New Bigfoot Photo out of Louisiana

that bigfoot can be found it Party City. That picture looks fake. There's something about it that's weird but i cant put my finger on it..

He was just spotted spying on the president!


Ok I tried.

[edit on 3-4-2008 by schism85]

Not real at all. Looks like a picture taken from the original film with the bigfoot that looks just like this but flipped around and put in a random picture of the woods.

reply to post by schism85


Nah, I think that was just Hillary Clinton, in need of a back-waxing! She stopped by to take one last look at the seat she WON'T be sitting in

Too funny schism85.

Well what ever it is it should be re-classified as A Big Feet photo. Big Foot photos aren't that clear. ...I think



dlb

www.rense.com (color adjusted) Hey I like bigfoot just as much as anybody but....how can you look at a photo of bf and ignore his/her surroundings? I am a woodsman, i live in the mountains of East Tennessee and i tend to notice things that are not natural parts of the local enviroment. Bigfoot is "always" in a crowd of entities just like the ones pictured here and they tend to move with and at the same speed as Bigfoot. Makes me want to consider the possibility that there is more going on here than an unknown homonid wandering the planet. I think everyone understands the consequences of a very limited gene pool? How many bigfoot do you need to have a viable species?

hahahaha... no sir. That is not it. I've heard stories of bigfoot, sasquatch, and such around Louisiana around Toledo Bend. Glowing red eyes, police dogs ripped from chains, and livestock maulings. But never a shred of evidence. Just missing german shepherds and snapped chain links. The cycle continues I guess.

Wow you guys are joking right? That looks so fake it would never be believable (to me at least).

It reminds me of one of those "lawn silhouettes",.....I've never considered placing such an item in my lawn, but this...this changes everything!

Looks like a pre-computer/pre-Photoshop/National Enquirer literal cut and paste - as in cut with scissors and paste with glue.

The contrast just kills me.

I sent rense an email when I seen the photo that it was a fake and pointed out it's weakness. Now today on rense a guy re-writes the story with a FAKE at the top and does some analysis to back up his determination it is a possible fake with the damn thing being a dimensional creature since no shadow is produced on the water.

What is it with these guys. Are they playing with the reader and practicing there analytical drama with questionable writing skills to further bamboozle us.

It says "FAKE" in big red letters right over it.
So .. I don't get it ... why's this here?

reply to post by FlyersFan


Read post above.

Look they are everywhere!!!!

Originally posted by FlyersFan
It says "FAKE" in big red letters right over it.
So .. I don't get it ... why's this here?

It didn't say that originally when it first ran...They posted the "Fake" commentary after everybody shredded it to pieces. lol!

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective

Originally posted by FlyersFan
It says "FAKE" in big red letters right over it.
So .. I don't get it ... why's this here?

It didn't say that originally when it first ran...They posted the "Fake" commentary after everybody shredded it to pieces. lol!

Old jeff must be scrapping the bottom of the toilet to paste a job like that on his site. When I seen the picture, I laughed and thought it was a slow news day for the webmaster. Than someone called ted twittymeyer comes back with even more nonsense about a dimensional creature. As if that makes anymore sense than the lame story it followed.

u can tell that it is fake. just look at it it was photoshoped to to there and the bigfoot is too black

It didn't even need any thinking about. The highlights on its fur exactly match the Patterson film (only flipped, obviously) did they really think that we'd fall for this?

*smacks Rense upside the head*

Maybe it's a Bigfooted Vampire, since it casts no shadow or reflection whatsoever??

Tuning in a little late on this subject..

But, what I can't get my head around... why anyone would dedicate a page, time and research into trying to debunk a rather obvious photoshopped picture.

Honestly, knowing anything about and/or seen the Patterson-Gimlin film, you would instantly know that the Bigfoot in the picture is from that film. And seriously, the photoshopping (if you wanna call it that) is probably the worst of any faked photo on any subject I've seen to date.