Have you seen this Big Foot picture?

I have not, and am no photo expert, but it does look like its standing in the water, or has it been manipulated?
Or just some freak in a sodden monkey suit?

Looks like a really small doll placed beside a puddle or river bank and the shot was taken aback of the doll to make it look big

Just my 0.02

Could be, and i can see that.
Is that grass/storks next to it?
Or the algae in the water, as size comparision?



[edit on 23-9-2006 by Denied]

Yeah I've seen it and as said by Faint it does look like it's very small as you can see blades of grass and pine needles which are about half his height.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by Xeros]

Okay......
i think your right, looks kinda freaky though, with no neck?

It's the second photo Here

A famous hoax created with the help of a small model in the photographer's back yard.

Originally posted by Denied
Or just some freak in a sodden monkey suit?

Most likely.

I've seen this before, and I have never considered it real in any way.

Definitely a fake. This one has been floating around for a while.

If I'm not mistaken, this hoax been credited to Cliff Crook(s) for years.

Matt @ Post Pro

wow.. if that's real then I'd expect right after I took that picture to haul ass because bigfoot is about to eat me for dinner.

[edit on 23-9-2006 by Revelmonk]

Guys, read Xerox' posts, he put a link and added the external source which says '' A hoax created by ...in his backyard'' ------ Read the other posts before posting one yourself!

-Jimmy-

It's unfortunate because from all I've read in the past, this guy was a well respected outdoorsman. He defended himself and his pictures for quite awhile.

I thought this was a Paul Freeman photo supposedly taken in the Blue Mtns.

Sasquatch have consistenly been reported with little or no neck. However, this shot definitely does look fake.

This was discussed here quite a while ago.



www.abovetopsecret.com...


Debunked. IMO

Can't be sure those are grass blades....they could be reeds. If they are reeds then that would make the creature huge. Can't be sure one way or the other.

I'll say this much though, if those ARE grass blades beside the thing, then that is a VERY small model, and that is some very fine detail in the facial features for any prop that small. It is extrememly difficult to get that much detail in something very small. The guy that made the "model" would need to be almost a Michelangelo!

I have seen the photo and it is one of my favourites of the creature to date. I looked over the photograph several times on the net; examining whether or not it had been photoshopped. I don't see any signs of photoshopping in the photo.

However, I certainly wouldn't stand there and get a photo of the creature knowing that it was looking back at me.

Either the person was foolhardy, or had had experiences relating to the creature in question.

On this occassion, I don't believe this photo is hoaxed.

People, please read the other messages posted prior to posting. It has clearly been shown to be a small model taken in some guy's back yard.

i really dont get y people go to so much trouble to fake something, its sad ,lame and means they have nothing better to do with there lives

[edit on 31/10/2006 by spookymulder]

It looks kinda like a doll or some kinda toy. if you look the grass looks bigger, like its out of proportion. Also there's a stick in the background either its in the water or just a reflection, its way to big compared to "bigfoot."

Maybe...

Maybe bigfoot is 6 inches tall, and that is why the picture looks the way it does?

Maybe this is what the baby bigfoot looks like? Kinda like the baby alligator looks like an adult, just smaller?



I couldn't resist.

I think it looks fake because it is looking straight at the camera and a wild animal would probably ran away by the time the camera poked out. i could be wrong though.