## Rocky Mountain Sasquatch Organization Receives an Interesting Picture

The Rocky Mountain Sasquatch Organization regularly posts purported images and videos of Sasquatches. They are definitely worth a follow, as they crank out great content all the time. Reviewing these pieces of potential evidence serves an important role whether people can agree on the conclusions or not. It is important to put a critical eye on these things and to put them in the public domain for debate.

In the below video, they analyze a picture from a trail cam sent to them from Oklahoma.

## A Counter-Analysis

In this particular case, I have to say that I disagree with the narrator’s conclusion. In the video the narrator says that the ratchet strap on the tree is a known height of about 7 feet. He also says that the tree it is wrapped around is about 15ft from the camera. He uses this measurement to say that the figure in the foreground must be at least 8 feet tall.

The problem here is with distance and perceived height. The narrator is judging the height of the figure based on the tree as if they were the same distance from the camera. But they are obviously not. To get an idea of a 1 to 1 2D comparison I made the photo below by copying the figure and putting it directly beside the tree.

Without scaling the figure it is 40% taller than the ratchet strap on the tree. If the two were at the same distance, the figure would measure around 9’8″. However with the figure being closer to the camera, it would have to be scaled down to get an accurate height.

We cannot get a completely accurate height because even though we have a height on one object and a distance for it we don’t have other measurements like the distance of the figure or the height of the camera. We would also need the camera info (pixel count, etc.) and the angle of the photo to be precise.

We can however get a decent estimate with the measurements given, assuming they are near accurate. The figure appears to be about half the distance from the camera to the tree with the strap. Given what we are told about the tree with the strap, let’s do some math.

## Some Rough Math

Solve for Height of Figure – HF

Height of strap = H1 = 7 ft

Distance of strap from the lens = D1 = 15 ft

Distance of figure from the lens = D2 = 7.5 ft

Figure is 1.4 times taller than strap in the 2D image

Scaling Factor: D1/D2=SF — 15 ft/7.5 ft=2 — SF=2

Apparent Height of figure in 2D: 1.4 ft * H1 = AH — 1.4 ft*7 ft=9.8 ft — AH=9.8 ft

Height of Figure with Scaling Factor Applied: AH/SF=HF — 9.8 ft/2=4.9 ft.

## In Conclusion

So with what we are given, the height of the figure appears to be roughly 4’11”. Now as I said, this isn’t accurate because we don’t have all the factors needed. The figure may be taller than that, because although the distance is roughly double the height doesn’t necessarily reduce at the same rate as the distance increases.

What I have shown, however, is that the figure is not 8 feet tall. It cannot be if the strap is at 7 feet. Let me know your thoughts in the comments!

*P.S. I really appreciate RMSO’s efforts and encourage you to give them a follow.*