Atlantis Online
July 23, 2019, 01:51:01 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Site provides evidence for ancient comet explosion
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/173177.html
 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register  

Bigfoot, or a bear?

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Bigfoot, or a bear?  (Read 144 times)
Jennifer O'Dell
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4546



« on: October 29, 2007, 09:25:38 pm »

Hunter’s pics revive lively Bigfoot debate
Some say creature a young Sasquatch, others call it a mangy be

Updated: 19 minutes ago
RIDGWAY, Pa. - It is 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 is 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 said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21518056/

Report Spam   Logged

Jennifer O'Dell
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4546



« Reply #1 on: October 29, 2007, 09:27:00 pm »



Bigfoot – not just a myth?
Oct. 29: A “baby Sasquatch” was found in Western Pennsylvania on Sept. 16. Could Bigfoot be alive? Bob Kiviat, producer of “World’s Greatest Hoaxes Exposed,” discusses
Report Spam   Logged
Jennifer O'Dell
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4546



« Reply #2 on: October 29, 2007, 09:29:25 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Jennifer O'Dell
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4546



« Reply #3 on: October 29, 2007, 09:31:47 pm »

Pa. hunter's images stir Bigfoot debate Sun Oct 28, 3:16 PM ET
 


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.


 
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.
Report Spam   Logged
Jennifer O'Dell
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4546



« Reply #4 on: October 29, 2007, 09:33:00 pm »



** THE ASSOCIATED PRESS CANNOT AUTHENTICATE THE CONTENT OF THESE IMAGES ** This image provided Monday, Oct. 29, 2007 by hunter Rick Jacobs shows an image taken by a camera with an automatic trigger set up in Pennsylvania's Allegheny National Forest on Sept. 16, 2007. 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. (AP Photo/Rick Jacobs)
Report Spam   Logged
Jennifer O'Dell
Superhero Member
******
Posts: 4546



« Reply #5 on: October 29, 2007, 09:33:52 pm »

Don't look like no bear to me, hut you decide...
Report Spam   Logged
Jake
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 239



« Reply #6 on: March 03, 2008, 08:43:36 am »

Most "hunters" have yet to learn how to read the tracks/sign of an animal other than what is blatantly in their face.

This is exactly what is happening in this case. If not, why does one need the camera to tell them what happened there during the night, when one can simply read the story that the ground and surrounding vegetation are offering.

One look at the tracks would tell you, conclusively, if this animal was a bear or not. (Here is a hint, a bears "big toe" is on the outside of its foot. This is not the case with hominids. Wink)

This "hunters" prey seems more likely to hold a microphone or camera, and write articles, far more often, than it lurks in the woods.  Grin

Jake
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum | Buy traffic for your forum/website
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy