This is a Squatch. The genitalia is visible in this photo, it is a male. A bear’s genitalia would not be visible in a photo at this angle.

tapper and Mystery_Man…”YOU OWE ME FOR ONE JELLY DONUT! The End!

I say: No, they actually aren’t too long for a bear. The camera angle does make us think otehrwise but they’re practically of equal length.

#2 Back hump shows extreme flexibility that quadrupeds don’t have in their spines.

I say: Wrong. I’ve seen black bears stretching in the same way my dog does and in all cases, if it’s not the downward-facing dog position, they almost appear cat-like in stretching posture.

#3 Shoulders too wide.

I say: Huh?

#4 even balding bears have ears. Photo shows no ears.

I say: Camera angle. I see no identifiable headshot, so does that mean it doesn’t have a head, either? Hardly.

(#5) What about the tipped over mineral lick? Could a small bear do that without a 4 foot plus height leverage… it must weigh 40 to 50lbs.?

I say: About a month ago, I was walking in the forest in which I live - in NY state, directly across from the Delaware River and next to 3000+ acres of untouched NY and PA wilderness. I often hear and see strange things but on this day I heard grunting, smelled what reminded me of a zoo, and heard rocks being moved. I immediately thought I was finally going to be able to see a squatch in full daylight. As I crept closer to one of the slate quarries on my property where the sounds had originated, I was somewhat disappointed to see an adolescent black bear, approximately the same size and dimensions as Jacobs’ photo, btw, forraging, and moving very large rocks. It caught my scent, looked directly at me and hauled it’s ass out of the area. I went over to the spot to see what it had been digging and discovered the bear had moved incredibly large rocks, one of them that weighed well over 50 pounds had been dug up and moved completely out of the ground. So, yes, even small bears have incredible stamina and strength

That seems very odd to me. Of course more pictures, no matter how poor, would be of some use. If only to make people like me shut up and realise that the extra pictures are very poor and of no use!

This whole thing makes me very uneasy. I’m not gonna sit here and accuse the BFRO or anybody of lying. It might sound like I am, but I’m not. It’s just that the way people have gone over the pictures we have, then they’d do the same with more pictures and maybe see the SOMETHING PRIMATE we all wanna see.

More pictures might show a bear and end this debate once and for all. I’m afraid that might be real reason they’re not being shown. That would be wrong and I hope that’s not the case.

I thought no way could that be a bear. Now, with all the pictures of bears I’ve seen, I can see a bear. I could be wrong. I HOPE I’M WRONG. This is one time being wrong would be great.

Also, to counter what you said, #1)- The arm and leg length are within the limits of a bear. Remember too that loss of hair could create the illusion of longer limbs. #2)- Quadrupeds can be very flexible with their spines, some remarkably so. It is incorrect to say that a quadrupedal animal could not possibly display a hump like that. How rigid do you think an animal’s spine is? Bears are actually a lot more flexible than some seem to be giving them credit for. The angle of the photo and the darkness obscures things, but I see no reason at all to think a bear could not be in that position. #3) Bears aren’t exactly known for being slight, narrow shouldered animals. The shoulders do not seem too wide to me at all. Again, within the range of a bear. #4) I agree that the apparent lack of ears is a bit odd. But the photo is dark, it is at an odd angle, the ears could be obscured. The bear might also have its ears back, which would make them even harder to see. I am certainly not ready to throw out the other evidence and say it is a sasquatch just because I can’t quite clearly make out ears. #5) With the mineral lick, yes a bear could do that if it really wanted to.

I won’t presume this to be THE END. Like I said, this is PROBABLY a bear, but maybe it isn’t. It is interesting how others can say with 100 percent absolute certainty that is must be a sasquatch and cannot be a bear. Very few absolute certainties in science, you take what you have and you come to as much certainty as you can get within reason. My eyes are just fine when looking at these. Sasquatch could be out there, but I think the evidence on these photos at this point leans towards a bear.