Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

Status
Not open for further replies.
William Parcher said:
It was me, and it was a serious joke. The breasts are supposed to be engorged with milk and should obviously bounce or flop. They don't. The only movement is a twitch that MK Davis found. But that movement coincides with the whole chest skin moving from the arm backswing. At that point it all behaves like a costume would.
Click to expand...

Ah, thanks for clearing that up. Oddly enough, I know that at least one person has used the lacking of bouncing and the twitch to argue that a baby is clinging to Patty's chest. This seems to be yet another case of "It looks real to me, so it must be real," which results in any flaws or oddities that can't be linked to features on real animals getting explained away as being the result of an unknown anatomy or a film defect. This also results in anything vaguely resembling a feature on a primate getting chalked up as "proof" that Patty is real and is too detailed/complicated to be a hoax.
 
Drewbot said:
Click on this, it is blockfoot. There are two frames, does anyone have any of the frames in between these two frames?[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_19705471f6be6c231e.gif[/qimg]

My basic point is this:

1-Photo shows lack of developed achilles tendon
Click to expand...

Would an Achilles Tendon be large enough to be visible in enlargments?

3-Patterson stated that when Patty got in the woods, she took off running 'just like you or me' (Thanks to Diogenes) http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/patterson.php
Click to expand...

This will probably get written off as Patterson "merely spicing up" the story. Which is a damn shame, because you're raising a very interesting point.

As for perfectfoot, it matches up to one of the casts Patterson is holding in the "cast display" picture. However, it's not known when the picture was taken/casts were made (although Dr. Krantz said it was taken before the P/G footage was shot; when Patterson was making fake tracks in order to get footage of himself casting tracks). If that is the case and if an independent restoration of the P/G footage fails to yield perfectfoot, this will point to someone inserting it into the pictures that MK Davis used to make his stabilized version (or, if perfectfoot isn't shown in those pictures, that Davis possibly inserted it).
 
Jake S said:
How could anyone read this whole thread?
Click to expand...
Some of us have the advantage of having been present at the creation, so to speak, but you probably do not have to read the whole thread. We're not much further than when we started. You could probably do a random sampling of posts, in or out of order, and be none the worse off.
So is bigfoot real or still unproven?
Click to expand...

The two are not mutually exclusive.
 
Last edited:
AtomicMysteryMonster said:
Ah, thanks for clearing that up. Oddly enough, I know that at least one person has used the lacking of bouncing and the twitch to argue that a baby is clinging to Patty's chest. This seems to be yet another case of "It looks real to me, so it must be real," which results in any flaws or oddities that can't be linked to features on real animals getting explained away as being the result of an unknown anatomy or a film defect. This also results in anything vaguely resembling a feature on a primate getting chalked up as "proof" that Patty is real and is too detailed/complicated to be a hoax.
Click to expand...

Look, the breasts don't act like they obey our physical laws. This is because they are fakes applied to the front of a costume. Anybody who tries to argue that they look natural (even for an unclassified hominoid) is making a special pleading for their private fantasy. Hell, the whole of Bigfootery is begging the rest of the world to see things like they do. What is this? A grassroots uprising for fancy imaginations? Open your mind and let the sun shine in. Let a wild hairy ape in there too, would you please?
 
carcharodon said:
Bwahahahahahahahahahaha. Laugh my ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ arse off.

This is the exact thing the 'scofics' lay into the 'believers' for. Holes in stories......no evidence etc etc etc.
Click to expand...

SweatyYeti said:
I'll share the laugh with you, Lyndon....:)...

2) There is NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE tying him to the film.

"That's how we laugh the day away....in the Merry old land of Randi".
Click to expand...

LTC8K6 said:
Except that he is apparently shown riding a horse in the same reel of film...
Click to expand...
Not laughing now.
 
What leads you to believe that the footage of Bob H was shot on the same reel? The Robert Morgan documentary showing what appears to be Bob H (but could be a similarly clad Bob Gimlin) leading a horse (can't tell if it's Chico) followed by Roger Patterson's son, Clint was a 1971 compilation of footage taken from several reels Roger P shot for his documentary. But there's no way to tell what reel any of the footage was taken from. Are you assuming there were only 2 reels? RP had the camera for quite awhile. No?
 
Sorry, we've already been all over this earlier in the thread. You'll have to go back and read.

What leads you to believe it wasn't?

So now we haven't even seen most of the first reel, let alone the second?

But there's no way to tell what reel any of the footage was taken from.
Click to expand...

Including the part with Patty on it...
 
A have read most of this thread. Unless I missed it, you're assuming that the 1971 compilation "Man or Beast" (that was tacked onto the beginning of Robert Morgan's 1975 "In Search of Bigfoot") is from the first reel. It also showed up on a 1976 documentary "The Mysterious Monsters". Or are you claiming that the still with Bob Gimlim wearing the wig was taken from the first reel?

I don't have any reason to believe that Bob H wasn't on the first reel, but there's no evidence that this was the case. Likewise for the Bluff Creek footage. But then, I'm not the one making claims. Sorry if I missed it, but where in this thread did this get resolved?
 
I'm not the one making claims.
Click to expand...

Actually the idea was put forth by someone on BFF well before we started chewing on it here.

There's no question in my mind that someone was filming Patterson and Heironimus riding around on horseback with a pack horse around the time the PGF was filmed. Probably in the Cowiche Canyon area by the look of the scenery. This is where Patterson was just before filming bigfoot, I believe.

It also seems odd that Gimlin never talks about running the camera when it seems pretty clear that he must have been using it at times. As far as I know, no one has even asked Gimlin about using the camera.
 
Last edited:
Óðinn/Oden,

I have to say that I agree with you in regards to the films that RP took from at least 67’ until his death. There is really no way to know for certain which clip belongs in what time frame. Until someone is given access to the masters all we truly have is guestimations, even with access to the masters the only valid information gained (as far as a timeline) would be when the raw film was cut and perforated (to within half year).

Considering RP’s obsession with this subject, if I had to guess, I’d say the guy probably shot at least 1500 - 2000 feet of film on this subject. Who’s sitting on all this film (if it hasn’t been destroyed), DeAtley, Mrs. Patterson?

In closing, I believe (but I could be wrong) that Green obtained a box of these reels from Mrs. Patterson recently. Anyone recall where I may have read/heard this?


m
 
I agree, Gimlin must have operated the camera at some point (filming RP casting the tracks). Since he has never mentioned it (or has he?) are you suggesting it could have been Bob H filming the tracks, maybe even while wearing the suit? No wonder RP was smiling to the camera. However, if you dispute the timing of the various footage, then this works against trying to place Bob H on a particular reel.

Mangler, very interesting if Green received reels from Pat Patterson. Would Green ever sit on anything explosive? I doubt it, but there may be more of RP's raw documentary footage with possibly some more clues to the timeline, etc. Maybe even some more of Bob H's involvement. Remains to be seen.
 
BG had to be working the camera on the scenery shots at Bluff Creek also.

Someone filmed RP and BH camping out on horseback as well, of course.

No one has yet explained the beard problem with RP either. He has a good beard going when he is showing the casts, but he is clean shaven when casting them.

Some say he is showing them at the film site right after casting them, which apparently can't be true. Some say the cast display film was taken later, which fits with the beard.
 
http://www.southwestdj.com/patterson.html

In the beginning I see RP and BH on horseback in the area of Cowiche Canyon* with BH pulling a pack horse. This is being filmed by a third person. Looks like BH, and the horse appears to be BH's horse with the white stockings. BH even appears to be wearing the same vest in other still shots.

Later I see RP being filmed on horseback with a pack horse in the area of Bluff Creek, presumably by BG.

We have different horses and different packs on different pack horses.

*Based on Gimlin's mention of the area and a comparison of the terrain.
 
Last edited:
It can’t even be said with any certainty what-so-ever that the clip of the creature and the clip of Patterson casting the impressions were shot on the same day.

Subject change; I challenge anyone to show me more than three frames in the PG film where the creature is casting a shadow on the ground. I have serious issues with the lack of shadows in certain places within this film. The shadows are extremely predominate in some places but lacking in others, I find this issue quite intriguing.


m
 
Well, I think there are only a few places in the film where you would see Patty's shadow due to debris in the foreground and the uneven terrain. It's only in the beginning where Patty is on level ground and we have an unobstructed view of the ground that we would be able to observe shadows.

In the shot below, the area where the shadow would be is not visible, for example.

bfoot1.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom