55 Responses to “Wisconsin Bigfoot Video?”

1. English Boy responds: July 11th, 2006 at 7:33 am

   it does look quite convincing but i dunno that might just be me wanting it to be real.

2. fredfacker responds: July 11th, 2006 at 8:19 am

   Unfortunately due to bandwidth limitations all streaming content is blocked at work, but I can’t wait to check it out tonight.

3. Ken Gerhard responds: July 11th, 2006 at 8:22 am

   Considering how well publicized the BFRO’s Wisconsin expedition was, this may be yet another attempt to reel them in. The thing that gives it away as fake is the quality of the camera work. It’s too good. I doubt anyone could hold the camera that steadily while pursuing a “huge” rancid unidentified primate through the brush. The clip seems to have a very orchestrated feel, using the brush to obscure any details and the shape of the Bigfoot reminds me of a ghillie suit. Also, the creature does not seem that “huge” when compared to the surrounding brush. All in all I would say a good, creative attempt, though.

4. Ole Bub responds: July 11th, 2006 at 8:27 am

   Nice find….Craig:

   Please keep us posted on this one….I’m not sure how to examine videos posted on youtube…very interesting…a followup may be necessary on this video…

   seeing is believing…

   ole bub and the dawgs

5. pandafarmer responds: July 11th, 2006 at 8:41 am

   i think the footage is quite compelling really. i think youtube gives us a great tool for the amature to share where they might not have ever had the technology or knowhow before. of course it would have been nice to see more, but i would think most hoaxes would have just ran through in a monkey suit and tried much harder not to be seen. anyone get screencaptures?

6. jjames1 responds: July 11th, 2006 at 9:20 am

   I would hardly call that footage “compelling.” It’s highly pixellated, and even in the clearer shots, at best all you can make out is an indistinct dark shape.

7. Alton Higgins responds: July 11th, 2006 at 9:45 am

   It is difficult to see much. The hair looks to be long and rather light in color. It reminded me of a Wookie costume.

   [Craig, could you insert the Wookie costume pic I sent you as an attachment? Thanks.]

8. pandafarmer responds: July 11th, 2006 at 9:49 am

   well the reason i say it’s compelling is that it’s the first movie i’ve seen in a long while where we get a fairly good chance to see things. fake or not, at least it’s not like the Ely footage where it was so obviously a costume it wasn’t worth watching more than twice.

9. jjames1 responds: July 11th, 2006 at 10:12 am

   Pandafarmer:

   What, exactly, do you see? All I see is blurry, pixellated footage; lots of brush; and an indistinct shape that moves a couple of times. At one point, the shape appears dark; at another, it appears to have a white/beige color to it.

   That doesn’t sound like a “fairly good chance to see things” to me!

10. furryfinger responds: July 11th, 2006 at 10:52 am

    interesting. i would be swearing up a storm if that was me filming a large monkey man who could swat your head off like a badminton shuttlecock..

11. One Eyed Cat responds: July 11th, 2006 at 10:55 am

    To those seeing pixels, You sound like you are expecting the film to start and are seeing the greens of the brush I did, until I noticed two ‘buttons at the lower right of the screen One will give a closer look at the frozen pic, but the other will bring another screen up that shows the footage.

    I still think the walker’s proportions are wrong for BF

12. bill green responds: July 11th, 2006 at 11:06 am

    hey craig loren everyone wow very interesting possible sasquatch filmfootage it definetly needs more research done it. the forest area in the filmfootage does look like wonderful sasquatch habitat. please keep me informed. the creature in this filmfootage look to have shaggy white hair all over its body. good morning bill

13. kokodhem responds: July 11th, 2006 at 11:12 am

    I have two problems with this video, and they have nothing to do with video quality. The “bigfoot” in question is lumbering through the thick, snapping branches and having a helluva time. The camera man is apparently able to trot along the path easily, so that means that the subject is apparently walking parallel to the walkway. Does this sound like “normal” behavior for a bigfoot that has been spotted by a human holding a camera? Don’t the usually proceed directly away into the thickest forest possible to slow the humans down?

14. pandafarmer responds: July 11th, 2006 at 11:12 am

    if you are watching this thing full screen… YES, it will be a mash of pixels and brush. starting at 0:43, the cameraperson zooms out, and we can see the shape much clearer, showing a hairy figure moving away from camera. the Ely footage i laughed at, even the game camera shots didn’t impress me much… but this is the first thing in a while that i’m waiting to hear more on before dismissing so quickly.

15. jjames2 responds: July 11th, 2006 at 11:35 am

    No, I wasn’t watching it full screen. I’m watching it on a high-definition monitor, with a T1 internet connection. I still see pixellation and an overall blurry image. There are moments when “something” is visible, but there’s no way to definitively discern what that something might be.

16. planettom responds: July 11th, 2006 at 11:55 am

    Darn, I’m at work, I will take a look at this when I get home tonight. With all the hype of searching for bigfoot in the area at the time, I’m sure someone had the idea to go out and film their own bigfoot sighting. I haven’t seen the footage yet, but from what I can tell from the above comments, it doesn’t seem to be extraordinary.

17. pandafarmer responds: July 11th, 2006 at 12:13 pm

    no, it’s not jaw droppingly amazing, i just think it’s worth looking into before jumping into the “hoax” arguement right away. could easily be a bear as anything else.

18. tapper responds: July 11th, 2006 at 12:25 pm

    There’s no possible way this is real. Beyond the fact that one frame shows what appears to be the profile of a “Harry and the Hendersons” mask, the ‘creature’ is moving through the forest in a casual manner, almost as if it’s not aware a human is close. It’s also moving WAY too slow … and how can the person with the video camera keep up with it? Trust me, these things are extremely agile and don’t have the kind of trouble navigating through the woods that this one seems to be having.

19. LeCope responds: July 11th, 2006 at 12:51 pm

    Agreed….the originator of the video claimed “It was real hard to keep up with it at the rate it was moving in the forest & that made it difficult to film.” I don’t see that…I see somebody stumbling around the woods trying to see out of a poorly fitting mask. Hmmm…and he accidentally pressed record and shut it off? Very very suspect.

20. jamesrav responds: July 11th, 2006 at 1:00 pm

    It is difficult to believe a person could get that close to a wild animal without being discovered. We are to believe this is a case where a human is slyly tracking a animal that should be completely in tune with the forest. Shouldn’t it be the other way around? To engage in that much risk for a posting to YouTube seems beyond belief. Hasn’t he seen the “Messin’ with Sasquatch” commercials on TV, those things are strong!

21. TemplarKnight21c responds: July 11th, 2006 at 1:26 pm

    It looks decent to me. It most resembles a very long-legged, very timid silverback gorilla to me. The width of the trunk of the body, the behavior (i.e., ripping out a vine or a tree limb or whatever that was), all except the sound. Did anyone else notice that it didn’t even make sounds of breathing? Something that big and powerful must have pretty powerful, or pretty strained, lungs. Also, all primates make noises when they’re startled, frightened, angry, etc. Yes, even humans, we’re just rather…rude about it. It has its high points and its low points, I think, but if it is indeed a hoax it’s a pretty good one, in my opinion.

    Tapper, not to be disrespectful, but do you happen to have a captive sasquatch on the premises of your home and/or business which you can observe at will? If not, like the rest of us, you can’t be certain just how a sasquatch moves. Maybe they are, in fact, very good in the brush, and this one is just going through the gawky, unbalanced part of puberty? Who knows?

22. Craig Woolheater responds: July 11th, 2006 at 1:31 pm

    This comment is shared by a professional filmmaker who wishes to remain anonymous.

    Hello, Craig

    I had the opportunity to view the footage posted on YouTube.com. I am very interested in what you and your people think. Below, my comments, as a film professional:

    The footage is intriguing to say the least.

    Movement is a bit sluggish, I do not see big strides, but the arm thrashing of the brush moved quickly, and when the creature reaches out to grab a branch the length of the arm seems accurate. Also, when walking away near the end you can sort of make out the rump.

    Unfortunately, an uploaded video to the web is very low resolution, so one would have to examine the original video. As far as the comment about not shaky enough, that is crap, it was plenty shaky. In fact, it may have been deliberately shaky, although I know I have been in situations where you are not sure where to frame the shot and you get documentary footage like this.

    Now, the thing that stands out the most to me is the sound…branches breaking, birds calling are very clear and crisp, but the videographer, who states that his heart was pounding a mile a minute…well, you do not hear any heavy breathing or whispered exclamations from him…seems too controlled to be real, I am afraid Also, no vocalizations from the creature, not a grunt or a snort, and in a confrontation situation I think there would be some animal sounds. As non-professionals, people don’t realize that sound is 50% of the experience, if not more. No breathing from the man shooting the video says to me that he was not nervous or excited. That may seem a small thing, but it enough for me.

    I am willing to be convinced otherwise, if there are more discerning expert opinions, of course
    Thanks, and happy “hunting”!

23. Porkchop responds: July 11th, 2006 at 1:59 pm

    This is more interesting than the last footage from youtube that I called a HOAX, however:

    Someone more familiar with Youtube might be able to answer this better:

    Why can’t I seem to make the timeline go frame by frame from :43 to 51 secs?

    Trying to advance it frame by frame in there seems to make it JUMP to 51 secs something that doesn’t happen during the first 42 seconds of underbrush…

    hmmm… And I’m from WI so I was hoping just hoping…

24. Mnynames responds: July 11th, 2006 at 2:46 pm

    Templar actually has something of a point there, but the overall impression of the film is of a seemingly well-adapted forest creature awkwardly moving through brush next to a perfectly good path while being completely unaware of being followed by a loud, smelly man with a video camera. It’s the very elusive, shadowy quality of the footage that lends weight to it being “real”, simply because we can’t immediately tell that we’re looking at a guy in a gorilla suit.

    Then again, maybe this particular Sasquatch was completely deaf and shoved one too many things up his nose as a kid…

25. Ken Gerhard responds: July 11th, 2006 at 3:05 pm

    In response to the anonymous filmmaker who labeled my shaky camera comment as “crap”. I just wanted to point out that I also produce videos professionally. As an active researcher, I also have quite a bit of experience using consumer grade camcorders in the field. My point is that consumer cameras are generally not very steady, particularly while on the move. Considering the circumstances, I think this camera person is doing way too good a job of keeping the subject in frame.

26. tapper responds: July 11th, 2006 at 3:16 pm

    TemplarKnight wrote: Tapper, not to be disrespectful, but do you happen to have a captive sasquatch on the premises of your home and/or business which you can observe at will? If not, like the rest of us, you can’t be certain just how a sasquatch moves. Maybe they are, in fact, very good in the brush, and this one is just going through the gawky, unbalanced part of puberty? Who knows?
    ——-
    You are correct but, in fact, I live in upstate New York and have had a few traipse through my property. I regularly hear knocks, whoops and have dozens of trees bent over and broken on my land (I have extensive audio and photos, and would prefer to keep them off the Internet, though I wouldn’t mind sharing a few files with someone like Loren). While I’ve not seen one up close in NY state, I know they move like the wind, regardless of the terrain.

    I’m no primatologist but there’s something that’s just not right about the video. I can’t put my finger on it but it just seems wrong to me.

27. TemplarKnight21c responds: July 11th, 2006 at 3:18 pm

    I stuck a dime up my nose when i was little once…Mom was less than pleased.

28. tapper responds: July 11th, 2006 at 3:44 pm

    Once, when I was a kid, I was chewing on the end of a broom handle while sitting on my kitchen countertop and fell off the counter, impaling myself with the broom.

    Does that beat a dime up the nose?

    Maybe that’s what’s wrong with me.

29. Drat responds: July 11th, 2006 at 3:50 pm

    Well, it’s interesting, but did anyone else hear the ambient noises? There were birdcalls, but I kept hearing what sounded like car noises. If that’s the case, it was filmed near a road or highway with frequent vehicle traffic…that leads one to suspect the vid as well. As well as no breathing noises from the individual weilding the camera.

    One minute of footage isn’t THAT long…so it’s conceivable that someone could catch the big guy on film for that long.

    I do find youtube to be an interesting forum, but the videos uploaded are generally such crappy quality you can’t be more than kinda sorta sure of what you’re seeing.

30. Illuvatar responds: July 11th, 2006 at 5:08 pm

    I think someone should interview the cameraman and look into his background. Some people with very convincing video end up having a very suspiscious background. Like Paul Freeman for example.

    I’d like to thank the anonymous filmaker for his opinion, it was helpful to me.

31. Craig Woolheater responds: July 11th, 2006 at 5:11 pm

    OK folks, the subject here is the footage, not childhood injuries.

    Let’s stay on topic.

32. Scarfe responds: July 11th, 2006 at 5:11 pm

    Interesting. Not obviously a hoax, but very suspect. Every big foot video should be suspect. It is only through picking it apart that we can get to the truth. It would be nice if the videotaper could provide an original, non-internet copy of the video to Cryptomundo.

33. KenMD responds: July 11th, 2006 at 6:22 pm

    Why is everyone fighting about whether it is a hoax or not. Let someone investigate it more and get the original data.

    Likely it is a hoax, because if any person just filmed it they might try to sell it.

    However, what would you all be saying if the TBRC posted this video after an operation claiming it to be a genuine video of BF?

    How would that be different if Biscardi posted this video?

    None of us know how much shaking/breathing is real, nor how BF walks/runs/squats/traverses through brush etc etc.

    I do agree that on may likely attempt to get away in a hurry, but that isn’t really the case with the Patterson film is it?

34. iftheshoefits responds: July 11th, 2006 at 7:30 pm

    This footage can be classified as highly suspect from the fact that, just when he gets the clearest shot of the subject 40 seconds into the film, he zooms out instead of keeping the same setting our zooming in. Most likely a hoax but one of the better ones so far.

35. shumway10973 responds: July 11th, 2006 at 7:33 pm

    okay, very interesting. If this is a fake, they went thru a lot of work to make it possible. It is very possible, though, that this is genuine. I thought it interesting that the creature in question did seem a little confused, I can’t think of the correct word, but you know how animals will start pacing and looking around for an escape route just before the “I’m cornered–ATTACK!” sequence takes over? Yeah, like that. So either genuine, or these guys really did their research into animal behavior and put some time into filming this.

36. oldbutnotstupid responds: July 11th, 2006 at 7:59 pm

    One word describes it though, FAKE. Enough said. Wish I owned the costume rental out that way.

37. Bonobo responds: July 11th, 2006 at 7:59 pm

    Look very carefully 15 seconds into the video and there is a suspicious looking edit when the cameraman passes the tree. There is a definate unatural looking black edge to the tree in the foreground. Try pausing the video at 15 seconds and see what you think.

38. twblack responds: July 11th, 2006 at 9:18 pm

    I would like to see the original footage. Better than the last video from youtube.

39. H_Wrabbit responds: July 11th, 2006 at 9:53 pm

    First off, the shot appears to be on pretty level ground, and the subject is more or less at head level, not too big. This isn’t to say that all sasquatch are bigger than humans, just that it’s not “huge”.

    Second, the filmer is way way too close when he gets to fully zoomed out. Anyone who’s ever tried to take pictures/video of any animal in the woods would know that getting that close is just about impossible when the forest is that thick, and then having time to get the shot before whatever it is runs off is another story, which brings me to point 3.

    The subject is not moving away quickly at all. Being the rare creature that a sasquatch should be, any close encounter it has with a human is probably going to scare it and send it off quickly into hiding, just like all the other animals, ESPECIALLY if you catch it as close as the filmer apparently caught the subject. Also, humans are the only animals I’ve ever seen to let blackberries or not-THAT-thicket like that in the video slow them down when they’re being chased. When you’re trying to get away from something in the forest, you don’t stop unless whatever is in front of you is big enough that it won’t break from your body weight slamming up against it.

    LASTLY, the subject doesn’t appear to be moving away from the filmer, just parallel to the trail (the filmer is obviously moving but isn’t snapping any sticks) that the filmer is on.

    Sorry if I said anything someone already said, I only went through the first few comments.

40. Mnynames responds: July 11th, 2006 at 10:57 pm

    No, Wrabbit, I think you pretty much summed it up quite well.

    The Patterson footage though, brings up an interesting point. Patty is moving away at a good clip, but not running in a panic. Of course, she’s out in the open, and the Humans are not following her, but keeping their distance. They’re also not nearly as close as this camera man is to his target.

41. Ouroborus Jay responds: July 11th, 2006 at 11:24 pm

    I’m highly suspicious of this video.

42. Senor Chubba responds: July 11th, 2006 at 11:51 pm

    Why is this video put in the context of the BFRO? The reason I like this blog is the general lack of mudslinging you see on other bfoot boards.That’s started to change lately and I am a bit troubled. Let’s take the high road and refrain from the backbiting. Please don’t even respond to this as I dont want to start another discussion of some group - lets just talk about the video. Re the video-Ole stinky seems to be having some trouble getting around in the video ala snow walker and is making quite a show with the slap down on the vines. that’s fishy to me.

43. Craig Woolheater responds: July 12th, 2006 at 12:03 am

    Senor Chubba,

    I will respond to your comment. The reason that the BFRO was mentioned was because they had 2 fairly high profile expeditions in Wisconsin just prior to the claimed date that this video was shot. The 2nd of the 2 expeditions ended just 2 days prior to the claimed date it was shot.

    Nothing derogatory was said by me, nor implied in my posting of this.

    It was a way of posting 2 items, one the video, the other the news story about the BFRO expeditions, in the same post. They did take place in the same state afterall.

44. Nachzehrer responds: July 12th, 2006 at 4:11 am

    Maybe, maybe not, and even if it is real, how would we ever know?

    On the other hand, it might be more charitable (a kindness even), to express unbridled enthusiasm. It gives Robert Goerman something to write about.

45. shovethenos responds: July 12th, 2006 at 5:20 am

    I’m doubtful that its authentic. My reasons:

    - Description does not match the video. The “animal” didn’t seem to be moving that fast, and neither did the cameraman.

    - The “animal” moves listlessly, seeming to go from side to side the way humans sometimes “ape” gorilla movement. (Pun intended.) This wasn’t straight line “get me outta here” flight by a creature that is usually described as incredibly fast and efficient.

    - There’s unnecessary branch and tree breaking. The “animal” could have plowed straight through gaps in the trees and brush. Instead it seems to intentionally tear at some vegetation.

    I guess it could possibly be real, but I’m highly doubtful of that.

46. Sergio responds: July 12th, 2006 at 12:17 pm

    It is more of the same. Even if it is of a real sasquatch (which I very seriously doubt), the video is not even remotely clear enough to make a definitive determination. Not that I would expect film footage of a sasquatch to be necessarily clear, but it seems the details surrounding this one, in addition to characteristics in the video itself mentioned by some of the posters here, gives great cause for circumspection.

    For the record, in my opinion, it is but another of a long list of hoaxed videos and photos. In my opinion, such continued, profligate, unrestrained hoaxing will only make things harder for those who are attempting to seriously investigate the matter, such as the TBRC and others.

47. Mateo responds: July 12th, 2006 at 8:49 pm

    It’s a hoax. I’m 99.995% sure. When the supposed bigfoot is walking at about the 30 second point you get a fairly good shot of his head and it’s clear that his lower face (especially the chin area) is completely covered in hair so that can not make out the face structure at all. Just like a chewbacca outfit.

48. as29732 responds: July 13th, 2006 at 8:34 am

    Glad to see so many BF behavior experts here. sheesch!

    I think some kind of investigation needs to be done before the hoax label is placed on this one.

49. larrykat responds: July 13th, 2006 at 1:07 pm

    What is striking about a lot of the posts concerning Sasquatch or whatever is the apparent expertise of the posters. Many posts like some of the above assume certain behaviors as if they have personal experience or something. Unless a video is painfully obvious or objectively found to be a hoax, all should be “taken seriously”.

    One poster above states the animals always head into the deepest woods, etc etc. How the heck would he know??!

50. escAPEe responds: July 13th, 2006 at 1:55 pm

    Whereas we only have this 1-minute recording sliced from the middle of the videographer’s experience– please realize that the videographer witnessed what happened before and after the portion of the encounter captured by video. His testimony needs to be documented, investigated and corroborated with what is captured on video. The location of the encounter should be visited, and the circumstances behind his story about the video confirmed.

    Let’s wait for the results of an investigation before so casually dismissing this video. It would be too easy and tempting to dis this one just because it was unfortunately posted on the You Tube site at a time when so many obvious pranks and hoaxes are also showing up on that web site.

    However, this video may be the one gold nugget to be found in a pile of worthless rocks.

    I look forward to the results of the investigation.

51. simian1 responds: July 13th, 2006 at 2:04 pm

    Bonobo, porkchop

    Hello. I am the aforementioned filmmaker whose comments Craig posted earlier. I am intrigued by this footage, as it is either a pretty good hoax, or it is a real creature. I’m not going to say definitively one way or the other, as there are ways to determine that beyond this forum. All I can discuss is the uploaded, low-resolution YouTube video. I have looked at the :15 area where Bonobo suggests there is an edit. I do not see an obvious edit, although a tree wiping thru the frame in the foreground does make a good edit point, as it sometimes looks smooth. What I see is a camera set to “auto-iris” that, when the bright tree enters the frame very close to the lens, shuts the iris down and what you get is an almost black frame, and then the camera re-adjusts the exposure and it looks like a fast fade-in. I think this area of the tape is continuous. HOWEVER…. there is an edit at :42 It is clearly a jump. There are ways to determine if the cut was done in-camera (pause record, resume record) or in an edit suite, if you look at the video signal on a vectorscope. Perhaps the man sent to investigate this supposed sighting will have an opportunity to look into it.

    As a filmmaker, I like this footage! I don’t think its real at this point, tho.

52. simian1 responds: July 13th, 2006 at 2:20 pm

    a couple of other observations…

    there might be an opportunity to enhance the original video to look at certain features, namely, hands. At the very start of the video, from :03 to :05 or so the subject is standing still in the brush and the camera zooms in. I think you can see its hand in shadow, hanging down. Also, at :25 an arm reaches out and the hand grabs a branch (the hand is on the extreme right side of the frame, grabbing, 1/4 of the way up from the bottom). Opposable thumb? Can’t really tell.

53. Ole Bub responds: July 13th, 2006 at 4:54 pm

    Good afternoon Simian….

    Just what we need, another damn expert opinion…welcome to the blog…ape boy….LOL

    seeing is believing….

    ole bub and the dawgs

54. simian1 responds: July 13th, 2006 at 5:13 pm

    Thanks for the welcome wagon, Bubba.
    still beadyeyed, bald and furry, are ya?
    part Sasquatch, most likely

55. Mnynames responds: July 15th, 2006 at 6:27 am

    Larrykat- How would a poster know about animals heading into deeper woods upon being spotted? Presumably because they’ve encountered animals in the woods before. Has anyone here ever approached a wild animal near the woods before? And what did they do when you got too close? I think it safe to say that they darted off into the woods (be they rabbit, squirrel, fox, wolf, or deer). And for those that would say it is unwise to apply animal characteristics to the Human-like Sasquatch, well…all I can say is that if you startled me, or started following me, I’d probably bolt into the woods too. Some would debate it, and at times I’m ashamed to admit it, but I am Human.

    Are these generalities? Sure, but they’re useful ones, I believe. I don’t think anyone here is claiming any special knowledge of Sasquatch behaviour, only a general knowledge of typical animal and human behaviour (and if they’re really lucky, perhaps an actual encounter or two).

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|