Larry Surface follows up with more info about the Bigfoot footage he caught on IR
 |
| Larry Surface have requested websites like GhostTheory.com and ours to remove all of his videos/photos. |
Ever since Larry Surface posted that night-vision footage of a 'sasquatch' yesterday, some in the Bigfoot community have been in a frenzy. Skeptics are saying it's too blurry to be able to tell exactly what we're looking at. They say could be anything from a
According to Larry's latest post, the footage was caught in southern Ohio around the residence of a senior citizen couple:
The location is in southern Ohio around the residence of a senior citizen couple. The area is surrounded by pieces of the Wayne National Forest, and exact location can not be revealed. I have access to put up cameras and audio recorders every night, it is not far from where I live. The surrounding properties are private and no so called "expeditions" would be allowed.
Here's the full follow-up post by Larry Surface:
To give a more complete picture of how the video was made, I'll try to answer some questions. More than a year ago I purchased the best night vision scope that I could afford, a gen2 "night spirit" which cost me more than a months pension check. The resolution of the scope is not HD, but I have to go with what I've got. The jvc camera attached has better resolution but that will not improve what the scope sees.Update: Breaking: Dr. Melba Ketchum requesting Larry Surface to remove IR footage of Bigfoot from his website and others
Since then suitable nights for recording are few and far between. There is only about 7 nights of good moonlight each month, and those nights are most often obscured by clouds. Infra-red lighting can not be used because I have found that the Wild People can see it, that includes the detection beams on trail cameras. There was close and frequent activity at the research location 2 years ago which imediately stopped when I put up game cameras. It took over a year before they began coming in close again.
The location is in southern Ohio around the residence of a senior citizen couple. The area is surrounded by pieces of the Wayne National Forest, and exact location can not be revealed. I have access to put up cameras and audio recorders every night, it is not far from where I live. The surrounding properties are private and no so called "expeditions"
would be allowed.
The scope/camera is put in various hopeful locations and left recording overnight, the IR function is never used. I'm happy to get all the positive comments, the critics are discarded, if they can't see whats in front of their face that is their problem, not mine. Many are surprised that it looks so "Human". The reason for that is that they are a "Human". That's what many of us have been trying to get across for a long time.
The subject of the video obviously has been checking that spot before, since he went directly to it then turned around. So now I probably know a much better spot to place the camera. Have probably missed them a lot by having it in the wrong places.
I will try to answer more questions later, right now I still have hours of video and audio recordings to review, and I'm about 2 days behind.
[via bigfoot-evidence.blogspot.com]
Related:
Larry is pretty careful with his follow up analysis...
ReplyDeletenot much show-boating from the guy historically....
Thanks Larry!
I've watched the video at least 20 times,and each time it looks more and more like a human,not Bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteIn the above comparison Larry's head looks to be the same size or bigger than the unknown on the left.
The subject on the left appears to have a large nose and large ear.The hi def version would need to be seen.Uploading the hi def version shouldn't take terribly long with a 31 second video.
It's just a person, an old man at that...head and neck are wrong for a bigfoot...are you people smokin something? you must be to even consider this crappy video of an old man to be a bigfoot. lol..its funny
ReplyDeleteThanks
Tom
The crypto hunters
I know it looks human, but y'all have to remember what nightvision does to hair. I'm a red head and in nightvision, my hair is pure white.
ReplyDeleteWhat makes this tough.. there is no real-time witness (remote set-up) and at a loction housing people, albeit elderly and much smaller.
ReplyDeleteSo, again this is an example of the wall that exists wrt to amateur contributions to the "field" where no professional exisits!
Right now it's an interesting video and unless there is better resolution ..it will reamin something very important to simply inform Larry of his next attempt..and of course that will be with fixed focus much closer...
Then he will know, because Sasquatches are creatures of habit... this will happen again I am sure! The hw will know, either the couple needs sleep therapy or we have that great amateur video we are waiting for!
I get what you're saying Autumn but it's not the colour of the hair I have a problem with,it's the lack of hair.
ReplyDeleteIf Night vision can make hair appear invisible then I'd like to see a comparison of a subject under normal lighting conditions,then the same subject under night vision conditions.
I'm not turning skeptic as I believe Bigfoot exists.I need to remain unbiased when I view any video of a supposed Sasquatch.
Autumn thanks for that post!
ReplyDeleteI also felt perhaps hair rather than hairless modern human b/c of overall fuzz (of course lack of focus can do that...) but also as you point out red and some other colors in NV look whitish...
the stoop unfortunately matches an elderly as well...
the comments on neck and general build I don't agree with..as I feel the range of body types is prehaps equivalent to our own...would hate to base all perception of modern humans on one Shaq video...
Statistially the average height of sighting is about 7' and the weight around 300 I beleive..based on a review on the sightings database...(I can't recall just off hand who did that a few years back...)
we;ll see!
But, I do want to point out..if you have a fixed idea of just what Sasquatches look like, consider the source of your perception, where di you get it? It's not like we have a lot to go on here in terms of good resolution phtographs!
So, let's endulge larry..he wants to know the truth I am sure...because of our history on BF sounds discussions...
he is not like so many eager for meida interviews....he might be mistaken, but my guess is he put this up b/c he feels confident and has access to the original res..
So larry....take care of that..expect another by next week :)
on the hair of sasquatches...again look to our own variabilty, not just genetically, but also with gender and age....
ReplyDeleteAlso, Sasquatch hair is lke ours, so very fine (not coarse fur) and per many witnesses just about 2" over most parts....
so, we'll see.
I do notice how quickly Tom of Cryptohunters puts this down...
and so again we see the uglyt side of BF reesearch..my guess? Tome knows Larry and there is more the comment thatn the data..
My BIGGEST complaint with amateur BFers...relationships/image of the "egos" seems to take precedence over data....
they will ignore good data if from a rival (or diss) and build up less worthy data if from thier "friendlies"
it will never get anywhere this way
I see this conference this weekend Ketchum is to speak.. sent Shawun link...you can google as "Primal People conference Ketchum and Randles" or such...
gee I wasn't even invited!
did you get that? Primal People..
LOL so....perhaps she can deliver and the continued amateur hunting of the "beasts/Monsters" shall come to an end?
we can hope!
What bothers me about the video is the same thing that every video since P/G. They always have an exuse for it being blurry. Even if you have thousands of $ worth of good equipment "oh well he walked to close to the camera" Well after the 500th time the reason for sharpness is getting old "where's the beef" Plus at least put up the HD version my God 31 seconds wouldn't take that long..
ReplyDeleteLOl, I think everyone agrees! Perhaps reflected in our impatience with the long promised DNA study that seems to have gotten mired in commercial interest raher than Bigfoots!
ReplyDeleteI know Shawn has included Mk Davis's work on this blog, but if you haven't been to his site here is a link, selected from his entries on human variability. http://thedavisreport.wordpress.com/page/3/
ReplyDeleteI think his work is the best, hands down, to date on the PG footage and his (14 yr per website) analysis is being made accessible to us all.
He is using a first generation copy provided my Patterson's wife Patricia.
A very interesting, and top drawer blog...I think pushing the limit of what "amateur BF researchers" can contribute to the field (and amateur here does not apply to his videos skills).
I love the discussions on this blog--damn, Shawn, this is an awesome site. I went on a Bigfoot hunt a while back and we used our IR cameras and when I got someone accidentally up close on the camera, someone crossing my path, they did look rather nondescript as far as seeing any hair, just a shape and they were very white up close to the camera lens. My first thought when I saw it was an old man, but I also know how I cannot recognize anyone up close on nightvision because it distorts so badly. People send me ghost pictures all the time (rolling my eyes) and one thing that I have to tell them is that, unless I was there to evaluate the conditions, situation, camera angle, and all, I'm just looking at "stuff" that cannot be ever absolutely confirmed. So, no matter how much an amateur wants to help the field, they muck it up more without serious controls. Someone should be videotaping the set up of the camera, surrounding area, height, temperature, occupants, residents, whatever--we need to know the entire context or it doesn't help the field, it just causes more derision.
ReplyDeleteVery good points Autumn!!Not enough is documented or controlled.Detailed notes should be taken and recorded,preferably with witnesses.
ReplyDeleteAs a result,speculation occurs because of unknown variables.
This really is a learning curve for me and I've gained so much insight from many of the posters here.
When I go out now,I have a good idea of what to keep track of.
^^^^What Autumnforest said.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe in bigfoot and after watching the antics of Melba Ketchum, Erickson and that disgusting Robert Lindsay guy, I'm even less inclined to believe.
Larry's indignation at being critiqued doesn't sit well with me. I was also disappointed by the footage and surprised by the number of people willing to jump on the "OMG! IT'S A F-ING BIGFOOT!" bandwagon.
Maybe it's desperate people wanting something to cling to after being so thoroughly disappointed by Erickson and Ketchum. I can understand that. Hell, I don't even BELIEVE in bigfoot and I was disappointed to see what I'd predicted come true. I still keep hoping it's all real and someone will prove it to me.
Nope. Not happening. :(
I just give up. It is not a squatch people. (Slaps forehead with hand)
ReplyDeleteIt's a naked old man running around making those who fall for this video look like fools.... And succeeding rather nicely, I might add.
ReplyDeleteI would like to see what a reconstruction of a Human face would look like, doing the same thing. It looks like it has got very small ears at 0.11 on the video, but it then looks like a bald guy at the same time. Its hard to tell.
ReplyDeleteIt also has a very human face but looks kind of hairy also at the same time at end of the video.
The gentleman who got the video said it was filmed at the residence of a senior citizen couple. It could be possible one of them stepped out late to feed the cat in the background. A longshot could also be a feral Human.
I read the article on the earlier post about this clip. The guy didn't say that it's probably a rat. He said that the skin on the creature in this video looks the skin of a hairless rat (in other words not like a hairy bigfoot), and it has a snout and ear. I cracked up at the Cornflake S. Pecially comment. The still picture taken from the clip shown in the earlier post does look like Corny from the Mr. Rogers Neighborhood program.
ReplyDeleteWhat's surprising is that anyone is naive enough to believe that what is shown in this clip is any way, shape, or form a bigfoot or that the person who took this footage believes that this is, or is is trying to pass this off as, a sasquatch.
ReplyDeletehey GUYS NEWS of a sort anyway
ReplyDeleteand I still can't find my glasses
but looks like Ketchum, et al are staking a claim on Taxonomic Designation:
Sasquatch: Homo spaiens hirsutii!
No public comment but the name pulled from a confernce webpage I stumbled on this morning... So, FINALLY we are moving closer to putting wevryone on notice:
they are us in our wild state!
here is conference link
http://www.ghostsofrubyridge.com/pacific-northwest-conference-on-primal-people/
I think the whole point of the raging controversy in the BF community is because many do believe Bigfoots are simply a "race" of feral humans...and not "apes."
ReplyDeletewe'll see!
Thanks for the link apehuman but I had to laugh.It's bad enough that Bigfoot is a mystery:
ReplyDeleteI quote;
"And…
Saturday night’s Banquet Keynote Speaker…. It’s arranged, but it’s a MYSTERY!!!! You will have to BE there to be aware!!!"
Really now,is this necessary?
The man-behind-the-curtain routine is very old and tiresome.
darn it Citizentruth, I am speechless! good catch!
ReplyDelete@citizentruth Keynote speaker: Bigfoot himself. Be sure to bring your Samurai Chatter phonetics key.
ReplyDeleteWhy is the Picture of larry surface's head on the Right, so much clearer than the so called bigfoot face pic?
ReplyDeleteIs there something moving behind the bush in the video.
ReplyDeleteanon - good question
ReplyDeleteI imagine he is also playing with his fixed focus..
So, he should try it also with the focus he had set for the BF...both versions useful- one future set-up, one past analysis
he may have
however, if this IS the same fixed focus and "light" conditions (important) then it would push me closer to thinking the general "fuzz" of the purported BF is actually hair..and the many hundreds of small, fine hairs reflecting light to further "de-focus"..as compared with "Larry's head.
I don't know why I put those terms in quotes except:
ReplyDeletefor me light means more than just the amount... but also the direction, time and position of moon, the aperture or sensitivity setting on his NV lens as well as the recording system, and so forth..
so I guess with quotes I am trying to indicate the term is pregnant with other meanings..but they are really irritating and I will work on stopping that!
What do you mean so thoroughly disappointed by Ketchum and Erickson. They haven't even released their finding yet. It's great that in your mind you can call it over already, but you're clearly a dumbass who has already made up his mind.
ReplyDelete