• SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, five years young! For a low subscription fee, you will be able to download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive After The Paracast podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! FLASH! For a limited time, you can save up to 40% on your subscription. Long-term susbcribers will receive a free coupon code for the James Fox UFO documentary "The Phenomenon," which includes 3 hours of extras, while supplies last. It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Marley Woods Unknown Creature

Hoffmeister

There is no spoon
Should it be shocking that it looks similar? I think that anything with 4 legs that you put next to it is going to look similar so long as you adjust the size appropriately. And after all, a dog with long white hair is what Ted said the picture was of anyway. But it doesn't look 400-500 pounds to me. But without any frame of reference size is difficult to nail down as well.
Not really, but it is a good visual example of how a grainy picture (and most of the time grainy pictures are what's promoted as 'evidence' in these topics) can look like just about anything.
The fact that it looks a little bit like a sheepdog, and the fact that Ted owns a sheepdog is a tiny bit amusing if nothing else.
hector.jpg
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Seriously?!? Now that is funny.

---------- Post added at 08:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:55 PM ----------

I don't know what to think now...

We need more photographs to evaluate.
 

Christopher O'Brien

Back in the Saddle Aginn
Staff member
I am back! Thank you to Gene and the current Mods for reinstating me.
You are sincerely welcome, but please, pretty please, play nice with the rest of us kids :)

The image looks to me like a dog, possibly a sheepdog type. I have shrunk a sheepdog image down in size and placed it next to the image in the photo and it looks very similar. The fact that there appears to be no snout could be that the dog is looking towards the camera.
Hmmm, interesting hypothesis. If the photo is of a sheep dog (Ted's?) Yikes! According to Ted the photographer of the shot claims there is another photo that shows the thing (whatever it is) to be standing erect. Until I see that shot, this picture is suspect IMO. To be honest, I am a little disappointed that the shot is of such poor quality, but still, I'll give Ted a chance to produce a higher rez version, or the before mentioned standing erect evidence. But, I ain't gonna be sitting here turning blue, holding my breath... Good work pixie!
 

Hoffmeister

There is no spoon
I actually say this in all seriousness now.... but you don't think that his dog might have been responsible for the hair? I imagine Ted takes the dog out with him when he looks around the woods, maybe the dog got some of its hair caught in the wire when Ted wasn't looking. Either way its a really cool dog though, i'd love to have one like that.
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
You are sincerely welcome, but please, pretty please, play nice with the rest of us kids
I have been playing in this sandbox a long time now. No one here besides Gene has been playing here longer than myself. I know the rules and if we ALL follow them there shouldn't be a problem. :) Thanks again to Gene and current Moderators for reinstating me. This 3rd banishment was the worst. I never left the forum, I read it several times a day and typed up a reply list like you wouldn't believe in regards to the pixel banning thread and many others... after thinking about it...I deleted them all.

Fresh slate, no burned bridges, no hard feelings. Gene and the forum members are like family. Nuff said.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I live and hunt in an area much like what is in the photo. I have seen many kinds of animals in this type of setting and this photo just didnt look unusual to me at all. When hunting you have to make sure of your target and if I were hunting for a Marley Woods Creature, I would not take a shot at what is shown. I would have resolved it to be a dog. (IMO)
 

Christopher O'Brien

Back in the Saddle Aginn
Staff member
Do you know or can you ask if the photo in question was taken with a digital camera (as opposed to film)?
I do not know, but I will sure find out. I really want to see the shot with whatever it is standing erect, if it even exists. Until it is produced, nothing anyone says, one way or another is unequivocal.
 

Gareth

Nothin' to see here
Did people really need someone to post an overlay of a dog on the image to give them the idea it could be a dog? I dont get it. Of course it could be a dog.

More interesting would be analysis showing why it is NOT a dog.

We really cant do anything with these pics. Im looking forward to seeing what else Ted has.
 
P

pixelsmith

Guest
Did people really need someone to post an overlay of a dog on the image to give them the idea it could be a dog? I dont get it. Of course it could be a dog.

More interesting would be analysis showing why it is NOT a dog.

We really cant do anything with these pics. Im looking forward to seeing what else Ted has.

"people" did not post the image, I did.

I posted it to show a resemblance of a dog with its head turned toward camera.

---------- Post added at 02:42 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:39 AM ----------

But the creature is very obviously dog-shaped....

It could be a capybara, or pigmy shetland pony, or a warthog, or a group of hairy Klerksdorp spheres... ;)
 

Gareth

Nothin' to see here
"people" did not post the image, I did.

I posted it to show a resemblance of a dog with its head turned toward camera.

---------- Post added at 02:42 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:39 AM ----------



It could be a capybara, or pigmy shetland pony, or a warthog, or a group of hairy Klerksdorp spheres... ;)


Re-read my post and youll see that your reply to me was completely unnecessary.
 

NTS

Skilled Investigator
As far as standing erect, dogs can do that too. When my dog was in the house and heard something out front she would rock back and stand up on her hind legs to see out through the screen door. She could hold that position for several seconds.

My impression of the pictures was of something more cat-like though. Also, I thought "Enlargement 3" was an enlargement of the original, but Enlargements 1 & 2 look like they're from a different photo (or a different part of the same original, but I couldn't see where).
 

Gareth

Nothin' to see here
As far as standing erect, dogs can do that too. When my dog was in the house and heard something out front she would rock back and stand up on her hind legs to see out through the screen door. She could hold that position for several seconds.

My impression of the pictures was of something more cat-like though. Also, I thought "Enlargement 3" was an enlargement of the original, but Enlargements 1 & 2 look like they're from a different photo (or a different part of the same original, but I couldn't see where).

http://il.youtube.com/watch?v=PfXLf5S7WPU&feature=related
 

Ron Collins

Curiously Confused
For me the size is completely dependent on the distance to the animal and the height of the trees. If this is the only image it would be next to impossible to accurately determine anything. I believe that was what pixel (welcome back) was saying and I obviously agree. I think it is all a moot point until we can get more information about the image, camera, distance, and what steps were taken to determine the characteristics reported.

---------- Post added at 05:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:45 AM ----------

Ron or Chris,

Do you know or can you ask if the photo in question was taken with a digital camera (as opposed to film)?
Thanks,

Lance

No but I will ask. I already sent him a list of questions and sadly this was not one of them. I should have thought to ask that.
 

Hoffmeister

There is no spoon
I have to say I am remain doubtful as to whether we'll ever see any more information of substance from him, and even more skeptical now that it has come to light that we got another picture of hair on a fence last time around. Unless this Yeti monster / Giant 500 lbs Beast(or whatever it is) is particularly careless and keeps walking into barbed wire fences right before Ted is about to appear on a paracast episode, then it all seems a little bit staged. I might see if I can find any other white hair photo's from Marley woods when i get more time

Thanks for your efforts in attempting to get more info Ron
 

Ron Collins

Curiously Confused
I have just read through the log of events of the unknown animal. I thought this might be of interest.

"September 2008 began the case file on Mr. Whitefoot as it would be known as events continued that seemed to be connected to this large animal. Based on the data I believe this animal is in no way connected to Bigfoot. Not one of the witnesses called it a Bigfoot creature or even mentioned Bigfoot. I have no idea what this animal might be but there are reports and we are in Marley to investigate any and all reported events."

In fact in many of the log entries witnesses liken it to a very large dog like creature. The face is said to have little in common with that of a dog. Hair samples have been taken from 5 or 6 locations at least. If I am reading it correctly the tracks are all from different events but in a few cases they are found in proximity to where the hair samples were taken or in relation to the other tracks.

From the detail listed in the log, I would expect it to be similar in appearance to what we see in the image.
 

Ron Collins

Curiously Confused
I have some updates! Ted was kind enough to take some time today to answer some questions while in town getting some equipment. Here is the Q&A.

Q: Was the camera used a digital or film camera?
A: he original image was taken with a small format film camera, how I wish it was otherwise. Obviously they didn't expect to see whatever this is. They were in that area looking for a panther. I will lay my hands on the original negatives, I'm surprised the image is as clear as it is

Q: How many images were taken? Am I correct in that there were 2 images taken. One of it standing and one of it on four legs? Am I also correct in that you do not have the standing image yet? Of course the next question is do you believe you will be getting it?
A: No standing image (on two legs) the standing image as you see four legs, in the 2nd imagae it was lying down. I think someone, including my team will get a two leg standing image. We have trail cams out in that area.

Q: There is some contention over the apparent size of the animal and in the distance to the animal. Have you confirmed that the distance from photographer to the animal was 800 feet? Also, is there any way to gauge the height in relation to the background trees?
A: It was 800ft + or - a few feet, they later walked to the area and no traces were found. I didn't find out about it until the film was processed. Knowing that area quite well and it being at the outside edge of the woods, I would estimate a shoulder height of perhaps 3 ft. My 150lb Old English Sheepdog is very large and the shoulder height is 27 inches, body 4ft long.

Q: Regarding the tracks, people have suggested perhaps they are from a cougar or leopard. Have you had the chance to send images or the cast to a specialist? If one of the forum members has a contact with a specialist would you have objections to them sending the track images to them?
A: We have tried to match the tracks and had no luck. A group of microbiologists tried to find a match for the tracks and hair samples with no luck. Wouldn't mind at all if the track images go out. We need to remember the animal in question has extremely long white hair. The pond tracks indicate a different type of print, just don't know how degraded the ice prints are from some melting.

Q: The hair samples are awesome! Am I correct that these were collected in separate events and are not related to the prints or to the creature image?
A: Yes, the hair samples are apart from the tracks and I always try to state that the tracks may not be connected to the white animal events. I feel the ice (pond) tracks are more significant as they are not like a known animal I nor a number of trackers have seen. The tracks appear to be from something with two legs judging by their relative potisions - and - NO, I'm not saying it was a Bigfoot!!!

Note: Ted was in a rush so I did correct some spelling and separated a few run-on sentences. Otherwise this is straight from the horses mouth.
 

paraschtick

Paragilmorian guy
Many thanks Ron for uploading the pics and handling the Q&A!

I mentioned that there seemed to be 2 images above (I would have thought that other folks might have observed that, too but no one else seemed to notice). Unfortunately both images are worthless as evidence for anything, rising just above the Erik Beckjord level of photographic excellence.
...
I listen to this stuff along with the rest of you folks and I wonder... I hear the same words you do. I hear the endless claims. And I listen very carefully but always in vain for even the faintest hint of a ring of truth.

Lance

My god I must be ill ... I agree with you Lance :D. I'm starting to despair that even the supposed top researchers can't come up with the goods. I say "the goods". I actually mean "any goods". I was expecting something a bit more from Ted than some grainy pictures and some strands of something that might or might not be hair of some sort. I thought the creature was a big fluffy friendly dog of some sort when I first (finally) figured out what I was supposed to be looking for. I certainly didn't see some cryptozoological nightmarish animal from another dimension.

So I await the DNA results with breath that shall remain unbated for now. I may be being a bit harsh on all concerned but we're given details upfront that make it sound like the researchers have the holy grail of evidence, and it turns out to be more of an egg cup.

I have a feeling from what I've read about Ray Stanford, he won't be coming up with anything worth bothering with. But of course I could be wrong.

We may be entering the long Dark Ages of Ufoology ...
 

Top