“I give up reading this thread - too many huge comments from Bigcatman!!”

“Just as well we have someone to instruct us on how to use a camera, I'd like to read more of it , my skills are a little rusty since I flogged the Hasselblad.
BCM. can you post the URL you got it from please?”

“Very good points!”

“and you need to be ready with your camera/phone when the cat appears for a couple of seconds. Very unlikely.”

“Tim, the image in most good phones and camera's are decent and good enough to get A4 and A3+ size from. The trouble with non-SLR and mobile phones as well as small hand-held dig-cams is that as you zoom in the pixalation rate increases. Also the main fact that most have a very small optical zoom compared to the digital zoom, both are different, and then may be image stabilisers are not included or may be not turned on which would gives a very out of focus and unsteady picture. I use DSLR and DMF camera's, the Digital Medium Format cameras have 40 million plus pixal count as compared to the majority of DSLR cameras which are averaging at 16 mp but most small cameras have a very small digital chip to collect the data. Given that to own a decent DMF camera will set you back well in the excess of £27K and more, then most people do not or will not have the ability to take such mega-pixal rate pictures.

Most people will tend to use their phone or small camera or small digi-cam, get over excited, heart rate will be racing, the zoom feature will be at it's maximum apature and focal depth, the light gathered in will be dark and the processing chip will not be able to deal with the low amount of information.”

“Not being funny haha, but has anyone noticed that despite the proliferation of high-quality image producing devices these days (and theres a fifty percent change each of us will have at least one on our person most of the time -phone camera), all pictures and video of "cryptid" animal ive seen recently looks like they were shot with a Vaseline-smeared mid-90's webcam?”

“If there are any from the Panthera family, I would have seen a few more kills including attacks on lone humans walking in the woodlands - Panthers - Leopards, Tigers, and the like also return to their kills - and depending upon the ground conditions left some paw marks. Were there any?”

“It's quite funny to think they've found a 29 mm lizard but we can't manage to
see a load of big cats that are supposed to be on the loose!!

I have little faith in the 'experts' they bring in on anything, in my experience
the media will use anyone who backs up the story they want to tell, regardless
of whether it is the truth.”

“Just a jumbo hoax: Documentary maker shows video of empty river that was doctored to show Siberian 'mammoth'

Iceland's sea monster unmasked: Experts say it's a piece of cloth snagged on a branch in fast-flowing river

What's to show and prove that the so-called sightings of "big cats" in the Gloucestershire county are real and true, given that the Siberian "mammoth" and the Iceland "lake monster" have been debunked and are now shown as fakes? All the CCRI study will show is what views the general readers have on the myth of such sightings, it is not a true or real gauge, but merely a measure as to the perseption of the myth.
A friend of mine said this to me today: Was so funny today at Ed Zoo all these visitors going wow look at the Black panther. When the sign clearly said JAGUAR!
That clearly says a lot, and goes to show that most people fail to see the obvious that is clearly in front of them. People in general fail to see the obvious that is right in front of them, put a sign up, people ignore. If we were to slow ourselves down then we would not miss the obvious and therefore live a more fruitful life.

Just because Frank Tunbridge says that he "heard it growl at him", and "he is 100% sure that there are big cats out there", afterall he is an "expert big cat tracker" strangly enough which even he admits that he has never caught, tracked or found a "big cat". So why should we and everyone belive him?
Pseudo-sightings and with a co-friend who just so happens to have published a book on the "big cats in UK" which just so happens all these sightings just appeared in the press within days of the book release. One then wonders who or what are the real motives of this man and his pseudo-sightings which have never been proved thus far, even the DNA came back as negative. So why should we believe this man?

There is no such science called cryptozoology and this is what is called a pseudo word, a made up word. It's not a science, because once the animal is found, it's just normal zoology, can't study what you can't see can you? It is simply a widely recognised term for a section of research. - Sorry for the information but this pseudo-word has to be shown in it's right context.

Oxford
cryptozoology
• noun the search for animals whose existence is disputed or unsubstantiated

Cryptozoology concerns itself with unknown species for which there are "legends" or "myths" (for want of a better word) and with supposedly-extinct species. Strictly-speaking, a species that is simply unknown is not cryptozoological. The overall problem with debating the specifics of the meaning of the term "cryptozoology" is that it is not a legitimate field of science. Any idiot can call himself a cryptozoologist as if it means something important and it does not. A zoologist is a legitimate title, as is geologist, biologist, etc. Cryptozoologist means nothing.

The discovery of a new animal is not Cryptozoology, but the search for one is. For example, if you told me you'd been on holiday and saw a little green frog that seemed to be using bio luminescence, and I decided it may be a new or believed extinct species and went to go look, that would be cryptozoology”

“I hear a low droning noise ..... must go to my GP to have the BS syringed out of my ears.”