I’m actually disappointed in the Cryptomundo crew that a trip was taken to look at a dead dog by the road a while back, and the chance to look at new footage of a possible bigfoot was passed up.

On the plus side those who perpetrate a hoax have in effect performed a reverse inoculation on themselves. Any claims they try to make in the future will be held to a much higher standard due to their tainted past. Thanks again for your input.

Best regards

I wonder who uses 16mm on vacation (even before digital video existed) ?

The sounds in the first video are ludicrous and bear absolutely no relation to anything that might conceivably be uttered by a primate. In the late eighties while backpacking in Northern California’s Mendocino National Forest, I heard what after years of reflection I have only recently concluded was one or possibly two sasquatches. What I heard sounded nothing like the sounds in the video and was in fact quite consistent with what we know of great ape behavior and vocalization. (It was a series of grunting barks followed by slapping or thumping sounds as of something powerful striking a tree limb or trunk, these followed by two piercing yodel-scream-shrieks.)

As for the name “Sylvanic,” it is so ridiculous and seemingly transparent that I am tempted to think that when Todd Standing refers to it as that used by “natives,” what he means is that it’s what the locals call it, and not that it has anything to do with Native Americans. In fact, while I may be wrong in generalizing, my experience has been that most Canadians refer to Native Americans not as “Natives,” but rather, as “First Nations,” or “Cree,” or “Kutchin,” or “Inuit,” or “Athabaskan,” or what have you, depending upon the particular group referenced. On the other hand, being no more than kids, maybe it really didn’t occur to them that lots of people have at least a nodding familiarity with Latin. (Speaking for myself, the name “Sylvanic” seemed so obvious that it did not even occur to me that it was being put forth as a native American place-name.)

The second video has the potential to be more convincing, but the fact that it’s presented with the first pretty much botches the job.

Finally, the notion that there is an unexplored valley in the northern rockies that remains unknown due to peculiar magnetic properties, is manifestly one of the stupidest things I’ve heard in awhile. While there are places on the planet that have yet to be documented and surveyed on foot –parts of the eastern slope of the Andes and of Papua New Guinea are great examples– it is no longer true that as in the past, there are large geological features, such as valleys, that we do not know about through satelite imagery and the array of technologies therein available. Cut me a husk.

Again, my theory is that these are a group of bored high-school students.

“None of the 35mm still photographs or 16mm motion camera shots turned out. They where somehow overexposed in a way that no person I have met with can account for. The most plausible expert explanation I was given seems to be our film was exposed to some kind of strong magnetic field.”

As I understand it, film is a chemical process, whereas digital would be more likely to be adversely affected by a “strong magnetic field”. Not that this really means anything in terms of Bigfoot, or sightings, but it might mean something about his “experts”, and his “expert explanation”. Surely his film could have been overexposed, but it’s a HUGE jump to conclude that it was due to some kind of magnetic field. This kind of conjecture makes the skeptic in me win over the believer.