I've been looking around and snoopin' about and studying the Jacob's Creature photos for some time and even though I really wish we had conclusive photographs of a sasquatch, I'm not entirely convinced. Look at this fancy bear below.
I chopped off its head and applied it to the photo below for comparison to what I think could be a bear (albeit a scrawny one). Don't get me wrong, when I look at the photo below I do at first glance admit that it looks primate but if you look at what is supposedly its head (click on the pictures to biggerize them)...
If it is a bear I see that it's nose is hiding behind its left forearm as if it were licking the inside of its elbow. Here is a photo that was posted at the BFRO of a mangy old bear. Poor sack of skin and bones. If I didn't know it was a bear I may have thought it was an ill hyena. We have better lighting, clearer photography to help us determine that this is not the case. At another angle, under starker lighting conditions and grainier film, who knows how similar to a primate it could look, especially if the head was out of sight?
The other photo of the creature shows a lump on the ground. Some people have been saying that this is its head. I don't see how this can be the case. Very very odd proportions. Too odd to be correct. So what is it? It wasn't there in the previous photo? I think it's a bear cub. Hey we have photos of bear cubs already. 30 seconds is enough time for an enthusiastic little cub to run up to its mother and start squirming around in the deer phermones. Again, just my opinion. I would love to have proof otherwise but I don't think this is gonna do it.