Photos Of The Day: Lupe Mendoza's Possible Bigfoot Encounter
 |
| Possible Female Bigfoot with Child (Enhanced) From Lupe's Cellphone |
Lupe Mendoza from Texas was visiting his son in WA last year and had a possible encounter with Sasquatch not once, but two separate times.
In the interview video below, Damian Bravo of Sasquatch Lives? talks with Lupe Mendoza about one encounter with a possible male and another with a female with juvenile or baby. Lupe has allowed Damian to officialy realease one photo from his encounters in Mt. Rainer WA. His life was change by the encounter and now he has begun his quest to find the truth on the creatures he saw that day.
 |
| Female with possible juvenile? |
 |
| Interpretation of Mother and Juvenile by Steven B. DeMarco |
Listen to Interview:
Looks like a rock.
ReplyDeleteI agree. It's a blobsquatch.
DeleteIf its real, that thing is huge!
ReplyDeleteYeah, if it is real, it certainly proves that even bigfoot wedding cake makes you fat!
DeleteThe seems credible and it seems that he saw something that wasn't normal, beyond that, it's just another report.
ReplyDeleteit's just another report? man i remember when we had zip about bigfoot. and this comes with a photo! and some investigative reporting. man we are spoiled with this social media stuff. not knockin you just sayin remember those bad days.
Delete"This video contains content from National Geographic, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds"- great. Tim, U.K.
ReplyDeletesame. Canada.
DeleteThe scale seems odd to me. Would like to see a human standing on the same spot for comparison. And a shot without the supposed creature to prove it is not a feature of the area.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately there is no sense of scale to the photo. If the person can go back and take a picture of a second person standing there at that spot while the photo is taken from the original spot then we can get a sense of scale. You know, like they do on Finding bigfoot. I don't think that's too much to ask.
ReplyDeleteRight now, it's impossible to tell if it's a 1 foot tall rock or if it's an 8' tall BF.
There is no way to tell.
Chad W
I have to agree with you as I almost always do Chad.
DeleteChuck
It is interesting, when I enlarge the picture it's even more interesting. An after shot would have been nice and as said above with some kind of reference for scale.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Its definately interesting when I enlarge it.
DeleteUse the surrounding trees as reference. Unless those are all redwoods (they're not), then that is a rock a foot or two across.
ReplyDeleteThis is actually one of the poorer attempts at passing something mundane off as a "Squatch" that I've seen so far. I'm going to go through all my pictures and find stuff like this and proclaim myself to be a sasquatch habituator and make me some dough.
I agree with your size estimate. It appears that some of the grasses/weeds are taller than the "sasquatch." It looks 2-3 feet tall. It has zero features of a sasquatch, nevermind two of them.
DeleteProbably a rock. Disappointing.
Even if it's sitting in the grass?
DeleteLupe Mendoza and plans to go back to the area and actually take scale shots of the rock to compare from the distance he actually stood with his son and some one croaching in the same side of the boulder or rock , as soon as we have them we will do a follow up on the photo.
ReplyDeleteD.B.
I don't think that is going to prove anything because i don't even think it's a rock. it looks like it is suspended. Like some sort of insect or bird nest possibly attached to that vine or the tree it's self
DeleteI just got off the phone with Jack Bindernagel and we discussed this photo a length. Jack is convinced this is the real deal and plans to visit the site on his next trip to Washington. He states that you could tell its not a rock by its shape and the coloring.
ReplyDeleteReally? The "Bigfoot on Mars" photo taken a few years back by one of NASA's Mars robots looks more like a humanoid/bigfoot than this rock formation.
DeleteHow can anyone be "convinced that this is the real deal?" There is no way to discern with certainty whether or not this is "the real deal" or not.
How??? Because he drew you pictures!!! Do you not see the oddly Hispanic-looking Bigfoots?
Deletewell i just got of the phone with elvis and he didn't know anything about it!
DeleteLOL dreamers
ReplyDeleteIsn't that just a rock with a shadow?
ReplyDeleteBigfoots Broski
Why does the interview contain content from National Geographic ??
ReplyDeleteLooks like BS again (Blobsqatch).
ReplyDeleteI like the enhanced version, though. Very artistic. It's like Monet painted a blobsquatch.
Deletebigfooters need photography classes
ReplyDeleteLooks like a guy walking from right to left. Something (white) over his right shoulder and carrying a backpack. See the face near the white area looking left? Maybe?
ReplyDeleteClearly a rock. It's the same color as the other rocks, it's round and 3 feet tall. It is an absolute joke that anyone would think this is a Bigfoot. Damien and anyone else needs to give their head a shake. It's shit like this that makes bigfooters look so foolish. I love how in the artists painting the Bigfoot is brown and NOT STONE GREY.
ReplyDeleteHey buddy The picture was taken with a cell phone, as always do not shoot the messenger we are looking more into the sighting to see if we can get some true scale of it, I believe somethign is there, does it clearly show what it, no, but its a interesting photo and the place is real, so to get a conclusion and see if this thing on the picture is some type of animal then we have to wait and see. I respect your opion, but I dot appreciate you calling me or anyone else crazy, and if this is shit then tell me what do you have to put on the table that can prove that bigfoot does not exist. Its easy to be a skeptic and sling insults but if your so sure he does not exist why even bother to come on here and give your opinon on a subject you state is bull.
DeleteDamian,
DeleteSorry, that was a little harsh. But I am honestly upset. You are an emerging voice in bigfooting and in order to gain respect for the community I think you need to be more responsible, objective, and critical before you post a photo like this with the caption "Possible Female Bigfoot with Child." Because 99.999% of people will not see bigfoot in this photo.
I agree but you can get your point across without the insults, and by the way the name given to the picture says possible, yet your right people can make their own opinons on the photo but its just a name, nothing to get upset about if you do not see that then its fine and you have a right to voice it I just disagreed wiht how you did it, no worries and thanks for your input.
DeleteDamian, no one needs to prove to anyone that Bigfoot DOESNT exist, because its obvious. The burden of proof lies with those stating these ridiculous pics of normal objects are a Sasquatch. Kill one and have a press conference-you and the others are vindicated.
DeleteIn the end, all that will matter is what this guy thinks or knows he saw. Everything else is just speculation about a pic he may or may have not taken of the thing that is the subject of his report. No different than anything else that's offered as BF evidence. Heh heh, I said BF evidence.
ReplyDeleteI meant to say that the "Bigfoot on Mars" photo shows a rock formation that looks more like a humanoid/bigfoot than this image. So, the image in this article could very well be a rock formation.
ReplyDeleteThere is no way that Bindernagel or anyone else can make pronouncements that this is "the real deal." There's simply not enough detail or scale to make such a statement with any type of backing evidence to firmly support that conclusion.
Is this Mendoza guy just another in the long line of hoaxers trying to pass off non-bigfoot as bigfoot?
ReplyDeleteI am pretty sure it's John Bindernagel....Dr. John Bindernagel...
ReplyDeleteBigfoot doesn't exist. How do I know? BECAUSE IF IT DID WE WOULD HAVE FOUND ONE ALREADY! WE ARE REALLY SMART! WE KNOW EVERYTHING THERE IS TO KNOW!
ReplyDeleteI'll stop shouting now.
God will you trolls just STFU??? it's getting old.
Deletebut just in case of the slim chance you may actually be this stupid
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/05/strangespecies/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammals_described_in_the_2000s
Where was our "all knowing minds" when these popped up?
Good job Tazieth, I doubt the trolls will take the time to go to the links you've given. It takes time, effort, reading and comprehension skills. They'd rather just troll.
DeleteOh I know lol
DeleteThe story goes that the guy had two different sasquatch encounters. If you click on the picture, you get four pictures to choose from. One is of the interpretive drawing. If there were two separate encounters (on the same trip to Washington state? What are the odds of that?), why are there three photos all in different locations?
ReplyDeleteI get the impression it is small and probably not alive. Just the feeling I get in looking at it. Will be waiting to see those upcoming scale photos that were promised.
ReplyDeleteI thought if it is a living being it is sitting down holding a young one. That was my impression after enlarging the picture.
ReplyDeleteI had damian post this so we could get some help with this. For someone to say it was a hispanic bigfoot because of my race was very wrong and ugly to say. Be happy im always in a good mood.
ReplyDeleteJust tell it to "STFU??? it's getting old."
Delete