patterson gimlin film

[pinkmoon]

I am almost at a loss to respond to this. To say that there were literally no stories bearing even a cursory resemblance to Bigfoot or Nessie before the dates you specifyf? Really? Saint Columba didn't claim to have driven off an aquatic monster from attacking a man in the River Ness by invoking the name of God many centuries ago? American Indians weren't telling tales of fearsome hairy giants in the woods just as long ago? I'm not saying the old stories have to exactly match the ones of today. I'm just saying that there is a precedent in history.

And if a fantastic claim is made, and then multiple people come out and claim "I was responsible for that" or "I know how such-and-such person was responsible for that" with more than one version of how it was supposedly done- well, unless one of those people presents absolutely undeniable proof of their claim, I'm afraid they do cancel each other out. If only one of them can be true, then there is the possibility that none of them are. Isn't that simple logic?

If pgf is faked show us the monkey suit and by the way the person who claims to be patty keeps changing his story .

[kensei]

Everything you have written is wrong.

There are no traditions about the Bigfoot before 1958 nor Nessie before the early 30's.

Several claiming the same thing does not automatically cancel them all out.

Patterson was a fraud though a desperate one. The suit was a mailorder job.

I am almost at a loss to respond to this. To say that there were literally no stories bearing even a cursory resemblance to Bigfoot or Nessie before the dates you specifyf? Really? Saint Columba didn't claim to have driven off an aquatic monster from attacking a man in the River Ness by invoking the name of God many centuries ago? American Indians weren't telling tales of fearsome hairy giants in the woods just as long ago? I'm not saying the old stories have to exactly match the ones of today. I'm just saying that there is a precedent in history.

And if a fantastic claim is made, and then multiple people come out and claim "I was responsible for that" or "I know how such-and-such person was responsible for that" with more than one version of how it was supposedly done- well, unless one of those people presents absolutely undeniable proof of their claim, I'm afraid they do cancel each other out. If only one of them can be true, then there is the possibility that none of them are. Isn't that simple logic?

[kensei]

Is it my imagination or are we hearing about fewer bigfoot sightings of late? Hopefully it's finally extinct.

Did you do even a cursory Google search before you posted this? Bigfoot sightings continue, scores of them every year, all across North America. The fact that the mainstream media doesn't usually choose to cover them is likely the reason for your opinion. So no, it is not extinct. I think it is amazing how people say "If Bigfoot was real it would be seen more often," when the fact is that even if they were seen a thousand times a year, after every single one of those thousand sightings those same people would repeat- "No way, if it was real it would be seen more often."

Even if Bigfoot doesn't exist, the fact that so many people report seeing it should surely be just as important a phenomena in the study of mass-hallucination. And I should be included as a test subject, because I had a brief roadside sighting of a Bigfoot when I was 8 years old. I am not crazy, and I swear to you the thing was there.

[Jonathan H]

Everything you have written is wrong.

There are no traditions about the Bigfoot before 1958 nor Nessie before the early 30's.

Several claiming the same thing does not automatically cancel them all out.

Patterson was a fraud though a desperate one. The suit was a mailorder job.

[kensei]

To Amanda

There's a terrific book about the Bigfoot hoax, how and where they got the suit from, and so on. Very entertaining, though tinged with sadness because the hoaxer was terminally ill.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Making-Bigfoot-Inside-Story/dp/1591021391

And this is in my opinion the definitive book about the Nessie hoax:

http://www.amazon.com/Mystery-Solved-Science-Paranormal-Series/dp/0879752785

Interestingly both are self-generated hoaxes in the sense that they play upon the notion that here long-standing legends about these creatures.

They're weren't.

I believe I read the book on Patterson you're referencing, which I checked out from a library. If the one I read was a different one then I apologize, but I remember all too well how it spelled out the many very impressive things about Patterson in his youth but then proceeded to do a really nasty and unfounded hatchet job on him including accusing him of faking Bigfoot sightings around his home town of Yakima, Washington by running around in a Bigfoot costume without any evidence whatsotever. I had always heard the description of Patterson include "inventor" as one of his titles but never knew what he invented, and that book filled in the blank. He invented a mechanical device for rodeo competitors to practice calf roping. For that, and for a lot of other things, I thanked the book. But it made huge leaps in logic to assassinate his character. He was by no means a perfect man and had many flaws in his personality. He was the classic jack of all trades and master of none, and like many of us his integrity probably had cracks in it here and there. After all, it is known that the camera he shot the Bigfoot film on was not paid for and a warrant for his arrest was issued because of it. But that does not automatically make him a hoaxer.

And btw- both Bigfoot and Nessie are NOT creatrures of long-standing legend? That is absurd. Stories of hairy manlike giants in American Indian lore go back so far into history that they have no clear begining, and though the stories of "kelpies" or "water horses" in Scottish lakes in ancient folklore might be slightly different from modern Nessie reports there is at the very least a long history of weird things being seen in those waters.

[kensei]

Hi Jonathan,

Would love to believe this but my gut feeling says naaaahhh!

The big giveaway for me is the soles of the feet, they're white/covered in snow.
If a gorilla-like creature walks through the snow, the snow would not stick to the foot completely, as their footpads are a very leathery texture & the snow would slide off. There would be patches but not a full covering.

Anyway, off to Loch Ness now, it's Nessie's lunchtime
Amanda

The soles of the feet are not white, they are light gray. And that is not snow. It is sand. The footage was shot in October before the snow came. You seem to have noticed that the feet are the exact same color of the ground the creature is walking on but not really realized what you were looking at. It was standing in shallow water in a creek when the men first came upon it. As it walked away, its feet were wet and the sand stuck to them. There are photographs and plaster casts of the footprints the creature left, the shape of which exactly match the feet seen in the film. The length of those tracks has been used as a measuring stick to deduce the size of the creature and they put its height at nearly seven feet.

[kensei]

The movie is a fake and a crude one, but you cannot help but feel a measure of affection for it.

We can even see interviewed the guy who was in the suit, poor basterd,

BigFoot was a hoax from 1958 that got out of hand, so why not a hoax film?

There have been multiple people claimed to be the one in the alleged suit, either people admitting to it themselves or accused of it by others. Since they cannot all be true, collectively they mean nothing. And even if the film is a fake (which I don't believe it is), it is anything but "crude." There are many fake Bigfoot films and many of them are crude, even laughably so. If Patterson's is a fake it is the best ever done.

And by no means did Bigfoot begin in 1958. Reports of encounters with them by white men go back well into the 19th century, and the Indian stories go back so far into history that they have no clear begining. The Vikings even reported encountering beings that sound remarkably like Bigfoot when they first landed in America.

[sdreid]

Is it my imagination or are we hearing about fewer bigfoot sightings of late? Hopefully it's finally extinct.

[Jonathan H]

To Amanda

There's a terrific book about the Bigfoot hoax, how and where they got the suit from, and so on. Very entertaining, though tinged with sadness because the hoaxer was terminally ill.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Making-Bigfoot-Inside-Story/dp/1591021391

And this is in my opinion the definitive book about the Nessie hoax:

http://www.amazon.com/Mystery-Solved-Science-Paranormal-Series/dp/0879752785

Interestingly both are self-generated hoaxes in the sense that they play upon the notion that here long-standing legends about these creatures.

They're weren't.

[Amanda]

Would love to believe....

The movie is a fake and a crude one, but you cannot help but feel a measure of affection for it.

We can even see interviewed the guy who was in the suit, poor basterd,

BigFoot was a hoax from 1958 that got out of hand, so why not a hoax film?

Hi Jonathan,

Would love to believe this but my gut feeling says naaaahhh!

The big giveaway for me is the soles of the feet, they're white/covered in snow.
If a gorilla-like creature walks through the snow, the snow would not stick to the foot completely, as their footpads are a very leathery texture & the snow would slide off. There would be patches but not a full covering.

Anyway, off to Loch Ness now, it's Nessie's lunchtime
Amanda

[Jonathan H]

The movie is a fake and a crude one, but you cannot help but feel a measure of affection for it.

We can even see interviewed the guy who was in the suit, poor basterd,

BigFoot was a hoax from 1958 that got out of hand, so why not a hoax film?

[pinkmoon]

when roger met patty

Read Bill munns book when roger met patty twice and I will have to say the only realistic outcome you can come to is that patty is the real deal.Bill munns has worked in the special effects business for over 40 years and knows what he is talking about quite simple can't make a fake monkey suit to replicate patty today let alone 47 years ago.

[TomTomKent]

Thank you.

Not a problem. I am used to talking about this subject in other forums where such information is a given and forgot to clarify here. I tend to have the same problem when talking about Canonical Victims of Leather Apron at other sites. So completely my bad.

[pinkmoon]

This is a brief overview of the ANE film we know Patterson was producing including his contract:

http://bigfootfilm67.webs.com/ron-olson-ane

So a nice simple comparison of stills from Pattersons documentary to the PG film is here in the number one spot:

http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_680_15-famous-paranormal-photos-explained-by-science_p2/

A summary of the arguments:
http://xzonenation.blogspot.co.uk/20...7-bigfoot.html

Thank you.

[TomTomKent]

This is a brief overview of the ANE film we know Patterson was producing including his contract:

http://bigfootfilm67.webs.com/ron-olson-ane

So a nice simple comparison of stills from Pattersons documentary to the PG film is here in the number one spot:

http://www.cracked.com/photoplasty_680_15-famous-paranormal-photos-explained-by-science_p2/

A summary of the arguments:

http://xzonenation.blogspot.co.uk/2006/11/exposing-roger-pattersons-1967-bigfoot.html