Documentary: Discovering Bigfoot (2017)

Naughty_Felid

No longer interesting
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
6,171
Likes
6,811
Points
294
#2
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt7058016/


Good doco that does point to some evidence of the manbeast living in North America. I do think however that Todd Standing faked the head shots to help pursue his personal crusade to protect the species.

The first two headshots are masklike and unblinking. The last blinking is considered to be achievable by easy to access CGI.

This is a good debunk from one of the Weta SFX guys:

https://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://media.texasbigfoot.com/SylvanicVideoExamination_Poling&Falconer_Aug2014.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjNx_rT5YrYAhWIx7wKHZWnDvIQFjAAegQICRAB&usg=AOvVaw1AwYwVE3lT__fW4GgAxKWA


Ive always felt that Bigfoot was plausible purely beacuse Gigantopithecus existed. I'm skeptical though and wonder how a Manbeast creature that can grow up to 10 feet tall, which is pretty active would acquire its 15000+ caloŕies a day to survive. Also they seem to move around in small groups so if you times that by 3 thats a lot of calories.

Would something so huge is often described as being agile would an upright skeleton be able to support this ability?

Anyhow the doco is worth a look. I do think that Standing, like many paranormal investigators , has falsified some of his evidence to further his cause. I know he's had a fall out with many people in the bigfoot community.
 

dr wu

Doctor Prog
Joined
Mar 12, 2002
Messages
1,974
Likes
1,320
Points
184
Location
Indiana
#3
What evidence is specifically cited in the doc...?
It seems that no reputable scientist etc thinks it's possible such an animal could exist for various reasons.
 

Naughty_Felid

No longer interesting
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
6,171
Likes
6,811
Points
294
#4
Well thats not sk.
What evidence is specifically cited in the doc...?
It seems that no reputable scientist etc thinks it's possible such an animal could exist for various reasons.
Well thats not strictly true it's only Western scientists that are hostile towards Bigfoot research. Jeff Meldrum and Todd Disotell are execptions. Ketchum was treated pretty poorly by the scientific community no matter what you think of her research.

I like Sykes he at least remains openminded.

Both Russian and Chinese scientists are more open to research the subject also. Although if you read Western skeptic blogs those guys are always described as "scientists" as you obviously cant take foreign scientists seriously.

Back to the doco. Broken trees snapped off high up which would require a fair amount of strength. Also logs formed into teepee like structures dotted around the wilderness was what i found interesting.
 
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
48,854
Likes
20,931
Points
284
Location
Eblana
#7
Ive always felt that Bigfoot was plausible purely beacuse Gigantopithecus existed. I'm skeptical though and wonder how a Manbeast creature that can grow up to 10 feet tall, which is pretty active would acquire its 15000+ caloŕies a day to survive. Also they seem to move around in small groups so if you times that by 3 thats a lot of calories.

They eat cryptozoologists and Bigfoot hunters. Lots of that variety of prey around.
 

Human_84

Somewhat human
Joined
Mar 30, 2005
Messages
1,300
Likes
89
Points
64
#9
Anyhow the doco is worth a look. I do think that Standing, like many paranormal investigators , has falsified some of his evidence to further his cause. I know he's had a fall out with many people in the bigfoot community.
Precisely, and when his fakery gets spotlighted he'll predictably fall back to the apologetic "I had to do it" stance. His body language, the way he speaks, it just screams liar to me. The self promotion, the click bait, and the endless promises that he has no intention of keeping... those are the worst part of it all.
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,468
Likes
4,228
Points
234
#11
I've watched it twice now (I'm in the process of writing something about where BHM research actually stands at the moment amongst all the gloom and flummery, whether there's really more that we're not being told, etc.) Agree with much of the above. I think Standing is much like Harry Price, basically: absolutely, fervently believes, probably has seen / experienced something, is determined to make others believe so "helps it along a bit". In the documentary Meldrum's interactions with Standing are the most telling: he's not buying a lot of it. Bindernagel is a bit more amenable but there's still a distinct air of benign scepticism. I'll give my full critique when the piece surfaces.
 
Top