Larry Surface responds to critics with enhance photo comparison of the 'Bigfoot' and himself (Updated)
 |
| Larry Surface have requested websites like GhostTheory.com and ours to remove all of his videos/photos. |
Since the release and removal of the night-vision 'Bigfoot' footage Larry Surface posted on his website last Friday, he has received a lot of flack from critics claiming it was probably just a shirtless old man. One criticism came from the president of the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization, Matt Moneymaker suggesting that the hairy figure in the video was probably Larry himself.
On GhostTheory.com, Moneymaker commented, "Take a look at the guy’s photo on Facebook … take a good long look, then look at the video again. Here’s the Facebook page: www.facebook.com Larry might have a hairy back too. I’m wondering what ElHombre will have to say about this."
Larry wrote this on his blog regarding critics and the enhanced photo comparison he posted:
It's getting pretty tiresome reading and throwing out the ignorant remarks about this subject being me or some other old man. Even one so called "expert" made that remark. I've seen lots of old men, I'm one, and that's not a modern Human old man. That's me in the comparison photo above. The height is not relative, the top of my head only comes up to the shoulder level of the subject. I'm 6'0". I'm not sure what causes these critics to deny the obvious. Some do not want Sasquatch to exist, some because it doesn't look like what they want it to, and some just because of lack of knowledge of the subject and poor observational skills I guess.
Larry also posted a close-up version of the 'Bigfoot':
|
| Larry Surface have requested websites like GhostTheory.com and ours to remove all of his videos/photos. |
I took one of the best frames from the video and enhanced it some. I find it very interesting. I think anthropologists could learn from this profile if they would take it seriously. I will continue to test and analyze the video to get as much nformation
as possible from it, and try to make a better file available. And of course continue to try to get more and better.
Thanks again for all the positive comments I'm receiving, it makes it easier to bear the insults and name calling that are coming in.
- Larry Surface
An update from Larry posted Tuesday, November 15:
Finished
The critics have beaten me down. I guess they can celebrate now. But one of my lifetime goals has been achieved, I have gathered enough evidence to prove to myself that the "Wild Man"exists. That is in the form of track casts, audio files, dna, and a video sighting. My mistake was in trying to share it with everyone. Although the comments were 90% enthusiastically supportive, that changed when I pulled the video for reasons which will have to remain unspecified. After that, the pack used it as amunition to support their claims of fakery.
To one who has spent his life truthfully, and now in weak health, it is just too much to put up with. Life is too short.
The video will come out again when the time is right. I won't post anything else here. I may post on facebook where I can block out
the ignorant.
Thanks again to all the supporters.
Larry.
Related:
- Dr. Melba Ketchum requesting Larry Surface to remove night-vision footage of Bigfoot from his website and others (Updated)
- Matt Moneymaker chimes in on Larry Surface's Bigfoot footage
- Larry Surface follows up with more info about the Bigfoot footage he caught on IR
- First 'good' video of Sasquatch to come in a long time captured by a guy named Larry Surface posted today
I like it. The enhanced photo looks a lot like some witness descriptions.
ReplyDeleteTo me there is no way this is misidentification!
ReplyDeleteThere is way to much difference in the structure of the head. Look how far back the ears are set. If Larry is being truthful, this is definately not human! (Not saying bigfoot, but definately not human or animal that I know of)
Oddly enough, this pic looks more ape than homo?
Paul
After looking more closely, I take back the ape comment. It does look more primative homo-something.
ReplyDeletePaul
Out of curiosity, I looked at some nightvision shots I got during a Halloween event outdoors. My friend and I had to keep retaking the pics of me because too close to the camera and I had no definition at all-just a blur and no individual hairs or anything--just a smooth fuzzy shape. When we finally took one from the right distance, I looked white, but you could see my eyes and hair. So, lesson here--crappy up close shot of someone, better more distant shot of someone. Comparing them is apples and oranges.
ReplyDeleteAgreed Autumn. There's definition differences in the comparisons photos here. Like the previous poster said the shape of the head, placement of the ears and the mouth region is all different. It looks to be pretty genuine to me. In the words of Jan Allen maybe Bigfoot is naturally blurry. Lol Sorry for the humor.
ReplyDeleteCTJ
If this is real then every Bigfoot video and photo I've ever seen is fake.
ReplyDeleteThe shape of the head is round, just like a humans, it looks NOTHING like anything I've ever heard described concerning Bigfoot's appearance.
Test and analyze the video all you wish. It's NOT proof of anything other than an unknown figure on a piece of video tape...
Just like hundreds of others.
I've heard many descriptions of bigfoots with round heads. I don't know what info you are getting to make this assumption. Many wittnesses have described round heads. Actually, I believe smeja's (sierra shootings) bigfoot had round heads, as well as one of the erickson project sites reporting round heads. Correct me if I'm wrong. (Memory tainted right now)
ReplyDeletePaul
This profile did not exist in the first video. The one Moneymaker commented on was clearly an old man, and actually looked like larry surface.
ReplyDeleteThere's no shame in being unsure of this. I don't understand why people are being so defensive. It's possible that it's a bigfoot, but it's possible that it isn't. There's a really good chance that it isn't. There are old people living in the area, and it does look a lot like an old person. People who are convinced either way are simply letting their bias chime in on their emotional responses. This is a blurry figure--period. Anything that's blurry can be warped into becoming whatever we want it to be in our plastic minds of interpretation. Larry, of course should be the least trusted because he has an emotional pay-off in his experience of being successful. I sort of hate to say that, he seems like a good guy, but it's true.
ReplyDeleteMaybe this is a bigfoot, maybe it isn't, but getting defensive either way, to me, seems ridiculous. Any kind of objective look at this should conclude that it's reasonable to think this may not be a bigfoot, and conversely, I understand why some want it to be a bigfoot.
I personally would love for it to be bigfoot, but unfortunately when I look at it, it doesn't look like one. However I"m no expert on night vision analysis so I could be completely wrong and I'm okay with that. Why does it seem like no one else is?
It's an old man...Please stop giving Larry the Hoaxer press.
ReplyDeleteThis profile did exist on the video.
ReplyDeleteCrap
ReplyDeleteFor crying out loud. It's not a bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteThing is why all of a sudden white bigfoots? I have been into the bigfoot thing since the early 70's and I believe. Not much early on about white bigfoots. White is not a good color for camouflage, unless in the snow all the time(Polar Bear). A white bigfoot running around would be a lot easier to see than a brown, black, or red as most are reported being. I have many years in the military (using night vision) and many years hunting all kinds of animals. This is a close up of a person passing the camera. Nothing more.
ReplyDeleteI am not a expert on bigfoot. I have been reading alot of your blogs. And I am not saying this is one. But just been thinking about all the blogs saying they may be more human then ape. We really don't know how they age and we are unsure of all the variations of bigfoot. I have read blogs people saying they have seen round heads and others coned. Some say they have long hair running anywhere from 6 to 12 inches long and some have short hair. Like the reds you always see pictures with longer hair, the black ones seem to have short hair, and if the white bigfoot from PA is real in the video it has shorter hair. So if there more human then ape who says they don't lose there hair like when do as we age or if it has a genetic defect. Sure it shows a slight neck but with the ones covered in hair makes it pretty hard to see one with hair. If it is a older bigfoot as they age the muscles would break down and they would become slimmer with age. Like I said I am no expert and have been interested in bigfoot since I was a young girl. And I do believe they are real. I grew up in the area where they talked about the River Styx monster.
ReplyDeleteIn defense of the critics of this clip, does the man who took this footage really expect not to be criticized for posting a clip of what is purported to be a bigfoot when the image in question looks nothing like what bigfoot is expected to look like?
ReplyDeleteWhy would someone use an odd looking figure to hoax this???? If it were a hoax I would expect someone to use a more traditional looking bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with the person who grew up near the River Styx monster area. She took the words right out of my mouth.
I'm not sure it's white. It could be gray with some white mixed in. The moonlight is reflecting off it. The face is definitely not white.
ReplyDeleteUh oh...I just saw a potty mouth comment disappear. Shawn must be awake.
ReplyDelete