Comments on: Update: New Skamania Tubesquatch

By: Savage30L

Savage30L — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 00:09:34 +0000

I think it’s a hoax. The bigfoot in the film is from the Patterson-Gimlin film…taken from the original, and reinserted in a different background. If you look closely you can see her turn around and look, just as Patty does, and you will be able to see her breasts in a couple of the frames.

By: dogu4

dogu4 — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 18:20:59 +0000

Can you be a little more specific, Bill? When I type-in the following “new bigfoot” I do get some videos from a party named “hicksfromthesticks” and he or she or they have been putting out some really outstanding “hoax” videos for the past year or so. I say “hoax” in quotes because they don’t try to hide the fact that they are creating these as fakes and in my opinion they’re interesting in that they are testing the parameters of what is or isn’t a genuine piece of evidence. If you’re finding some other results from some other source it would be good to know more, thanks.

By: bill green

bill green — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:47:22 +0000

hey loren this still a very interesting filmfootage, but i was just at youtube.com i typed in new bigfoot in search box there is a few new possible filmfootages posted there today take a look for those interested. bill

By: Maine Crypto

Maine Crypto — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 03:07:44 +0000

This seems a lot better than the last few clips that have been posted. It was a good week for cryptids!

By: SharkFisher

SharkFisher — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 20:16:53 +0000

There is definitely some thick stuff in the southwest area of the state. The video looks as real as any to me and the background information recently provided in this article sounds legit. I would like to know what some of the ” experts ” (no offense meant) on this web site think of this video regardless of the fact it was found on you tube.

By: ShefZ28

ShefZ28 — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:10:32 +0000

Nothing about this video screams hoax. Although there isn’t much to it.

The only thing that strikes me as odd is the fact that whatever is shown in the video is just walking…not even looking around. Meh, oh well.

By: DARHOP

DARHOP — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:39:21 +0000

Man this is not far from where I live.

I need to take a couple week vacation and head deep into them woods. Like to take a couple weeks in Ape Canyon too. And the Gifford Pinchot National forest, Star Mountian is in that area. I don’t think I want to go alone though. And most of my buddies think I’m crazy when it comes to the BIG GUY. That is the main reason I wish proof positive of their existence. So they quit frigging laughing at me when I bring them up.

Anyway this looks like some pretty legit footage to me. Safety or not, I would have to try and get closer. That’s what the 50 cal. is for. Just in case. I sure would hate to have to shoot though. That would suck. I really believe these animals want to be left alone, and in most cases will leave an area if they feel threatened, as opposed to investigating the threat. But then again the stories of rock throwing and stuff. I may be wrong.

By: sschaper

sschaper — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:36:23 +0000

So, he is following it, but it walks parallel to him, without noticing him, like how many commercials? I suppose anything is possible, but I find the earlier video more believable, with the animal trying to get away, down a gully.

Yes, the arms are long, the knees are bent.

By: Sunny

Sunny — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 13:39:47 +0000

The reply doesn’t set off any major red flags…I’m guessing you’re working on credibility/background/master copies/etc.

What an exciting week — two cryptid clips that don’t scream hoax…can’t wait to hear more about both of them!

(we won’t mention the Honey Swamp thing.)

By: dogu4

dogu4 — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 10:58:57 +0000

Since you’ve established a tentative connection with the person who took the video, perhaps the camera master could be reviewed and even processed to enlarge and stabilize?
It is intrigueing.