Saturday, June 23, 2012

Robert Lindsay: One Melissa Hovey Photo Reportedly Shows Half Of Bigfoot's Face


Robert Lindsay just released the following tidbit about the sequence of photos that was purportedly sent to Melissa Hovey over 4 years ago. According to his source, you can see half of the Bigfoot's face in one of the photos:

Melissa Hovey photo is part of a series. Apparently a lot of folks are unaware that the famous Melissa Hovey Bigfoot photo is part of a series. The series is of 4 of 5 photos in sequence. The photo released is the first one in the series. The others show it walking away in a sequence.

In the last photo, it has its head turned around, and you can see one half of its face. A source informed me that someone in the upper echelons of Bigfootery, a Californian, has seen the entire sequence. This person feels that the photos are of a real creature.

I feel the Hovey pic is either a statue as in the sort a taxidermist or Bill Munns type would make, or it is a real Bigfoot because I am certain it is not a costume. If the sequence exists, then it must be of a real Bigfoot, since statues can’t get up and walk away.

Hovey only released the first photo. After she did that, the source contacted her and approved of her release, gave some new information, but asked that no new photos be released. Apparently Hovey is in possession of this series of 4-5 photos but is not releasing them as per instructions form her source. But they seem to be making the rounds anyway, as the Californian at the very least has seen them.

I didn’t think this was worthy of a story since I thought everyone new about this, but some major Bigfooters told me that had never heard of this sequence, so we are running the story since apparently a lot of folks didn’t hear the first time I reported it.
[via robertlindsay.wordpress.com]

62 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Always the same: Irrefutable evidence exists, a bunch of people know and have seen it.....but the general population will never be able to see.

      Anothe day in the interesting psychologically deficient Bigfoot world.

      Delete
  2. Could it not be a series of different statues used for each photo?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nope, we now have the word of the Californian, it's the real deal. Lol

      Delete
  3. I guess not a lot of people "new" about this then....lmao

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I just bought a knew shirt today. Lol.

      Delete
  4. This shit is gay. Super Duper Top Secret Bullshit and nothing more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Knock it off with using "gay" as a putdown, you bigot.

      Delete
    2. Mamabear, it means 'lame' or "uncool'. Look up the word gay in the 1896 version of websters dictionary and you'll see why. That version is hard to find though, no one went to the bookstore; it was the gay nineties and everyone was having to much fun prancing through flower filled parks wearing gay looking suits and ankle length dresses.

      Delete
    3. I just looked that up on good old google. It looks like "gay" has a few meanings.
      You are correct, but using the word "gay" can easily be replaced with a word that is more to the point.

      Delete
    4. what you talkin about willis, yes yes! I love it! +1000000

      Delete
    5. Yes sir...it is very gay indeed.

      Delete
    6. i'm pissed this a-hole took down my not so political correct post. all because of some little word known as GAY. now i have to say that the dude sean or what/how ever he wants to spell or say it is GAY, GAYER, AND THE GAYEST of all!!! this pisses me off. i guess it's alright to call people a bigot and racist but not GAY! well web-owner that is just not cool at all. i know it's your dog but that dosen't mean i want to pet it. this is what's killing our country! this censorship with some choice words man. bigot offends people just as much as the stinking word GAY. you libs can't have it both ways man. so the next time mamabear gets her panties in a big, probibably real big knot over the word GAY we all can just substitute the word bigot for GAY!!! so that's what i'm talking about shawn!!!!

      Delete
  5. Gee, more super secret "evidence" from the BF community...how original...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Why don't they just show us when they have these photos and videos? Let us see the damn thing already!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because they don't have the stuff, but want the attention anyway.

      Delete
    2. Because it doesn't extist. They're trying to drum up publicity and then release some garbage and of course the gullible schmucks will believe it. Ah hahaha. Sad.

      Delete
    3. Interest in dishonesty and greed trumps interest in science.

      Delete
    4. LMFAO, Anon 9:55 is being trolled by Hovey and he doesn't even realize it. Ahahaha, sad.

      Delete
  7. These people dont show it for one of two reasons.

    #1 Nobody has offered them money

    #2 Nobody has offered them money cause there full of shit

    If you can find a better reason let me know

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. #2 is correct. You know they're shit since Tom Biscardi saw these photos and passed.

      Delete
    2. Bro, The rear photo has been released, can't put that genie back in the bottle; to release a facial that indicates a hoax would obliterate the credibility of anyone associated with the release. I would not be surprised if they deny having more photos(which may be true)

      Delete
    3. Releasing a photo of a facial usually does blow one's credibility. All puns intended and are trademarked and copyrighted.

      Delete
    4. :) Right, even a G-rated avocado mask.

      Delete
  8. The first Hovey photo is highly suspicious for these reasons: she initially said it was a trail cam but the quality of the photo and the reported time period mean that it couldn't possibly be a trail cam. Hovey later changed her story and said it was a 35mm remote cam that had been cropped (still barely makes sense and hurts her credibility); movie people have come forward and claimed that the photo is a costume from their movie; the left arm is missing; the tree in the background is an unusual species not common in traditional bigfoot areas; the placement of the remote cam is extremely close to the tree and therefore highly unusual placement for a trail cam; the photo only shows the easiest parts of a bigfoot to hoax (no face, hands, or other fine details); ...

    There is no good reason for secrets or suspense, if there are more photos release them. Or release the uncropped version if the first one. Giving vague details like this seems like an attempt to sensationalize the story.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I thought someone figured out that it was a loquat tree. Those are pretty common in the southern US.

      Delete
    2. ... and raise Hovey's autograph fee to $3.00

      Delete
    3. i would pay 100 dollars to have the rest of the pics posted so we can al lol at how fake they are

      Delete
    4. @Enlightenment, there was plenty of good reason, its called exploitation.

      Fact: Photo was never hers
      Fact: Witness was blackmailed
      Fact: The copyright is a joke
      Fact: the copyright system may well have been abused to get the claim
      Fact: It was all done for exploitation

      scum is scum

      Delete
    5. First, any decent trail cam with a flash will take pictures of this quality or better. Don't believe me, go to walmart and buy one for 79.99. Set it up and walk past it. If the pics are great, I will drive to where ever you live and give you double the money for the trail cam. Second, How most of you morons immediately attack any/everyone's credibility, there is no way I would release ANY evidence of bigfoot I might obtain to the public. There are so many of you vampires looking to suck the blood out of every person who has the courage to come forward with ANYTHING. Yes, most of you are not worthy of seeing or reading about anything other than the funny papers.

      It doesn't matter what you trolls say to justify your existence, you attack good pics, bad pics, good footprints, bad foot prints, virtually anything. So; why does it matter?

      Budha

      Delete
    6. Believe what you want. I'm interested in truth.

      Delete
    7. If you believe Hovey did anything but exploit the witness, the photo or the situation, you should probably try harder

      Delete
  9. I loved the someone in the "upper echelons of Bigfootery" comment. I did not know there was an actual chain of command or pecking order. Its the illuminati isn't it? Naw....if that were true they would have traded in the camo baseball hats for silk ties long ago.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A good laugh, indeed. But I did ponder it and cast the roles as I currently see them in terms of clout, and money talks --

      Matt Moneymaker - Don Corleone
      Cliff - Consigliere Tom Hagen
      Bobo - Luca Brasi, loyal soldier and kitchen lid-lifting pot-sniffer

      The feuding families: Olympic Project (inc Ketchum & infiltrator Bobo), TBRC, MABRC, Biscardi Group (inc AZCRO)...

      Loren Coleman is allowed to consider himself the Pope, to the extent that it will shut him up.

      Delete
    2. I would refer to them as the Dumbinati.

      Delete
    3. There isnt any pecking just delusional assholes cashing in, trying to perpetuate that belief.

      Delete
  10. ok lets see some more pics Robbie...put your rumor hole in gear and go and find us some more pics to look at young Robbie boy.
    By the way those photos you released of yourself...you still look like a ferret

    ReplyDelete
  11. What on gods green earth is the reason to not release the rest of the photos? It's like watching a movie trailer to a movie that never comes out ( like the Erickson Project).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why on God's green earth would anyone release the photos? 9 out of 10 people will attack their authenticity, claim their uncle is the one wearing the suit, attack the persons reputation who took/released the photo, etc. So, I re-state the question; Why on God's green earth would anyone with a brain release these photos. They have nothing to gain or prove, and all they will gain is headaches, attacks on their character and heartache.

      Shadowwatcher

      Delete
    2. Actually, no. Allow Hovey to release the rest of the photos and keep their mouth shut as they already have done. As easy as that.

      More likely is that RL is wrong, there are no more photos.

      If there are more, there is no reason not to release them anonymously through Hovey unless like an above poster pointed out, money is the issue.

      Problem would be a short sequence of photos will not be enough to fill and sell a book, so watch out for either more "new" photos and eye-witness accounts of this particular beast in a conference you will pay for to get in or a book or...nothing at all.

      Delete
  12. I tire of the drama in the BF community. Just show the damn picture!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are none. Unless you consider the obvious hoax pics they have. They're scared to release them because they're so bad that they would expose them as hoaxers.

      Delete
  13. The illuminati youtube mk loves the illuminati you will learn and get to laugh. I bet the person in california is kathy strain they are good friends i'm sure she has seen the pictures.She lives in california and you might call her "upper echelons of Bigfootery" I respect her opinion more than most in bs community.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ms Strain has some clout in that degree, Hovey simply does not. Let us count the reasons why.

      Delete
    2. Yeah I dont much care for Hovey but I know they were good friends at some point just trying to guess who this californian is lol My money is on Strain.Idk a stab in the dark...By the way Strain is a great person not trying to get her in the bs in anyway.

      Delete
    3. If you trust Kathy Strain, you need to keep lookng over your shoulder.

      Delete
  14. Lindsay was also certain the wooley mammoth was real. His track record is a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This picture has never made sense. I posted several problems with it before, but now I really don't believe it. After this blog had a post that talked about Harry and the Hendersons, I looked up some old clips on youtube (love the movie). Well in the scene posted, there is a shot of Harry from behind, it looks VERY similar to this picture. Keep in mind, this move was done in the 80's yet sooooo many said that it could not be faked with technology today. Yet Harry had different length hair, variable color, variable density, etc. This is nothing more than a hoax. More proof of that is still in the fact that these "other" photos aren't being released.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJkmvYEqRVE&feature=relmfu about 1:35 into clip

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dude, you do realize the Harry and the Hendersons movie was a HUGE budget Hollywood movie that was a big hit when it came out. As a matter of fact, I own the DVD. I think the point being made by most people is that the average hoaxer doesn't have a Hollywood Movie budget to spend several hundred thousand dollars to play a prank or create a hoax. Maybe Donald Trump could afford this, but I would image that he has better things to do.

      Delete
    2. No, most people said that even Hollywood couldn't do it and that is simply BS. Those suits don't just get destroyed, they are somewhere. Also, they talked about how the details in the costume wouldn't take the time to do things that I mentioned...yet they did on that suit.

      The story doesn't make sense, the suit can be made, etc. All points to a hoax that people keep bringing up.

      Delete
  16. Melissa Hovey is a hoaxer just like the rest of her MABRC buddies and of course the king of the no show "Ed Smith"

    ReplyDelete
  17. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d8oqIXtjdo&feature=relmfu

    @ 1:45

    ReplyDelete
  18. Melissa was not sent a series of photos of the costume. She was only sent the ONE that she posted. She said the "witness" told her there were others.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Blah blah blah, she strong armed the witness into giving her control, ie, exploiting the whole thing. By now this is common knowledge.

      Delete
  19. As Usual, Lindsay has his facts wrong. Do some research before you shoot off your mouth.

    ReplyDelete