tired and going to bed. Thanks, Duke |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · The Front Porch · Next Topic » |