Gray Bigfoot?

What do people think of this video and pictures
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=P-_H8nbCUYg&NR=1

looks squatchy

So if I understand his right...

They catch 4-5 pictures of the creature at a distance and a whole bunch of video close and far.
They hand over video to the authorities...original master video before making copies.
Original video vanishes.
They create a reinactment video (which includes closeups of the creature) and documentary on how the pictures show an 8' tall creature.

Ok call me skeptical but I am not seeing it.
Show me a paper trail for giving up the original, sworn testimony of the individual who received the footage, etc.
The great lengths to show the pictures to be real i can see, but a reinactment? Serves nothing to prove anything except maybe that they posess a suit.
Nothing here to add to the pile of potential evidence.

I'm not sure of the paper trail, but I think it was accepted as fact that these guys were putting this out there in lieu of a documentary release, as pre-pub? I'm not clear on the background info on this, but it seems it was widely accepted by proponents and skeptics alike, that this was a creation, a fraudulent story at least regarding the seizure of the film itself.

I'd like to be way off, so if there is new info related to this I'd like to know.

Instead of watching the video, please read the description below the video and read the text in the video itself.

Then read this carefully: Temagami Bigfoot

I'll leave it that for now.

SasquaiNation wrote:Instead of watching the video, please read the description below the video and read the text in the video itself.

Then read this carefully: Temagami Bigfoot

I'll leave it that for now.

The video posted by OP, is from 2 or 3 years ago. This is a totally different witness, and testimonial, right?


My initial impression of the Ben Matine evidence was that it was legit, because of the difficulties involved with hoaxing, but I dunno those eyes don't really look right, almost animatronic.

NobleSavage wrote:

SasquaiNation wrote:Instead of watching the video, please read the description below the video and read the text in the video itself.

Then read this carefully: Temagami Bigfoot

I'll leave it that for now.

The video posted by OP, is from 2 or 3 years ago. This is a totally different witness, and testimonial, right?


My initial impression of the Ben Matine evidence was that it was legit, because of the difficulties involved with hoaxing, but I dunno those eyes don't really look right, almost animatronic.

The Matine video and the Temagami photos were shot in and around the same location.
Both stories mention helicopters, friends, and cabins. The years are about the same timeline.
The body of the story is the same, only the names have changed.
Also, I cannot seem to find any trace of this Jeane Heibert. I also never remember anything in the news about Ben Matine during that time.
My guess- same people rehashing a hoax for reasons unknown.
That's my personal feeling on it. I certainly could be wrong though.

+1

I'm jumping on board with that premise Sasquai, too many similarities.

I'm going to bet on hoax with this one. Robert Lindsey's article the other day about 'if it's made by a film maker, it's probably a hoax' applies to this one. Not that I would categorically eliminate all film makers, but I think this one falls into that category.

callmeIshmael wrote:Robert Lindsey's article the other day about 'if it's made by a film maker, it's probably a hoax' applies to this one.

I think Lindsey was very wrong with regard to that generalisation. It would be a terrible irony if a film maker or FX artist caught a genuine bigfoot on camera and the BF community dismissed it out of hand as a hoax.

Yes, we should be more cautious when it comes to claims/evidence presented by film makers, but you can't just assume that you are dealing with a fake. You have to look at the evidence and judge it on its own merit.

In this case everything seems to point towards it being a hoax.

I agree you can't categorically reject filmmakers (some have the means and skills to possibly get the best footage ever) but whenever it is made by a filmmaker you have take it with a grain of salt. It's just one more thing to consider. Sasqui nailed it on this one, as usual.