Here is the reasons why this is likely not a Sasquatch:
- Walks/stands on four legs - Sasquatch are bipedal
- Size - Smaller than 5 feet tall (reference), probably about 100-150 lbs (my own guess), Sasquatch are generally much bigger. Although this size is well within normal range for a female black bear (reference).
- Bear cubs photographed in the same location less than 30 min prior - Bear cubs are generally accompanied by an adult bear.
- Spinal flexion - The level and location of spinal flexion is not consistent with human, gorilla, or chimpanzee; but is consistent with a bear. See figure:
- Gluteal muscles - It does not appear that this creature has pronounced gluteal muscles. Large gluteal muscles are associated with bipedal gait. Glutes appear similar to bear, although inconclusive due to picture quality.
- Girth of upper limb is roughly equal to lower limbs - Bipeds would probably have larger girth in lower limbs relative to upper limbs.
- Feet - feet appear small
- Professional opinion - The Pennsylvania Game Commission declared this a "mangey bear" (reference). The bigfoot community argues that the Pennsylvania Game Commission is biased because they do not accept the possibility of a Sasquatch. Similarly, the Bigfoot community is biased because they do not accept the possibility that Sasquatch does not exist.
I feel the R Jacobs photos are most probably a bear and unlikely to be a Sasquatch. This might be an example of Bigfoot researchers drawing observations from conclusions.
No comments:
Post a Comment