Probably some left over animal from the old Tarzan movies made in Silver Spring that has bastardized from inbreeding. Either way, the close ups show much different eyes, along with teeth ! LOL

I have some first hand experience with the Skunk Ape, which was documented at BFRO. Mostly because they were the only folks around online 7 or 8 years ago.

I live pretty far out in the Green Swamp, the closest 7-11 is 10 miles away. Makes it rough when ya want a pizza, as the closest pizza shop is 16 miles away ! LOL Anyway I can assure you that there are very large animals out there. During the hurricanes of 04 they were driven out of the swamp and closer to humans.

We also have smaller monkeys scattered around the state. Some from movie sets, others from folks letting their ‘pets ‘ loose. It is a known fact the the St. Johns river basin is primed with Resus monkeys. Anyway I have run on long enough.

Several comments have been made about the eyes. It doesn’t take an expert to know that eye relflections occur when there is a bright light source that is in a nearly direct line of sight of the observer or the camera. This is easily seen at night with car headlights, a spot light, a photo flash, or even a bright flashlight.

These photos are obvioulsy not taken at night, and while it is common to use a photo flash strobe for a “fill” light even in daylight, I would rule this out as the leaves between the camera and the subject would be much brighter, or more commonly known as “washed out” by the flash.

I wonder why they are called enlargements when they are obviously completely different photos? Photo #4 may possibly be an enlargement of #2, but without looking at the actual photos it is not easy to say for sure.

A very predominate feature of Sasquatch that is reported by eye witnesses are broad shoulders. The subject in these pictures has almost no shoulder even though the body is at a 90 degree angle to the camera.

Also, the common feature of having no neck so that the head appears to sit abnormally low (compared to a human) between the shoulders is not the case in these photos.

Things just don’t add up correctly to my way of thinking.

A bigfoot being frightened and annoyed? I don’t recall any other sighting reports that describe a bigfoot in such a way, surprised maybe but not frightened.

A female protecting her young (in any animal) is going to appear as angry and aggressive as possible at the first sign of intruders, no? if the observers had already been charged at and had rocks thrown at them why would she then be playing peek-a-boo from behind a tree?

Were the observers following the subject before she turned and started charging them and throwing rocks at them? Even Biscardi says that there is no way to keep up with them, as well as many other reports.

I was not able to view the motion clips, I also hesitate to call them videos since I agree, as has been mentioned, there was no portable video equipment available in the 1970’s.

I did use a video recorder back then to tape our High School basketball games but it was far from portable and required 110 volts for each separate piece of equipment and the camera, recorder, and monitor were 3 separate pieces of equipment and the tape was reel to reel.

I’ll keep trying to view the “movies” but if I don’t see the usual spots, flecks and hairs in them it will only cast more doubt in my mind.

I have been a wildlife artist by profession all of my life, and I am nearing 60 years old, that’s a lot of observation time, and a lot of experience. This whole thing may well be a hoax, but those eyes haunt me.

What it is, is, it’s getting harder and harder to trust JUST a photograph, when it’s not backed by observations to which science responds: Well, there it is, we have a new species here.

I have to say though: it can be really funny reading all the pseudosophisticated tech debunking that goes on. “Oh man, that’s easy. You just get somebody to step into a ten-foot-high ape costume….then you go to Photoshop…” I’ve heard “debunkings” of the Patterson film that are absolutely delusional.

In my opinion, it is still VERY hard to do a Photoshop — or Anythingshop — job that can’t be debunked. Even in a photograph, there’s still something about a real animal.

But before you go filling in a blank branch on the family tree, you better get more than that.