|
Post by Igor Burtsev on Feb 27, 2010 10:21:46 GMT -5
1. Igor??? This isn't the Igor who bought into the Mary Green nonsense - is it? ... 2.The distance from the subject to the camera changed and yet the head of the subject remained the same size and on the same axis. 3. Maybe Igor can show the Brisson image to Mary Green who in turn can share it with her talking Sasquatch so to see if it recognizes one of its own. (double sigh) 1. Yes Bill, I'm exactly that Igor who visited Tennessee in 2004 and confirmed Mary Green's and Janice Carter's great sense and achievements... 2. Look at my post and repeated one in answer to Seb. You could use a microscop to mesure the small enlarging of the face and its turn 3. Yes, soon I intend to visit them both and hope to speak to their Forest Friends. And not only theirs, but there are more three points in the U.S. me to do the same... ;D P.S. Your previous nic was better. Even the best is "beefhunter". Because BFs don't like hunters in general and more over bigfoot hunters... And you never catch them with such a nic...
|
|
|
Post by Igor Burtsev on Feb 27, 2010 10:49:07 GMT -5
Randy's initial story to the people that he told about it was that he was alone when this allegedly happened. About his son - it was just my presumption, my fantasy and a little a joke (my sign was a smile). I'm repeating: we had no contact to him before! Now I know, that he was alone (he himself has written to me). Don't believe too much to mass media, even if they called "Pravda" ("Truth")
|
|
sebastian
Really into this!
Detective Gadget & Moderator
Posts: 512
|
Post by sebastian on Feb 27, 2010 11:52:00 GMT -5
HI Igor,
The matter of trust is very important in this field. Trusting a person whom you never met is a risky business. On the other hand, if I trusted Brisson's every claim and I will report that Brisson has an encounter every time heading into the park, then, what? Will I be a good researcher if I trust everybody's claim?
cheers, seb
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Feb 27, 2010 14:19:24 GMT -5
In my view Mary Green and her antics were designed to entertain ... not educate. If having multiple encounters without a photo of one of these creatures doesn't scream insanity, then hearing how a language between the two was discerned should have added insult to injury.
I respectably disagree with your use of of the English language when you say you 'confirmed' Mary Green's achievements unless finding someone gullible enough to travel a great distance so to be duped by a woman from Tennessee was the goal.
Confirmed: Having been ratified; verified.
Gullible: easily tricked because of being too trusting;
You can use PhotoShop and slight manipulations to achieve the same effect. The problem that distinguishes the differences between the two is that the distance to the stump changed and yet the size of the head did not. To simplify ... If for example the distance to the reference points within the image between two photos increases by 'X' ... then all the reference points will increase equally. Brisson got cocky by shooting that second photo and merely pasting the same head onto it.
You will probably find that there are others like Mary Green in the US and they too won't have a single photo of one of these creatures, nor will they be able to produce one for you to see even if you spent your remaining days on this earth with them.
As far as hunters ... you must be joking. There are lots of circumstances where hunters saw a Sasquatch ... some even firing at them. Patterson and Gimlin were hunters and carried their rifles with them in the forest.
As for me ... I hunt with a camera only. And before you tell me that the BF's don't like cameras ... Patterson carried a camera and filmed his subject. I carry a camera and have seen a Sasquatch.
Good luck with your future confirmations. There is a small group in Georgia that are in need of some confirmation that their BF suit actually had a dead BF in it. There is another nut named Lansdale (aka. Monster Hunter) who claims to have seen more BF's on his family's property than he can even guess at so to give you a number ... and that is what he called the confirmed sightings. (sigh)
Bill Miller Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Feb 28, 2010 7:19:10 GMT -5
Igor, please see the animation in post #4 on page 1 ... and also post #33 on page 3. The distance from the camera to the stumped changed while the head remained the same size. The head also remained on the same axis. There is no defending such an obvious deception in my view.
Brission couldn't fool people here in the US and Canada (with the exception of Bobby Short and a couple of others), so he must have thought that the Russians would be easier to hoax on a wider scale. I would hope that someone tips off the author of the article as to what the findings were here on this forum.
Bill Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
|
Post by Igor Burtsev on Feb 28, 2010 16:09:02 GMT -5
Igor, please see the animation in post #4 on page 1 ... and also post #33 on page 3. The distance from the camera to the stumped changed while the head remained the same size. The head also remained on the same axis. There is no defending such an obvious deception in my view. Bill Bigfoot Field Research Bill and all, look at not the animation but at two frames together but separated. I've drawn in Photoshop with red lines diametres of the same trees on each of two frames, and also some sizes of the stump's parts, and they are the same on both frames! NO ENLARGMENT OF THE TREES BEHIND! Just the trunk of one tree (# 1) which is on right side disappeared, having OPEN THE MORE OF THE STUMP, that is why it seems that IT enlarged!! Just because Randy moved a little to the left when shooting second frame (which is on right side here)... No one tree has been enlarged, they are of the same size!!! Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Feb 28, 2010 20:45:18 GMT -5
First of all, there is no need to launch a personal attack on BFhunter, Hiker 11. Second: But I don't agree with some of your interpretations of Sasquatch associating with paranormal activities, emitting eye glows, and telepathy etc. As to the First - I support you, Seb. As to the second - let's alow researcher to explain his approach without limitation. No wonder if he occures right or not... So many things in this research are unexplained that we cannot reject even fantastic prepositions... You do like Artur Clark. Why don't you like such a more realistic idea than Clark's ones are? By the way, it reminded me one case when our very famous editor Vasiliy Zakharchenko was accused by our Communist State leaders for publishing Clark's novel in a youth magasin and he was expelled for that from the head of that magasine because of ideological reason... Don't be look like them! Igor. Please take the time to study this entire thread before coming to the aid of any particular poster. There is much background here!
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Feb 28, 2010 20:58:20 GMT -5
Igor??? This isn't the Igor who bought into the Mary Green nonsense - is it? If so, then the apple hasn't fallen far from the tree in support of the asinine Brisson hoax. The distance from the subject to the camera changed and yet the head of the subject remained the same size and on the same axis. This was just one of the things wrong with Brisson's failed hoax. However, it was that mistake that anyone with any common sense can understand ... well almost anyone! (sigh) Maybe Igor can show the Brisson image to Mary Green who in turn can share it with her talking Sasquatch so to see if it recognizes one of its own. (double sigh) Bill Bigfoot Field Research Bil. There is no need for the dripping sarcasm on your opinion of Igor's veracity and beliefs on this subject. We all harbor our own opinions on a number of Igor's past statements, as well as some beliefs which he has put forward over the years. None the less, he has been a stallward bastion of interest in this subject over many decades, and deserves a modi! com of respect for his efforts in a bleak area. Obviously he is operating from a position of misinformation with regard to Randy Brisson. He should not be condemned for that, but informed. Your work debunking all of this speaks for its self. It does not need a heavy clubweilded because someone is not up to par on the subject.;)All is well.
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Feb 28, 2010 21:57:22 GMT -5
I didn't mean to suggest that Igor isn't being truthful when it comes to Green and Coy and or his beliefs on the subject. In a day or two I will offer Igor some more in-depth information that will hopefully give him some better insight on the matter.
Bill Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Feb 28, 2010 22:32:30 GMT -5
I didn't mean to suggest that Igor isn't being truthful when it comes to Green and Coy and or his beliefs on the subject. In a day or two I will offer Igor some more in-depth information that will hopefully give him some better insight on the matter. Bill Bigfoot Field Research Great Pal! I look forward to that...as I do to all of your insights on specific areas in this field of research
|
|
|
Post by Igor Burtsev on Mar 1, 2010 14:45:28 GMT -5
Thank you Gerry for respecting my many decades of experience in this field. More over I should say that for last 5-6 year I studied especially the stick structures (or wooden markers), and there were exactly Janice Carter and Mary Green who initiated this interest when I visited them in 2004 and investigated their findings for 5 weeks and had found many confirmations of their rightfulness... And last year I have visited five regions of our country checking the encounters and looking for such markers. And all the visits were very successful... And especially fruitful was my expedition in Kemerovo region which had been initiated and supported financially by the Governor of that region Aman Tuleev, who invited me there as an expert on such Wild men... Also fruitful was my expedition in Petersbourg region: the group there started to communicate with our Forest Friends after finding such markers and footprints. But especially I want to mention my input into the investigation of Patterson film of 1967, i.e. I'm skilled in checking such materials as Brisson's photos. Up to now I've made aquaintance with a lot of info re his activities, I've connected with many peoples in the U.S. , in Canada and in Russia also (there are people here who new him much better than me, just entering w-sites and following radio and tv-programs of yours). And as more I learn as more become sure that his shooting was real... And his attitude to creature is brotherly, not as to a big ape, but as to Forest Brothers, that is why he acheaves such results... And let other peoples accuse me for such thinking...
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Mar 1, 2010 15:24:02 GMT -5
But especially I want to mention my input into the investigation of Patterson film of 1967, i.e. I'm skilled in checking such materials as Brisson's photos. I will offer a sneak preview of my investigation concerning Brission and his story to the Russians. The story starts out with the Russian article saying, "The murky picture published in Pravda Thursday looks like it could be something ... and it also looks like it could be nothing. It appears to be a disembodied dark hairy face in a forest. Brisson is reported to have encountere the Sasquach near Pitt Lake, B.C." The newspaper got it right when they called it a disembodied dark hairy face. More on the disembodied face when the photos we took can be posted. As far as the claim that the encounter was in the vast wilderness of Pitt Lake ... well the alleged encounter was really at Golden Ears Park about 250 feet from the parking lot and not 70 feet off the trail. The Pitt Lake remark to the reporter by Brisson was not true. Steenburg and I went there and took recreation photos today and will post them soon. The area is pretty wide open and Brisson had a perfect view of the area in the event that his alleged Sasquatch tried to move away from behind the stump. On the way out we remarked while smiling how Brisson didn't even bother to pick a secluded location to carry out his hoax so no one would find it. Watch for more info soon. Bill Miller Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
vilnoori
Really into this!
Bone Collector
Posts: 547
|
Post by vilnoori on Mar 1, 2010 15:40:15 GMT -5
Igor, can I have your opinion of this stick arrangement? I found it in an area that I have also found very wide, barefoot prints in the coldest part of the year. This is beside a lake here in BC. Here are pictures: Here is another couple of branch twists I have seen in areas in which there were large barefoot footprints, as follows: This one, which was like a little railing to climb a steep part of the hill up to a meadow. I think maybe it was made to help a young one. In that area I heard an odd, resonant child humming near the water. There also was small rocks piled in the middle of the creek, off the path, not near where people go: and footprints, one big and one little. The little one was about 11 or 12 inches long and the big one much longer, maybe 18? It was very flat looking also. The were in mud, cutting across the path, going up from a creek, crossing the path, and going up to a meadow by the "railing" I photographed. This is near Mt. Baker. Finally here is a massive twist near a popular hike here, Mt. Elk! Could be made by machinery but it was far from a road, up the path, near the summit, and before any logging took place. This tree I could put both hands around. I value your comments. I think we have some very promising areas here in BC, for those that have eyes to see.
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Mar 1, 2010 21:44:33 GMT -5
If looking at those photos makes one think Sasquatch, then they will probably enjoy seeing these as well ... A single foot outline drawn onto the ground ... A line of tracks that could be said to be Sasquatch tracks by someone who may not know that a large bear made them. Print believed to be an actual Sasquatch track (2000) Print believed to be an actual Sasquatch track (2005) Bill Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
|
Post by Igor Burtsev on Mar 2, 2010 12:18:02 GMT -5
Hi Vilnoori, Your pics are very much impressive. As to the first one, of course, it could be made by a human, it depends of the circumstances. If you are sure that none of people has made it - it should be S. to make it. Especially if big footprints were found there... I've found similar ones in our wood men places... The last one definitely has made by a big and very powerful Sasquatch. I think you yourself understan this without my suggestion... As to the stone pile - I could notice it hardly trough branches, but finaly noticed it... I suppose that Ss left this (if not peoples). As to their paths we know that they usually are crossing peoples' ones, just sometimes going alongside them... That means your conclusion is right, there is a place where Ss dwell... We find here three such stable places. And now try to befriend with them. But our possibilities are limited, those places are not close to cities, and we haven't enough funds to visit those places regularly... And fourth place is in Siberia, Kemerovo region, we just started to do something there.
|
|