Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[Huntster]

Not worth it.

Take care.

You're a quick learner, Melissa. This place is a lost cause. I stay to keep the fools high in denial, just in case the proof comes while I'm still alive.

I'd love to be the guy to smear it in their faces.

 

[RayG]

I'd love to be the guy to smear it in their faces.

And I'd love to be the smearee, crow-eater, whatever, but after 30 years I've quit holding my breath. Wake me when they bring in some actual evidence. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I hear Pine Ridge is a real hotspot of activity... zzzzzzzzzzzz

RayG

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster
I'd love to be the guy to smear it in their faces.

And I'd love to be the smearee, crow-eater, whatever, but after 30 years I've quit holding my breath. Wake me when they bring in some actual evidence. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Okay. I'm just waiting myself. Like I've said lots of times, I'm not out there looking for them. Almost nobody is.

It might be a while.....................

.....I hear Pine Ridge is a real hotspot of activity... zzzzzzzzzzzz

You mean that military deal in Arkansas, or the Indian thing in one of the Dakotas?

I wasn't too impressed with either. I haven't been paying attention to any hubbub regarding them.

 

[bruto]

Okay. I'm just waiting myself. Like I've said lots of times, I'm not out there looking for them. Almost nobody is.

It might be a while.....................



You mean that military deal in Arkansas, or the Indian thing in one of the Dakotas?

I wasn't too impressed with either. I haven't been paying attention to any hubbub regarding them.

I can't understand why you're not out there looking for them if there's any chance they inhabit your region. I mean, you really believe that they're real, and you know your woods, and you like to go out there and hunt and what not anyway. What prevents you? If I truly believed, for example, that the Champlain monster was real, and just not sufficiently sought by the right people, I'd be out there at every opportunity with big lenses and fast film and whatnot. I hope at least that when you do go out you take a camera that is capable of actually focusing.

What the bigfoot community needs is new people getting new stuff. What are you, some kind of slacker?

 

[Huntster]

I can't understand why you're not out there looking for them if there's any chance they inhabit your region. I mean, you really believe that they're real, and you know your woods, and you like to go out there and hunt and what not anyway. What prevents you?

Because they are clearly not around here in any significant numbers. If they were, I would be out there looking for them.

Most Alaskan reports come from (ranked in frequency of reports):

1) Southeast Alaska, and more frequent in the southernmost areas
2) The upper Bristol Bay area, most frequently in the Illiamna area
3) Along the Yukon River, most frequently in the mid-river area between the Koyukuk River and the Yukon Flats, and these reports are older and becoming less frequent

I live in Southcentral Alaska. Reports here were extremely infrequent, mostly before white settlement, occur almost never anymore, and the environment isn't of coastal evergreen like the southeast areas where reports are still common.

And this is Alaska. One does not jump in the car and drive to the other end of the state. There are few roads, and most of the state is extremely remote and difficult to access. All three of the areas where reports are most prevalent aren't accessible unless you fly or boat in, and a chartered or scheduled airplane or boat will simply drop you off in a small town or village. If you want to get into the woods from there, you need a specialized vehicle along with enough gear and supplies to stay alive.

I think you may be illustrating why many in civilized areas don't have a clue about this phenomenon. You just can't relate.

If I truly believed, for example, that the Champlain monster was real, and just not sufficiently sought by the right people, I'd be out there at every opportunity with big lenses and fast film and whatnot. I hope at least that when you do go out you take a camera that is capable of actually focusing.

I don't. I take a Sony Cybershot DSC-U60. It only has 2 megapixel capability and no zoom whatsoever. I carry such a snapshot camera because it's totally waterproof, highly shock resistent, I'm tired of replacing cameras when the Alaskan environment kills them, I don't have the money to obtain a state-of-the-art camera, and don't want to lug such an item around along with all the other gear I have to take on my outdoor excursions.

What the bigfoot community needs is new people getting new stuff. What are you, some kind of slacker?

Yeah, I suppose, but I'm also a realist. Even if I did get a photograph of a sasquatch, I know exactly what would happen next. The PG event is proof of that:

"The Huntster is obviously a scumbag because he drinks lots of Foster's beer, he's a Catholic (thus a "woo"), he's been interested in the phenomenon for many years, thus it's a hoax."

No, thanks. I need that like I need a nuclear explosion in my watchpocket.

 

[Mad Hom]

You're a quick learner, Melissa. This place is a lost cause. I stay to keep the fools high in denial, just in case the proof comes while I'm still alive.

I'd love to be the guy to smear it in their faces.

This just in Fuddster........the proof will not come in while you me,or anyone else for that matter....is alive........You know why?

Because there isn't any.

I second what RayG said......I'd love to dine on crow with regards to Hairy Bipeds of Unusual Size. As a matter of fact I'd smear MY OWN face in it..if only it were true,it isn't of course...but the idea of a real live flesh and blood Bigfeets would be very cool...and as I said eariler I would dine on my crow heartily if Bigfeet proof was ever brought forward.

Of course the same can't be said about Rank-N-File Bigfeet Fan though can it Fuddnik? I doubt very seriously that you people would even nibble at your crow if ever "Proof" came forward of the PGF having been hoaxed.

Bigfoot Fan just knows Bigfeets are out there and no amount of evidence to the contrary will ever suffice. They're out there and you're positive of it.

It's been 50 years since Jerry Crew found those tracks and still no Bigfoot. The Gorilla analogy sucks because.....a 50 yr span makes sense in the late 1800's when technology was in it's infancy...a gorilla had to be shot and sliced up for definitive proof. Hundreds of explorers and their crews spent countless hours I'm sure schlepping around in the Congo looking for gorillas...no cameras,no motion sensors...no trail cams..no infra red..nothing.

Bigfeet hunters have access to all of this stuff yet still no Bigfeetsus...and that in nutshell is the problem.

How long are you people going to continue to be apologists for this phenomenon Fudd? Another 10 yrs? 20? 30 more years?

What will it take Fuddley...for you and the rest of Bigfoot Nation to give up already? I'm guessing your going to say a dead body....but there aren't any body's to kill......that's the thing Fudd. There is NO reason to believe anything but casts and poor video will ever be brought forward......ever.

Myself,RayG and I'm sure most every skeptic on this board would all gather round the crow table,fork in hand if ever a Bigfeet was shot and analyzed....so...

What would cause you to eat crow Fudd? That's what I want to know.

 

[Mad Hom]

I didn't think you were upset and I really appreciate you stepping in.

I've seen a copy of OM, and even with many air bubbles (which let me see what tube was talking about on those) I was startled to see irregular holes with rounded edges matching Krantz' description of what he took for sweat pores. I hadn't seen any discussion about OM having them. I'll be getting my own copy and a Freeman cast (that cast, I think), soon.

I'd love to see Elkins Creek.

Freeman??

Isn't he the guy who claimed multiple sightings? and didn't he film one more than once? As a matter of fact couldn't he basically pull up Bigfeet proof on demand?

Here's a link...I found on old Freemie.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/dennett03.htm

Says in that link that Freeman claimed to have at least 4 sightings,filming it twice. Apparently he found a trackway that went...,Left,Right,Left,Left of which Dahinden took photos and made casts of. It went on to tell the tale of some synthetic hair samples Freemie tried to pass off as real and how he admitted to an ABC intertviewer that he faked some tracks

Basically says that not since Ivan Marx has someone so consistently been associated with BOGUS evidence as Paul Freeman.

So tell me again why anything at all that Freeman touched with regards to Bigfeetsus evidence should be taken in any way seriously?

 

[Huntster]

,,,,,Of course the same can't be said about Rank-N-File Bigfeet Fan though can it Fuddnik? I doubt very seriously that you people would even nibble at your crow if ever "Proof" came forward of the PGF having been hoaxed.....

How do you know I haven't already tasted raven meat? Literally?

Bigfoot Fan just knows Bigfeets are out there and no amount of evidence to the contrary will ever suffice. They're out there and you're positive of it.

No, I'm not. I'm 95% certain.

It's been 50 years since Jerry Crew found those tracks and still no Bigfoot.

Big deal. It was nearly two thousand years from when Hanno described gorillas until folks like yourself accepted the reality.

The Gorilla analogy sucks because.....a 50 yr span makes sense in the late 1800's when technology was in it's infancy...a gorilla had to be shot and sliced up for definitive proof. Hundreds of explorers and their crews spent countless hours I'm sure schlepping around in the Congo looking for gorillas...no cameras,no motion sensors...no trail cams..no infra red..nothing.

You're sure?

You're sure of squat.

Bigfeet hunters have access to all of this stuff yet still no Bigfeetsus...and that in nutshell is the problem.

What "Bigfeet hunters"? Access to what?

How long are you people going to continue to be apologists for this phenomenon Fudd? Another 10 yrs? 20? 30 more years?

Until the truth is known.

What will it take Fuddley...for you and the rest of Bigfoot Nation to give up already?

Proof.

Myself,RayG and I'm sure most every skeptic on this board would all gather round the crow table,fork in hand if ever a Bigfeet was shot and analyzed....so...

So..................I hope I'm there to carve and serve.

What would cause you to eat crow Fudd? That's what I want to know.

Strong evidence or proof.

 

[Mad Hom]

How do you know I haven't already tasted raven meat? Literally?

Fudd I didn't ask if you have literally tasted anything...ok so you've eaten raven meat....MMmmmmmmm...who cares!!....relavence??

No, I'm not. I'm 95% certain.

+ 5% positive = 100%

Big deal. It was nearly two thousand years from when Hanno described gorillas until folks like yourself accepted the reality.

Fuddster?!?!? This just in we live in an age of incredible technology and enlightenment...not in Hanno's day......or in Thomas Savage's day or even....Rogey roge Patterson's...it's 2006,Bigfoot Fan does not get the same curve that the people in the days of Hanno got. I can fully understand why no one bought Hanno's story back in the 5th Century BC....why should they believe the guy without any proof,he told a story of a large hairy black monster....of course no one should buy that sight unseen....and the fact that you believe that they should have is disconcerting.

You're sure?

You're sure of squat.

Wow there's that wit and eloquence you're so famous for...rearing it's ugly head again. Fudd address my argument...not me.

What "Bigfeet hunters"? Access to what?

I dunno...Rick Noll for one...I mean he charges an arm and leg for Bigfeet safaris he should have the scratch for some whizzbang gear...that is of course if he has even the slightest interest at all of ever finding one of these big hairy S.O.Bs...which I believe he does not.

Until the truth is known.

Fudley you know you'll hold out until the very last old growth tree is felled hoping a Hairy Biped of Unusual Size is hiding behind it.....don't deny it. The truth will be slapping you upside your head for years before you let go of Bigfeetsus.

Proof.

Proof of what? The PGF is mired in inconclusiveness and damn near everyone involved with it is dead...once Bobby G kicks the old Bigfoot cast....the PGF will never be able to be 100% debunked (at least to your satisfaction) and you and the rest of Bigfoot nation will hide behind the mystery of the PGF forever and ever....all we the skeptics will have to fend you off will be logic and common sense...and as the previous 118 pages proves...those things don't work on you or the rest of the Rank-N-File.

So..................I hope I'm there to carve and serve.

In good faith the skeptics of this board have told you that we are willing to be wrong...you apparently don't have the nad to do the same....this statement proves it.

Strong evidence or proof.

We want a body...you guys want the suit...round and round it goes...and neither of us will EVER get either...such a pity.

The strong evidence is everywhere Fudd...your just blind to it. Other than the riddle wrapped in an enigma that is the PGF all Bigfoot Fan has besides anecdotal evidence is Dermal Ridges,Bossburg and Skookum.

The Skookum arse print was in fact an arse print....only of an elk. The dermal ridges were provided by a known hoaxer ..oh...wait a minute...that were corroborated by J.W Parker's fake dermals from Bloomington and the Bossburg Cripplefoot tracks were found in the hometown of another known hoaxer....wait check that...a known SERIAL hoaxer.....So Fudd all you have basically is your LMS: The Legend Meets Editing limited edition DVD and not much else.

Like I said.....The evidence is everywhere....so how do you like your crow again Fudd?

 

[bruto]

Because they are clearly not around here in any significant numbers. If they were, I would be out there looking for them.

Most Alaskan reports come from (ranked in frequency of reports):

1) Southeast Alaska, and more frequent in the southernmost areas
2) The upper Bristol Bay area, most frequently in the Illiamna area
3) Along the Yukon River, most frequently in the mid-river area between the Koyukuk River and the Yukon Flats, and these reports are older and becoming less frequent

I live in Southcentral Alaska. Reports here were extremely infrequent, mostly before white settlement, occur almost never anymore, and the environment isn't of coastal evergreen like the southeast areas where reports are still common.

And this is Alaska. One does not jump in the car and drive to the other end of the state. There are few roads, and most of the state is extremely remote and difficult to access. All three of the areas where reports are most prevalent aren't accessible unless you fly or boat in, and a chartered or scheduled airplane or boat will simply drop you off in a small town or village. If you want to get into the woods from there, you need a specialized vehicle along with enough gear and supplies to stay alive.

I think you may be illustrating why many in civilized areas don't have a clue about this phenomenon. You just can't relate.



I don't. I take a Sony Cybershot DSC-U60. It only has 2 megapixel capability and no zoom whatsoever. I carry such a snapshot camera because it's totally waterproof, highly shock resistent, I'm tired of replacing cameras when the Alaskan environment kills them, I don't have the money to obtain a state-of-the-art camera, and don't want to lug such an item around along with all the other gear I have to take on my outdoor excursions.



Yeah, I suppose, but I'm also a realist. Even if I did get a photograph of a sasquatch, I know exactly what would happen next. The PG event is proof of that:

"The Huntster is obviously a scumbag because he drinks lots of Foster's beer, he's a Catholic (thus a "woo"), he's been interested in the phenomenon for many years, thus it's a hoax."

No, thanks. I need that like I need a nuclear explosion in my watchpocket.

Points taken, but I still think that if even one person, even a believer in bigfoot who, like you, has no history of having faked, hoaxed, or profited from the critter, came up with a decently focused photograph even of low quality, that was not so ambiguous it could be dismissed out of hand, it would change some attitudes, even if it did not constitute sufficient proof to change the minds of the world. It continues to surprise me how nobody who happens to have a camera in the vicinity of a squatch or a Champ remembers how to use it properly, and how consistently poorly prepared even the people who search for these things seem to be.

 

[RayG]

...Rick Noll for one...I mean he charges an arm and leg for Bigfeet safaris...

I'm guessing you meant Matt Monkeymaker/Moneytaker/Moneymaker.

If not, can you provide some links to evidence of your assertion?

RayG

 

[Mad Hom]

I'm guessing you meant Matt Monkeymaker/Moneytaker/Moneymaker.

If not, can you provide some links to evidence of your assertion?

RayG

Yes of course you are correct...and I am completely wrong.

I meant Moneytaker...err...Moneymaker.

There Fuddster...another soft ball....I mixed Noll and Moneytaker up...my bad...care to pounce?

 

[Huntster]

Quote:
Big deal. It was nearly two thousand years from when Hanno described gorillas until folks like yourself accepted the reality.

Fuddster?!?!? This just in we live in an age of incredible technology and enlightenment...not in Hanno's day......or in Thomas Savage's day or even....Rogey roge Patterson's...it's 2006,Bigfoot Fan does not get the same curve that the people in the days of Hanno got.

City folks basking in their technology still don't get it.

There isn't technology in the wilderness unless you bring it out with you, and if you don't go, it ain't there.

I can fully understand why no one bought Hanno's story back in the 5th Century BC....why should they believe the guy without any proof,he told a story of a large hairy black monster....of course no one should buy that sight unseen....and the fact that you believe that they should have is disconcerting.

I didn't say they should have believed it. I'm saying the gorillas were there, they were there before Hanno heard of them, they were there 2,000 years later when Thomas Savage provided skulls to Jeffries Wyman, they were there when DuChaillu finally shot one and brought the carcass out, and they were there while Americans like you were scoffing at DuChaillu's claims and the Royal Geographic Society was publishing affirmatives to DuChaillu's claims.

They're still there. And the only way you know about it is because of Savage, DuChaillu, and all the "yes" people who came later.

Quote:
You're sure?

You're sure of squat.

Wow there's that wit and eloquence you're so famous for...rearing it's ugly head again. Fudd address my argument...not me.

You have no argument.

Quote:
What "Bigfeet hunters"? Access to what?

I dunno...Rick Noll for one...I mean he charges an arm and leg for Bigfeet safaris he should have the scratch for some whizzbang gear...

I was unaware that Noll provides commercial "Bigfoot safaris". Perhaps you can validate your claim with some evidence?

If not, you can continue your ignorant claims. It provides evidence of your position.

that is of course if he has even the slightest interest at all of ever finding one of these big hairy S.O.Bs...which I believe he does not.

Great stuff there.

Provide something to validate your drivel, please.

 

[Huntster]

....care to pounce?

No need. You've made your position clear.

 

[Huntster]

Points taken, but I still think that if even one person, even a believer in bigfoot who, like you, has no history of having faked, hoaxed, or profited from the critter, came up with a decently focused photograph even of low quality, that was not so ambiguous it could be dismissed out of hand, it would change some attitudes, even if it did not constitute sufficient proof to change the minds of the world.

I hold no illusion whatsoever that that is true, even a little bit. The DuChaillu affair as well as the hundreds of pages of Bigfoot threads on this forum should make that perfectly clear.

It continues to surprise me how nobody who happens to have a camera in the vicinity of a squatch or a Champ remembers how to use it properly, and how consistently poorly prepared even the people who search for these things seem to be.

An experienced big game hunter could teach you a little about "buck fever". For example, did you know it can occur to even the most experienced and seasoned hunter, and quite unexpectedly?

Little wonder, then, why most folks confronted with a creature that they have been conditioned to deny it's very existence would acquire a strong dose of "buck fever" at the most inopportune moment.

 

[Mad Hom]

No need. You've made your position clear.

Fudd!?!? I freely admitted that I mistook Noll and Moneytaker...now what I want you to do is address...the facts that..

Freeman was a hoaxer...anything he touched with regards to Bigfeet is suspect.

Marx was also a hoaxer...anything he was anywhere near with regards to Bigfeet is suspect.

J.W Parker faked dermal ridges....as has Tube....demal ridges are therefore suspect.

If Roge would have filmed a Gorilla in 1967 instead of a Bigfeet we would have DNA proof by now....why??.....Well mostly because Gorilla's are actually there. Hanno had no access to a camera...or a gun even..nor did he have a way of testing DNA....had he I'm sure things would have went a different direction with regards to the discoverey timeframe of the Gorilla... why?.....mostly because they are actually there.

Using Hanno,Savage and DuChaillu sounds great as it comes out of your cakehole Fudd...but bottom line had they access to the technology that us 'Cityfolk" bask in...Gorilla's would have been proven long before they had.

Nowadays Bigfeet hunters have access (IE it's there to be acquired if they can afford it or choose to access it) to cameras,guns..and high falutin city boy technology...and still they have no definitive proof of Hairy Bipeds of Unusual Size..why? Mostly because...they aren't there to be proven.

This deep into the brush stuff rings rather lame as well. Sort of like you need them to be sequestered deep in an undiscovered forest to fit your theory...of why we haven't found proof yet.They're being seen (allegedly) all the time Fudd...by normal people doing normal things in normal wooded places. So spare me the deep dark prehistoric woods take would ya already.

 

[Huntster]

....Nowadays Bigfeet hunters have access (IE it's there to be acquired if they can afford it or choose to access it) to cameras,guns..

The existence of satellite photography, nuclear weapons, infrared, etc is a whole lot different than having access to it.

And even having access to it doesn't mean it will work in the environment where these creatures may be most numerous (if "numerous" at all). Viet Cong guerrillas proved that.

Sort of like you need them to be sequestered deep in an undiscovered forest to fit your theory...

I don't need anything to fit "my theory." My opinion is based on what I've read and learned, and the frequency of reports clearly show that reports are more frequent in the coastal PNW.

 

[Mad Hom]

The existence of satellite photography, nuclear weapons, infrared, etc is a whole lot different than having access to it

And even having access to it doesn't mean it will work in the environment where these creatures may be most numerous (if "numerous" at all). Viet Cong guerrillas proved that.


I don't need anything to fit "my theory." My opinion is based on what I've read and learned, and the frequency of reports clearly show that reports are more frequent in the coastal PNW.

Bigfoot Nation has had 50 years to drum up enough enthusiasm for someone.. anyone to drop a little cash in their laps for a serious inquiry into the Bigfeet Phenomenon. Thus far they have dropped the ball...their preoccupation with a 40yr old movie,alledged dermal ridges, and elk prints that look like Sasquatch butt has sealed that fate.

If you want to buy the high falutin city boy technology and you don't have the dough yourself...you have to convince someone to give you this cash. Somehow Bigfoot Fan can't seem to pull this off....with all their footprint casts and tales of things that go bump in the woods....hmmm...go figger huh?

But wait what about the BFRO?? Checked into fees and what not for Bigfeet Safaris and this what I found...

$300 a pop they provide no food,no gear..nothing ..just the B.S...usually 25-45 people.Let's call it 35 for an average...that's $10,500 per safari...I show 5 such safaris planned for '07 for a total of $52,500....plus 3 other ones that are privately funded.....hmm I'm guessing Moneytaker (who I thought was Noll...doh!?!?) could afford some whizzbang gizmos....but of course that's just a guess.

Oh and by the way of the 8 total safaris they have planned (3 privately funded ones,5 public) only one of them seem to be headed into the hotbed of Bigfeet activity that is the PNW...why is that Fudd?

As for being more numerous in the PNW....

I did another little quickie check over at the BFRO database and found this..

PNW (CA,OR,WA,BC)
17 sightings 3 of which were considered Class A

Southeastern US (FL,GA,AL,SC,MS,TN)
14 sightings 5 of which were considered Class A

So Fudd...at least in the case of how often good sightings are being recorded...your "PNW is where the Bigfeets are at" take....rings rather unsubstantiated by recorded numbers of sightings wouldn't you say?

 

[Huntster]

....As for being more numerous in the PNW....

I did another little quickie check over at the BFRO database and found this..

PNW (CA,OR,WA,BC)
17 sightings 3 of which were considered Class A

Southeastern US (FL,GA,AL,SC,MS,TN)
14 sightings 5 of which were considered Class A

So Fudd...at least in the case of how often good sightings are being recorded...your "PNW is where the Bigfeets are at" take....rings rather unsubstantiated by recorded numbers of sightings wouldn't you say?

No, I wouldn't say.

But I would say your research abilities suck, at best, and are dishonest, at worst.

If you checked out the listing of states, for example (instead of clicking the very first thing you saw, which are "latest reports"), you'd see that Washington has had some 401 reports. Florida has recorded 104.

In fact, if you were able to recognize numerical digits, you'd see that only 6 states offer reports in the three digit range: Washington, Oregon, California, Texas, Florida, and Ohio.

British Columbia has three times the sightings that other provinces have.

Keep trying. Maybe someday you might get the clue.

 

[Mad Hom]

No, I wouldn't say.

But I would say your research abilities suck, at best, and are dishonest, at worst.

If you checked out the listing of states, for example (instead of clicking the very first thing you saw, which are "latest reports"), you'd see that Washington has had some 401 reports. Florida has recorded 104.

In fact, if you were able to recognize numerical digits, you'd see that only 6 states offer reports in the three digit range: Washington, Oregon, California, Texas, Florida, and Ohio.

British Columbia has three times the sightings that other provinces have.

Keep trying. Maybe someday you might get the clue.

Fudd did I forget to mention that that was for 2006....my bad.

So run those through your abacus again Fudd and see if you don't get 17 and 14.

I didn't do 2005 but my guess is it will be more of the same....2004 as well.

Historically you are correct..the PNW is indeed Bigfeet Country..but recently it seems that the trend seems to show the Eastern Bigfeet is being seen just as much as the PNW version.

That's problematic wouldn't you say?