July 28, 2009 -- The Bigfoot creature may have been captured on a remote trail camera placed in the Sierra National Forest, based on photography evidence released by Sanger Paranormal Society.

Investigator Jeffrey Gonzalez said Tuesday night that multiple cameras were put in place in this remote area on Memorial Day weekend, and retreived on June 7, 2009.

Gonzalez said they did not immediately see the evidence, but upon closer inspection, noticed what appears to be the Bigfoot creature.

Gonzalez said a group returned to the site to review the exact capture spot after many theories surfaced once the original image was released in early July.

The tree stump theory was ruled out, he said, because the "dark object" is not there. Gonzalez said the bear theory does not stand up either, because the image does not have a snout on the head.

"You can see features of a human face such as the nose, mouth and chin," Gonzalez reports.

"The arms on a bear, when standing, do not hang that far down. We also took measures on how high this thing was. According to the leaves and the branches that were covering the object's face, the tape measure said it was between 8 and 9 feet tall. The same camera that took the picture of the object also took pictures of other objects such as black bear and deer, which does not resemble the object in any way."

Photo: Jeffrey Gonzalez standing in the same spot as the object in the image.

Gonzales said that Bigfoot investigator David Raygoza has been visiting this location for six years after an elderly Native American pointed it out to him.

He told David that this spot in the forest was sacred Indian land and that weird things happen here. He said David has had many individual sightings and has collected footprints, but has never captured anything with a camera until now.

Photo: Jeffrey Gonzalez

Returning to the exact spot where the image was captured, Gonzalez said that the angle of the hill is 45 degrees, which would make it difficult for a bear to stand upright. He also said the the object is clearly brown in color, ruling out the black bear.

The Bigfoot creature has been reported in many different parts of the country during the 20th century, including an "outbreak" during 1973 and 1974, primarily in southwestern, Pennsylvania, and investigated by Stan Gordon. During that period, hundreds of Bigfoot sightings were reported as well as hundreds of UFO reports. No photographic evidence exists from that time, although Gordon collected many foot prints in that region.

Aside from this single image, Gonzalez points out that there were three additional images taken several days earlier near midnight, where a bright light lit up the area.

His group cannot account for how this happened, except that they are ruling out a flashlight as the source of the light in the images.

Examiner dot com
Photos: Jeffrey Gonzalez & Dave Raygoza

Comments:
I don't believe the Raygoza photo of the "bigfoot shape" is anything more than a naturally occurring shadow or dark spot on a background tree. Here's why:

The photo of the "bigfoot" and the subsequent photo of the man are clearly taken from different angles. The first photo was taken from a position considerably to the right of the position from which the second photo was taken. This is made most evident by the fact that the tree against which the man is framed is not even visible in the original photo.

I've highlighted some of the most prominent visual landmarks in each photo: The bigfoot figure in red (as you can see, it's still there in the second photo, but cropped so that only the front of the "figure" is visible); The leaves of what appear to be a vine mapel in green (higher and to the right in the second photo from their position in the original); the large tree to the left in purple (notice how no part of it is obscured by leaves in the second photo); and the line of bark texture on the foreground tree in blue (in the original photo this line is well on the left side of the tree trunk, in the second photo it is almost centered).

I think that if one were to return to that spot and really line up ones camera to the position from which the original photo was taken, one would see the "bigfoot" standing there.

It's too bad the photos are too small. If they were larger and clearer, I believe the discrepancies between them would be even more evident.

Seeing may be believing, but it's not always the truth.

Randy Stradley,
September 7, 2009

Back to stories
Back to Bigfoot Encounters Main page
Back to Newspaper & Magazine Articles
Back to Bigfoot Encounters "What's New" page

Portions of this website are reprinted and sometimes edited to fit the standards of this website
under the Fair Use Doctrine of International Copyright Law
as educational material without benefit of financial gain.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
This proviso is applicable throughout the entire Bigfoot Encounters Website.