It’s time to play a time-honored classic skeptic’s game: Misguided Eccentric, Raging Nutter, or Fraudulent Douchebag?
Choose carefully, now: if Mike Greene is a misguided eccentric or a fraudulent douchebag we can laugh at him. Otherwise, no can do.
A few more things to consider before deciding: the “8-foot thing” that is obviously a beast because the heat signature isn’t “splotchy” looks exactly like a dude wearing a t-shirt. Also, the narrator (reporter??) calls it “the moneyshot.” Also, dude used a candybar for bait. Also, this guy’s day job is to be a fraud investigator.
Oh and also: apparently it doesn’t make any sense that we don’t have a single lousy picture of Bigfoot! Obviously the only logical explanation is that they don’t exist they are so smart and/or can “hear or sense” electromagnetic radiation.
OF COURSE
I think the last comment from the narrator is most important. ‘until we get that moneyshot, we’ll have to believe it’s the real thing’
That’s the backward part. Until we get the moneyshot (or until the first time a sasquatch dies and leaves a corpse in the woods), we’ll consider a BS scam with only two kinds of participants: either marks and cons.
I’m not laughing because it’s a bit depressing to see people wasting time with junk science.
Oh! I laughed before I got the “all clear!” Is that ok? As soon as he said “it makes no sense, UNLESS…” I lost all ability to reason.
I am definitely going to have to go with misguided eccentric. This guy is just not dealing well with retirement.
I’m betting “misguided eccentric” but really hoping for “viral campaign for Snickers”.
In Australia we use “lollies” as bait. You might need to know this when you are here for TAM. Also we have our own imaginery totally real version of a fictional monster “the Yowie.”
Bigfoot:cameras::dogs:vacuums? We already got the “money shot” in on Bigfoot!
Misguided Eccentric, hur hur hur.
I love the fact that this guy’s a fraud investigator, he must fall for every pathetic excuse going.
I also think it’s hilarious that he’s “baffled” by the fact he’s hasn’t found a definitive picture in 40 years of looking.
I picture him waking in a cold sweat one night, as reality clobbers him in the face with a lump of wood.
Those are some very warm trees on the ol’ thermal imaging sasquatch-seein’ forest cam.
Maybe evolution kept them hot — to put off bigfoot?
You guys are forgetting: this guy was a fraud investigator. He’s out of the fraud investigation game now. He’s more into fraud perpetuation these days. That’s where the big money is! And the dames!
Some of those trees are as hot as the “sasquatch” I think a smell fraud…
Oh, love the reasoning, until the day we get conclusive proof that the highly improbable giant beastie exists, we will just have to believe it exists….
Now, there is scepticism for you!
I find arborealendothermia more compelling than sasquatch. I mean, squirrels live in trees through the winter, right. Squirrels are smart.
Obviously the only logical explanation is that
they don’t existthey are so smart and/or can “hear or sense†electromagnetic radiationthey are invisible, floating, heatless, odorless, silent, incorporeal Bigfeet. Just like the dragon in my garage.Aren’t they covered with fur? Fur is going to be at the same temperature as the air.
What about a bear?
“Not that he hasn’t heard all the possibilities from the skeptics”
Those silly skeptics always trying to ruin everyone’s fun with other possibilities. Don’t they know people don’t care about reality? Plus, he’s got a THERMAL camera. NO WAY that could be a guy in a suit.
Did you notice how he doesn’t show what exactly a guy in a suit looks like with a thermal camera? Also, how do we know exactly how big that figure is? Is it taller than a person? There isn’t anything to compare it to other than trees. And if it IS taller than normal it still doesn’t really matter because you never see the things feet. How do we know it isn’t wearing stilts or something?
I also like how he says it’s something you couldn’t fake. I bet someone could make a fake that looks very similar to the video.
The fact that the whole “creature” is completely white suggests burnout to me. That is, the camera’s sensitivity is high enough that even the coldest part of the figure is warm enough that it shows as completely white. That way the whole subject appears as it’s of a uniform temperature even if it isn’t.
This seems extra likely if it was filmed in NC, at night, during autumn (so the ambient temperature would be quite low).
The same thing happens if you film a light source at night with a regular camera – if it’s sensitive enough to pick up anything that isn’t a light source, anything that does emit light will just be a uniform splash.
I think the bigger discovery is that some trees are warm-blooded. Think of it…mammalian trees!! :-D
I’m sorry, but I don’t understand one assumption of the bigfoot theory: why do these people think there were any hominids or apes other than humans in North America or Australia? A hitherto undiscovered big ape in Asia – OK, plausible, so Yeti is not impossible. But do we have any hominid fossil in America or any placental mammal in Australia?
FF
Definitely misguided eccentric. An amusing one at that.
He could be buying expensive equipment, hanging out in the woods and killing animals, or buying expensive equipment, hanging out in the woods, and taking pictures of pretend animals. The latter sounds more fun, and certainly more fun for us spectators.
First, I have to admit that I don’t know enough about thermal imaging to be able to speak knowledgeably. That being said, how the hell are the trees as hot as a a living creature? And like daedalus2u pointed out, Bigfoot is covered in fur. Fur at night shouldn’t show up like that, should it?
@Florin:
You mean primate, not hominid.
Hominid: A primate of the family Hominidae, of which Homo sapiens is the only extant species.
@John Greg:
I mean Hominidae, a family that includes today chimps and gorillas, and some extinct relatives, say Gigantopithecus in Asia (Yeti?). And I mean hominids before the humans Homo sapiens arrived in America and Australia.
Imagine a cousin of Homo erectus colonised America before us and there is still a small relict population today known as Sasquatch. Is there any non-human hominid fossil in America to support such hypothesis? I think there is no bigfoot, but at least the Yeti seems plausible in principle. I don’t see any reason we even think American and Australian bigfoot could exist.
Sorry, there are placental mammals native to Australia: bats and mice. All the rest are monotremes, marsupials, and introduced placentals.
@Florin:
Whoopsy! My bad. So sorry. For some reason I was thinking hominids were just us Homo Sapiens.
/blushes with shame and embare-assment
Choose carefully, now: if Mike Greene is a misguided eccentric or a fraudulent douchebag we can laugh at him. Otherwise, no can do.
I do not remember agreeing to these rules and will laugh at anyone I wish to laugh at.
@QuestionAuthority: Mammalian trees means…say it with me…Tree Boobs!
http://www.collegehumor.com/picture:1761945