LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
Africa Screams is downloadable for free. I think it's public domain now or something.
Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film
- Thread starter Skeptical Greg
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bigfoot film patterson gimlin
- Status
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Hey Luminous check this post out from the mystery cat thread:
Thank-you for demonstrating just how differing people's observations and perspectives can be and making a salient point on why it's not so wise to label people who don't see the muscles of a flesh and blood animal in the PGF as dishonest.
I can't even begin to see how he's seeing a dog or something other than cat. Is he being dishonest? You see big house cat, he sees dog. Something to think about.
Last edited:
cloudshipsrule
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2006
- Messages
- 1,170
Where's patty now? Why has no one found patty's skeleton? Think she's still alive making more little bigfeet? It's just silly.
What ever happened with the story of an actual yetti caught on film last year? It was supposed to be ground-breaking footage and proof and all that jazz.
Why is it that every photo of bigfoot looks like a different animal. Would there really be that kind of diversity in a species with so few living members?
What ever happened with the story of an actual yetti caught on film last year? It was supposed to be ground-breaking footage and proof and all that jazz.
Why is it that every photo of bigfoot looks like a different animal. Would there really be that kind of diversity in a species with so few living members?
Last edited:
Kenny 10 Bellys
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2005
- Messages
- 290
Luminous, I have to say I shared a similar, if less illustrious, path to scepticism as RayG. When i was young I absolutely lapped up everything about UFOs, Bigfoot, Nessie, etc and couldn't get enough of Arthur C Clarkes Mysterious World and all the books on cryptozoology I could find. I myself live in one of the most famous UFO hotspots in Europe and have seen some weird things in the sky.
However, as time went by and I learned more about the world (and people) around me I began to question some of those beliefs and I came to a few conclusions based on actual evidence and straight thinking rather than blythly accepting all the nosense proffered to me.
Nessie was the first to go, what with all the scanning of the Loch showing nothing, and indeed nothing for it to eat. Next thing you know all the famous photos are revealed to be fakes, with even the scientific expeditions admitting to retouching and altering photos.
Bigfoot was the next to bite the dust. The more I read about the guys who made the single film of note, the more I read about how little evidence there was, the less I believed it could be true. Some ancient legends, reports of weird noises in the night and one probable fake film do not make for a viable population of enormous apemen inhabiting the worlds forests. There are some odd footprints, but there are also footprint fakers and other factors effecting marks in the dirt, and they certainly dont point to 14,000 Yetis roaming free.
I also have to say I'm with RayG and Tube when it comes to your reverence for the likes of Jeff Meldrum. Why? Nothing multiplied by 40 years is still nothing. Read what you like into the footprints and movie but you still have no hard evidence to support your theory, and appeals to authority are poorly received when that person is an authority on nothing. I have watched the likes of LAL and yourself argue at great length and in great detail concerning the physiology and behaviour of a non-existant animal based on scraps of info that are quite probably fakes. My occasional calls for a simple 'show me the yeti' are ignored as if heckling from the cheap seats while you intellectuals duke it out concerning ridges and casts. They're not meant as heckles, they're meant to try and bring pseudo-intellectuals back to reality and stop the gibbering.
Here's the low-down on the existance of Bigfoot. The evidence is against it. Experience and common sense are against it. Until you come up with a live (or even a dead) yeti very few will take you seriously.
However, as time went by and I learned more about the world (and people) around me I began to question some of those beliefs and I came to a few conclusions based on actual evidence and straight thinking rather than blythly accepting all the nosense proffered to me.
Nessie was the first to go, what with all the scanning of the Loch showing nothing, and indeed nothing for it to eat. Next thing you know all the famous photos are revealed to be fakes, with even the scientific expeditions admitting to retouching and altering photos.
Bigfoot was the next to bite the dust. The more I read about the guys who made the single film of note, the more I read about how little evidence there was, the less I believed it could be true. Some ancient legends, reports of weird noises in the night and one probable fake film do not make for a viable population of enormous apemen inhabiting the worlds forests. There are some odd footprints, but there are also footprint fakers and other factors effecting marks in the dirt, and they certainly dont point to 14,000 Yetis roaming free.
I also have to say I'm with RayG and Tube when it comes to your reverence for the likes of Jeff Meldrum. Why? Nothing multiplied by 40 years is still nothing. Read what you like into the footprints and movie but you still have no hard evidence to support your theory, and appeals to authority are poorly received when that person is an authority on nothing. I have watched the likes of LAL and yourself argue at great length and in great detail concerning the physiology and behaviour of a non-existant animal based on scraps of info that are quite probably fakes. My occasional calls for a simple 'show me the yeti' are ignored as if heckling from the cheap seats while you intellectuals duke it out concerning ridges and casts. They're not meant as heckles, they're meant to try and bring pseudo-intellectuals back to reality and stop the gibbering.
Here's the low-down on the existance of Bigfoot. The evidence is against it. Experience and common sense are against it. Until you come up with a live (or even a dead) yeti very few will take you seriously.
Last edited:
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
When I was a kid I read a brown, raggedy, paperback book of Bigfoot stories. It absolutely fascinated me and I could not get enough. I believed with all my heart that bigfoot was real and that I might run into one if I stayed out in the woods looking.
It has been the passage of time, and the lack of evidence and the contradictions in the idea of bigfoot that has changed me into a skeptic. I just don't "believe" in things all that much since I grew up, I guess. You gotta show me something.
I have to say that the book was certainly entertaining, as so many books these days are not.
I don't remember what book it was, though. I can probably find it if I try, and I may just do that.
It has been the passage of time, and the lack of evidence and the contradictions in the idea of bigfoot that has changed me into a skeptic. I just don't "believe" in things all that much since I grew up, I guess. You gotta show me something.
I have to say that the book was certainly entertaining, as so many books these days are not.
I don't remember what book it was, though. I can probably find it if I try, and I may just do that.
tube
Muse
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 917
Yeah, my own story is quite similar to some of these other people. I may have mentioned it or parts thereof here before, so please forgive me if I'm repeating my self.
My mother, my brother, and I went to a film shown at the University of Montana student center somewhere in the late 1960's. I was probably only 6 or so, making it about 1968. I can't remember much about the film, though I believe it included Patterson's footage. I seem to remember the "Jacko" story, illustrated with still drawings.
When I was about 9, I was given a gift of John Green's On the Track of the Sasquatch. Later, I bought his other two early books. I was truly intrigued. I suppose I was a "believer", as I remember having an argument with another child whose father doubted Bigfoot. I remember having my friend read some passage from On the Track of the Sasquatch!
TV in the early 1970's had the occasional story about Bigfoot. One program was "You Asked For It", where viewers could send in requests to see unusual stuff. I thought about what the coolest possible thing I could think of to see, and I decided it was the Patterson film. But I didn't know it was called the "Patterson film" so I wrote off a request asking to see a "new film" of Bigfoot. One day in the mail I get a manila envelope from You Asked For It, containing "clippings" of Bigfoot related material and a letter telling me they would honor my request! Unfortunately, what ended up being shown was an Ivan Marx film, which looked like a man wearing a shag carpet dancing around in the snow.
As the years went by, I became sort of angry that Bigfoot had not been found, and by about the time I got to high school (1976) I had lost interest. I think I even discarded my John Green books.
Years past, and Bigfoot was off my radar screen. in 2000 I saw a news story on the Internet about the Skookum cast. I realized that using the Internet, I could "catch up" on all the stuff that had gone on since the mid 1970's. Two items that really interested me were the "dermal ridge" business and the Skookum cast.
But tempering my re-awakened interest in Bigfoot was a generalized skepticism that I had gained since the mid 1970's. In particular, I read lots of Isaac Asimov, Carl Sagan, and Martin Gardner. Randi's book on Uri Geller made a big impact on me.
In 2002 I read this article by Ben Radford, entitled Bigfoot at 50.
http://www.csicop.org/si/2002-03/bigfoot.html
Reading Daegling's book was also a huge wake-up call, though it came out too soon to include a treatment of the desiccation ridge business, and the Skookum Elk Cast.
Daegling and Radford forced me to begin thinking critically about the whole enterprise. In particular, the no-roadkill factor really bothered me, as I've seen enormous amounts of roadkill in my life.
In about 2004 I saw "Legend Meets Science", and became interested enough in the dermal ridge business to investigate it myself. I think you know the result of that... But even after that, I wouldn't close the door totally on the possibility of the Sasquatch.
But what really turned the corner for me, putting me firmly into the skeptical side of things was this:
Seeing this image was more or less an epiphany for me, and in fact motivated me to quit two of these Bigfoot organizations I was a member of.
The Skookum Elk Cast is the Rosetta Stone of Bigfootery, as it ties in all the major advocates. To see OBVIOUSLY and unambiguously how wrong all these "Bigfoot experts" were really changed my perception of the whole enterprise. If all these guys screw it up this badly, why should I listen to what any of them say at all?
I'm very sorry to say that my perception of John Green has changed markedly since childhood. As a child I thought of him as an intrepid reporter and investigator, hot on the trail of a genuine mystery. But his hyperbolic claims about the Skookum Elk Cast being a Sasquatch in the first place, then his denialist attitude seen in his letter to Daniel Perez' Bigfoot Times with regards to Dr. Wroblewski's analysis, suggest to me a mindset very similar to that of creationists. His defense of the Ray Wallace tracks is just sad...
At this point, I think it's time to stop giving Bigfootery the benefit of the doubt, in that the claim that there is lots of hard physical evidence for this animal is clearly bogus. It's time to start looking at the subject as a quasi-religion, as a human myth, as a sort of PT Barnum style Ballyhoo.
It's clearly a subject that works on an aesthetic and emotional level, even for many skeptics. Bigfoot is an incredibly cool idea, at least for those not mired in a square-Joe, Norman Rockwell kind of mindset. Bigfoot is at least as cool as Futurama, but only as real...
My mother, my brother, and I went to a film shown at the University of Montana student center somewhere in the late 1960's. I was probably only 6 or so, making it about 1968. I can't remember much about the film, though I believe it included Patterson's footage. I seem to remember the "Jacko" story, illustrated with still drawings.
When I was about 9, I was given a gift of John Green's On the Track of the Sasquatch. Later, I bought his other two early books. I was truly intrigued. I suppose I was a "believer", as I remember having an argument with another child whose father doubted Bigfoot. I remember having my friend read some passage from On the Track of the Sasquatch!
TV in the early 1970's had the occasional story about Bigfoot. One program was "You Asked For It", where viewers could send in requests to see unusual stuff. I thought about what the coolest possible thing I could think of to see, and I decided it was the Patterson film. But I didn't know it was called the "Patterson film" so I wrote off a request asking to see a "new film" of Bigfoot. One day in the mail I get a manila envelope from You Asked For It, containing "clippings" of Bigfoot related material and a letter telling me they would honor my request! Unfortunately, what ended up being shown was an Ivan Marx film, which looked like a man wearing a shag carpet dancing around in the snow.
As the years went by, I became sort of angry that Bigfoot had not been found, and by about the time I got to high school (1976) I had lost interest. I think I even discarded my John Green books.
Years past, and Bigfoot was off my radar screen. in 2000 I saw a news story on the Internet about the Skookum cast. I realized that using the Internet, I could "catch up" on all the stuff that had gone on since the mid 1970's. Two items that really interested me were the "dermal ridge" business and the Skookum cast.
But tempering my re-awakened interest in Bigfoot was a generalized skepticism that I had gained since the mid 1970's. In particular, I read lots of Isaac Asimov, Carl Sagan, and Martin Gardner. Randi's book on Uri Geller made a big impact on me.
In 2002 I read this article by Ben Radford, entitled Bigfoot at 50.
http://www.csicop.org/si/2002-03/bigfoot.html
Reading Daegling's book was also a huge wake-up call, though it came out too soon to include a treatment of the desiccation ridge business, and the Skookum Elk Cast.
Daegling and Radford forced me to begin thinking critically about the whole enterprise. In particular, the no-roadkill factor really bothered me, as I've seen enormous amounts of roadkill in my life.
In about 2004 I saw "Legend Meets Science", and became interested enough in the dermal ridge business to investigate it myself. I think you know the result of that... But even after that, I wouldn't close the door totally on the possibility of the Sasquatch.
But what really turned the corner for me, putting me firmly into the skeptical side of things was this:
Seeing this image was more or less an epiphany for me, and in fact motivated me to quit two of these Bigfoot organizations I was a member of.
The Skookum Elk Cast is the Rosetta Stone of Bigfootery, as it ties in all the major advocates. To see OBVIOUSLY and unambiguously how wrong all these "Bigfoot experts" were really changed my perception of the whole enterprise. If all these guys screw it up this badly, why should I listen to what any of them say at all?
I'm very sorry to say that my perception of John Green has changed markedly since childhood. As a child I thought of him as an intrepid reporter and investigator, hot on the trail of a genuine mystery. But his hyperbolic claims about the Skookum Elk Cast being a Sasquatch in the first place, then his denialist attitude seen in his letter to Daniel Perez' Bigfoot Times with regards to Dr. Wroblewski's analysis, suggest to me a mindset very similar to that of creationists. His defense of the Ray Wallace tracks is just sad...
At this point, I think it's time to stop giving Bigfootery the benefit of the doubt, in that the claim that there is lots of hard physical evidence for this animal is clearly bogus. It's time to start looking at the subject as a quasi-religion, as a human myth, as a sort of PT Barnum style Ballyhoo.
It's clearly a subject that works on an aesthetic and emotional level, even for many skeptics. Bigfoot is an incredibly cool idea, at least for those not mired in a square-Joe, Norman Rockwell kind of mindset. Bigfoot is at least as cool as Futurama, but only as real...
Luminous
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 296
Too small a redering. It's the closeups that tell the whole story.
Luminous
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 296
Too small a rendering. It's the closeups that tell the whole story.
Luminous
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 296
What I say has weight of its own. What weight? The closeups. They speak for themselves. But there's no way to convince someone who plays the "I don't see it" game. That's why I propose that those who play such games are intellectually dishonest. Such individuals are self-deceived. But when I make statements like this, I expect I will hear, "We're not decieved, you are..." It goes on and on and never stops. It's pointless. Why I'm still here, I don't even know. I guess I'd like to meet others who believe as I do. Are they even here?
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 27,480
But you said that Bigfoot would be confirmed within 10 years. The back-and-forth bickering between believers and skeptics will come to an end within 10 years, right?
Luminous
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 296
Very few on this board maybe. But many away from this board listen very intently and eagerly. Nice long story about your life Kenny, but being a skeptic dosen't make you right. Knowing the truth does. It seems you forsook one at the expense of the other. That's a sad state of existence IMO.
Luminous
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 296
Why don't you go ahead and tell me. You seem to act as if you've got the inside scoop. Say on...
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 27,480
Yes, skeptics are sad, tricksey and false beings because they don't yet know The Truth about Bigfoot. You said that you were leaving but you didn't leave. It's because a force greater than you is keeping you here to try to show THE PATH. You do know the way to Mordor don't you, Lummi?
Locknar
Sum of all evils tm
Sorry...larger, its still just a guy walking in a costume.
Kenny 10 Bellys
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2005
- Messages
- 290
Being a Skeptic doesn't automatically make me right, but what is does guarantee is that I am less likely to be wrong than the average non-skeptic when it comes to matters such as bigfoot. I do not see the likes of Jeff Meldrum holding up a cast and say "that's it, the world is heaving with 9' tall hairy men!" All I see is an old guy holding a cast of something like a footprint. I think the saddest state of existence is to live life in a delusional haze, trying desperately to ignore the facts.
As for continually trying to goad people into seeing details in the PG film, you're on a hiding to nothing. There's nothing obvious in the film apart from the obvious lack of detail in such a small and grainy image. You see sharply defiined musculature, we see a hairy black shape. It's only useful as a kind of Rorshach inkblot; belive and you see a female sasquatch in all her muscly glory, dont believe and it looks awfully like a guy in a hair suit being badly filmed.
Correa Neto
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2003
- Messages
- 8,548
Self-deception is to ignore that the costumes shown at
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2736205&postcount=5480
contain all the "evidence-Patty-is-a-real-animal" pointed by PGF advocates. ome are even better.
Insults will not advance anyone's cause. reliable evidence and solid reasoning can work wonders. In bigfoot's case, any one is available?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2736205&postcount=5480
contain all the "evidence-Patty-is-a-real-animal" pointed by PGF advocates. ome are even better.
Insults will not advance anyone's cause. reliable evidence and solid reasoning can work wonders. In bigfoot's case, any one is available?
drapier
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2006
- Messages
- 273
Evidence never speaks for itself. What people who use the phrase really mean is "I'm too lazy to make my case."
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Do you know what data mining is ?
You pick out the stuff you like and throw away the rest .. You don't like this picture, so you pretend it doesn't exist ..
In order for muscles to work, they have to be shaped a certain way and attached to the bone a certain way .
However with padding is doesn't matter..
Last edited:
- Status