Michigan (Minnesota) Fisherman Photo

Everyone's talking about it. Everyone has an opinion. My turn now.

No, I'm not going to tell you that it's real or fake. I wasn't there. And neither were you. But we all have had our two cents worth of opinion, as usual. Some are skeptical, some are rude, some are non-committing, and some are endorsements. But all are just opinions. And yes, we are entitled to them. So let's take a look at some of the comments.

But first a little background for the few who may not be familiar with the story. The post of the video claims this happened in Northern Michigan. It has been discovered that the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness is actually in Minnesota. That could have been a mistaken error, not done on purpose. It is sometimes easy to mix up state abbreviations or if your mind was on the recent Michigan stories, one could mistakenly put that as the state.  So for those who use that as the reason to call these photos a fake, not good enough for proof.

Jack, the witness, says he left the campsite to gather firewood when he came upon what he thought was a bear. Suddenly the figure stood upright on two feet. It appeared to be approximately 6 feet tall with an upright posture. The figure had a high-pitched growl, made eye contact with Jack for a few seconds, and seemed to be trying to hide in the trees as it ran off.

[below is the video for those who wish to view it again]

Now for the many opinions. First off, quite a few complaints were made of the "blurry" photographs, the "lack of details", "no real clear shots", "blobsquatch", "could be anything".

Then you get the claims of the details that others saw: "bloke wearing a hoodie", "figure holding a pick or other tool" so it's a hoax, hair stops abruptly at the wrist and the face doesn't look realistic so it has to be someone playing a joke on the witness, on 65" screen clearly shows it's a human, can see the shirt in the picture "long sleeve black shirt and a bigfoot mask", shirt line and pants visible, "fragile wrist sticking out of fur hoodie sleeve", bigfoot costume, or gorilla costume.

So, which is it to be, people?? Is too blurry for details? Or does it "clearly" show the details that you list?

You get the "hunter in a ghillie suit in a tree stand looking for deer" when it isn't even deer season. And yes, I know there are and will be poachers.

And we have sarcasm displayed, "bigfoot with an afro". Ok. if you say so. Some Dogman statements were made including speaking of seeing pointed, dog-like ears. Some say it's "darn good" and "could be"; you can read "No bear, great photo of a young sasquatch", followed by simply "Bear". More suit claims, dogman claims.

One of the less convincing comments posted went something like this. That it was a cheap gorilla costume. The photographer only included the blurry pics where you can't see the details so that he could hide the details of the suit. The photos were purposely made blurry to disguise the mask. And, although there are no details, he was able to provide the link to the suit that the witness used. Ok then.

Other suggestions included: shadow of a tree, teenage sasquatch, and bigfoot.
We also have the usual complaint of why didn't he take a video.

And we get the "no cone head" reason. The shape is all wrong. The head is too "human-like". And here is one person I will quote by name because under one of the no cone head comments she made the reply I wanted to. "Not all have cone-head shapes." Thank you, Marilyn J. Sloper. How right you are. Not all Sasquatch are going to look like Patty. They are as different as you and I. Time to stop using that old excuse for why it's fake: It doesn't look like Patty.

Another favorite response was: it was a gorilla costume; the arms were too short; there was no cone head; it wasn't hiding; and so it has to be a hoax. Well, there's some sort of logic in there somewhere. Except, we don't know if it was a costume or not; arms are bent, legs partially concealed, so how are we measuring; already covered the cone head thing; can't say it wasn't hiding as it is seen in the photos that it is trying to get some trees between it and the witness; don't know if it's a hoax.

I also liked the stand-alone comment made by one person: "Well, it's not blurry."

I also have to admire the one that gets the "I'm on the Fence" award: "Looks convincing, but I'm not convinced."

A little more rebuttal here: The so-called line between the shirt and pants? Look closer. It appears to be a twig of some sort on one of the branches closer to the camera.

Ditto for the alleged mask: Sorry, the figure is facing away from the camera. Unless he's got a demon inside ala Linda Blair, the "mask" appears to be a leaf or some such object attached to a branch or twig closer to the camera.  Oh, that also means that if he is wearing a "cheap gorilla suit", you would not be able to see that, unless he is wearing the suit backwards.

There does appear to be something either in the figure's left hand or resting on his left arm. It seems to be sort of star-shaped. I don't know what it is, maybe a leaf, maybe a flower, or part of a larger object. I don't know. But it doesn't seem to resemble a pick or a tool to me.

Is it a person in a suit? Or is it a sasquatch? I don't know. I wasn't there. I will leave this photo in the realm of the unknown. For now.

Which brings me to my last reflection. There really are not that many details discernible in this photograph. But yet a great many are making their claims of seeing this and seeing that. And then the rest are claiming it's too blurry; it's a blobsquatch.

Are we only seeing what we wish to see? Are we putting on blinders to block what isn't fitting our own agendas?

Are there those who will never see because they fear losing the mystery of Sasquatch?

Nancy

This Post By TCC Team Member Nancy Marietta. Nancy has had a lifelong interest in the paranormal and cryptids. Nancy is also a published author and her book, The Price of War, has been met with great reviews.

[Please Note: Sadly Nancy passed away at the first of January, 2022. We will continue to honor her and her research by sharing her work. RIP Nancy. -Thomas]

This post is sponsored in part by

Ads