Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[kitakaze]

The observations I make about Patty's leg are made based on what I see happening with Patty's leg.

Whoah! Hold the phone. First, that would be a "No, I do not have an informed opinion of how flesh and blood would differ from a suit." Second, what you just wrote is the same as "The observation's I make about Patty's leg are made based on the observations I make about Patty's leg."

Not very helpful for trying to posit Patty as a real bigfoot. Meanwhile, I have all the ridiculous things I listed earlier to tell how clear it is that the PGF was a hoax.

ETA: Sweaty, you do realize that Correa will most likely come back in the next 24 hours or so with some images of suits showing the same type of shape change you outlined?

 

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti
I think the Freeman video could be real. There are things about it that support it being legitimate...

Such as...?

Such as, this stabilized animated gif I made quite a while ago....

At the very end of the video, there is something which looks like 2 legs moving up and into the main subject's body....a possible infant being lifted up by the main subject of the video.

After aligning, and stabilizing the frames, it became apparant that more than just 2 possible legs are moving up. Higher up is something which could be an infant's head.
The total size of that moving mass appears to be right for an infant.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Second, what you just wrote is the same as "The observation's I make about Patty's leg are made based on the observations I make about Patty's leg."

That's right.

 

[Drewbot]

Dfoot has already shown costumes with the same leg ripple/defect that occurs when the actor moves.

The freeman footage is worse than the Memorial Day footage, if that is the extent of the believidence that you want to use to support the PGF, then you are really grasping for straws.

I am still under the impression that if the PGF falls, then the entire BF industry falls as well. That is why they defend it with such nonsensical gibberish as we are seeing here.

The leg 'rippling' that you portray as evidence of a real beast, looks to me like the suit is not fitting correctly, and every time he takes a step, the padding slides up his leg, and bends out ward causing the "HERNIA". Did you guys here on JREF know that it is widely (In PGF support groups) accepted that the bump on the Patty's thigh is considered a hernia?
http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=16864&view=findpost&p=356187

 

[kitakaze]

Such as, this stabilized animated gif I made quite a while ago....

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/freefoot22enlrg.gif[/qimg]


At the very end of the video, there is something which looks like 2 legs moving up and into the main subject's body....a possible infant being lifted up by the main subject of the video.

After aligning, and stabilizing the frames, it became apparant that more than just 2 possible legs are moving up. Higher up is something which could be an infant's head.
The total size of that moving mass appears to be right for an infant.

I'm sorry, Sweaty. I have perfect eyesight but all I see is a very indistinct image. I do not see two baby legs or a baby head. I certainly do not see anything which makes a real sasquatch more likely than a guy in a suit. I'm quite sure that for anyone to whom we should be presenting evidence of bigfoot the same conclusion would be reached.

You see, this is what reliable evidence is not. It in no way makes a guy-in-a-suit assignment difficult. It comes from a known, admitted hoaxer. You drop it, you don't touch it with a 10ft pole and you advise any of your proponent friends that if they want anyone to take them seriously, they do they same.

You have a video of a sasquatch chewing on a marmot, you come talk. You have a video of a sasquatch taking a dump and chucking it at you, you come talk. These things do not immediately mean proof, but they potentially could be very hard to explain as a man in suit, thus reliable evidence.

 

[kitakaze]

Did you guys here on JREF know that it is widely (In PGF support groups) accepted that the bump on the Patty's thigh is considered a hernia?

For as long as it has been posited as such.

 

[drapier]

I think Sweaty is being too modest. He's really discovered evidence that Patty is a shapeshifter. Notice how half way through each stride her two legs morph into one large one limb. Here's the evidence that has a certain degree of probability:


The yellow lines are Sweaty's . I've drawn brown lines to show the mega-limb.

Now I know you denying denialists will argue that the blueish line really should represent the right leg and that our lines conflate the right and left legs. But really, how can you deny the evidence that is as plain as day? Bonk!

 

[kitakaze]

I think Sweaty is being too modest. He's really discovered evidence that Patty is a shapeshifter. Notice how half way through each stride her two legs morph into one large one limb. Here's the evidence that has a certain degree of probability:[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/8407476e87ac1d661.gif[/qimg]


The yellow lines are Sweaty's . I've drawn brown lines to show the mega-limb.

You know, I see now that the conspicuous line in the thigh was just the mouth the phasing wookie face. You guys see it, right? RIGHT?

 

[kitakaze]

Such as, this stabilized animated gif I made quite a while ago...

Here too, upon further consideration, I have decided there is a certain degree of probability that Stinky there is reaching for a crossbow...

HAARP ON THAT A**!!!

 

[kitakaze]

Loren feels a little jealous over Moneymaker's sugardaddy, trolls for job:

http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/cz-travel/

 

[Dfoot]

SWEATY - I would have been disappointed if you'd responded any other way. This continues to prove what I've been talking about.

Bob H. makes a slight turn to complete profile. I just have a camera sitting on a tripod. I have no idea if I'm even in frame. I'm just walking a straight line.

However, in the PG frames you are talking about my foam leg mimics precisely what is seen in that film. I have other clips I can dig up somewhere around here. All this footage is old stuff I did back at the BFF.

The ability to ignore data that points to pads while stretching the imagination to make Patty's alleged leg muscles real reminds me of Dr. Meldrum's book showing a Wallace foot next to prints it doesn't match, yet on another page he has prints that clearly match Wallace feet. He's CHOOSING to use the wrong fake foot for comparison yet within his own book the evidence to the contrary should scream out to anyone doing a real investigation that Wallace's feet did make the prints.

That is why I'm so interested in comments from people like yourself. While the investigation into unknown species is important, it's the ability of the human mind to create evidence to support a preconceived notion that's most at work in the Bigfoot research community. It's more group-think than open-minded research most of the time.

 

[Dfoot]

Even though the angle on me is wrong here it shouldn't take a genius to see that it's virtually the same thing.

You can try similar experiments yourself if you like. You can make a bicep grow or a thigh. Soft foam moves with your own muscles. (*I apologize for not being as tall or having legs as muscular as the 26 year old Heironimus. I'm going into training now for future Squatch excitement.)

 

[kitakaze]

That is why I'm so interested in comments from people like yourself. While the investigation into unknown species is important, it's the ability of the human mind to create evidence to support a preconceived notion that's most at work in the Bigfoot research community. It's more group-think than open-minded research most of the time.

Dfoot, I am in complete agreement with you on this matter. I think a good example of this is the time Sweaty's spent trying to show baby bigfoots on their parent's backs in the MDF and Freeman footage.

 

[cloudshipsrule]

After aligning, and stabilizing the frames, it became apparant that more than just 2 possible legs are moving up. Higher up is something which could be an infant's head.
The total size of that moving mass appears to be right for an infant.

Ah yes, and I believe I caught just the slightest glimpse of an elf in there too. Or perhaps it was a hobbit. I never can quite distinguish between the two when I see one pop up from time to time.

Pet any unicorns lately?

 

[Drewbot]

Dfoot, I am in complete agreement with you on this matter. I think a good example of this is the time Sweaty's spent trying to show baby bigfoots on their parent's backs in the MDF and Freeman footage.

I'm not sure if Sweti said this, but many of the pro-MDF people, believe not only that there is a baby in the MDF footage, but that the Subject of the video is an adolescent, performing babysitting duties for the larger Bigfoot hanging out higher on the mountain.

FYI, Using the MDF and Freman to support the PGF is not good debate tactics

 

[Dfoot]

Dfoot, I am in complete agreement with you on this matter. I think a good example of this is the time Sweaty's spent trying to show baby bigfoots on their parent's backs in the MDF and Freeman footage.

So far the only Bigfoot researcher that I know of who has honestly tried to duplicate some of the things I talked about is TUBE (aka Matt Crowley). I showed what happens when you use plaster to make fake feet or prints and he went out and actually tested these things and more.

But conversing on the faked prints of Freeman is one thing; declaring Patty is a fraud is like bitch-slapping a statue of Jesus in a church. You're bound to get torn apart by the gnashing of teeth if you dare to declare outright that the film is a hoax and attempt to show why. That film has become the idea of what a Sasquatch is supposed to be and no evidence to the contrary will be entertained. Period. Gymnastics of the imagination will ensue to provide assurance that the Patty-God is propped up.

I've had my life threatened for hinting that Bob Gimlin is not telling the truth while the other Bob is. I've been told that I'm dissing an "American legend" (Gimlin) and insulting a "sacred place" (the Bluff Creek film site). I'm not kidding. These are the actual words used.

Freeman had the balls to use his own fingerprint to show the world's first dermal ridge on a Bigfoot print and then admitted he was a hoaxer on national television. Still.... his evidence is considered probably real.

I enjoyed the way producer Doug Hajicek cut out some of Freeman's bad acting on the audio of his Bigfoot vid. He also edited out the audio on the ridiculous MDF. Take any loose fitting $89 dollar gorilla suit, put on some black shoes and run. You'll get the MDF. Though it was indeed fortunate to have a Bigfoot researcher standing next to the picnic people, I suppose Hajicek forgot to mention that when he made his LEGEND MEETS SCIENCE.

Anyway, next time an acorn falls in the woods it's up to you to prove to me that a Bigfoot didn't throw it. This is what it's come to.


And DREWBOT - Don't forget that enhancements have already shown the guy actually REMOVING HIS MASK in the MDF itself. It's as clear as can be. Amazing that the recent "Mangy Bear" photos have been dissed when it's the only thing that shows a real animal. Meanwhile goofy suits that are blurred enough are proclaimed to reveal all sorts of details that aren't even there.

As Dr. Krantz said of Roger Patterson: "He couldn't have faked this film. He didn't even know what I was talking about." Ahhh... hubris. The con man's dream.

 

[kitakaze]

So far the only Bigfoot researcher that I know of who has honestly tried to duplicate some of the things I talked about is TUBE (aka Matt Crowley). I showed what happens when you use plaster to make fake feet or prints and he went out and actually tested these things and more.

And thus we have central Woods and Wildmen players like Rick Noll putting hard thought into and making poor, underhanded attempts at discrediting him. See Noll's failed Monster Quest maneuver with Matt.

But conversing on the faked prints of Freeman is one thing; declaring Patty is a fraud is like bitch-slapping a statue of Jesus in a church. You're bound to get torn apart by the gnashing of teeth if you dare to declare outright that the film is a hoax and attempt to show why. That film has become the idea of what a Sasquatch is supposed to be and no evidence to the contrary will be entertained. Period. Gymnastics of the imagination will ensue to provide assurance that the Patty-God is propped up.

While we're being good sports and spotting the PGF fans with comparison material, I was wondering if any of them out there reading the thread could provide a list of sightings reports of a creature matching Patty's description contemporaneous with the film. That's not a stretch, is it?

I've had my life threatened for hinting that Bob Gimlin is not telling the truth while the other Bob is. I've been told that I'm dissing an "American legend" (Gimlin) and insulting a "sacred place" (the Bluff Creek film site). I'm not kidding. These are the actual words used.

The prevalence of fundamental Christians within the ranks of bigfootery would be an interesting topic to explore IMO. Meanwhile, Gimlin an 'American Legend'? Not by a long shot, bigfoot cult weirdos. A major player in the creation of an American legend? Absolutely.

Freeman had the balls to use his own fingerprint to show the world's first dermal ridge on a Bigfoot print and then admitted he was a hoaxer on national television. Still.... his evidence is considered probably real.

Hey, maybe he really did have some gold but faked some went he came up dry...

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Take any loose fitting $89 dollar gorilla suit, put on some black shoes and run. You'll get the MDF. Though it was indeed fortunate to have a Bigfoot researcher standing next to the picnic people, I suppose Hajicek forgot to mention that when he made his LEGEND MEETS SCIENCE.

I'll have to do a search but I brought up the same thing some time ago and it may not be true about the BF guy being there.

Anyway, next time an acorn falls in the woods it's up to you to prove to me that a Bigfoot didn't throw it. This is what it's come to.

Hmmm... a pile of rocks. Score! Bigfoot art!

Hmmm... Broken tree branch, conspicuously high. Yahtzee! Bigfoot terratorial marker!

Hmmm... I'm so scared I'm going to vomit. Banzai! Infrasound!

As Dr. Krantz said of Roger Patterson: "He couldn't have faked this film. He didn't even know what I was talking about." Ahhh... hubris. The con man's dream.

Paging Dr. Meldrum...

 

[kitakaze]

Though it was indeed fortunate to have a Bigfoot researcher standing next to the picnic people, I suppose Hajicek forgot to mention that when he made his LEGEND MEETS SCIENCE.

Here we go, Dfoot. Here's LAL's response to my question regarding the presence of Fred Bradshaw during the taping of the MDF:

I wonder what his thoughts are on the presence at the scene of footer Fred Bradshaw.

Fred Bradshaw was not at the scene. His own family says that's not his voice.
The voice Larry Lund says is Bradshaw's is that of the outfitter, Tom Lines.

I may have to search more but I don't recall how that was confirmed. Enhancements showing obvious headwear removal notwithstanding.

 

[Geno]

Fun story about Dahinden who was quite skepitcal about tree breaks. Seems he heard of broken tree tops at Bluff Creek that were reported as BF activity so he went back in 94 to see the film site again. He took some video of these broken tops on trees that were about 6 feet tall or so. Then he found some 30 to 40 foot tall trees that had broken tops, "must have been a 40 foot tall sasquatch" he mused. I miss that guy.

 

[kitakaze]

More people who don't find bigfoot:

Operation Noble Mustang

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/22/AR2007122200235.html?tid=informbox

First result in trying to debunk myself:

Border Patrol Agent witnesses bigfoot? (bolding mine)

http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/report_detail.php?id=00640

Date: april, 1994
county, CA

Nearest town: san diego
Nearest road: otay lakes road
Conditions: heavy fog
Time: night
Location: The Otay River leading into the lake; but it is a restricted area. I was working as a Border Patrol Agent and that is how I had access to the area.

Description of event: At about 2am I was working the Otay River area with three other Agents. The area had just burned in a fire, so it was black, and there was heavy fog. We were working on foot and heard a loud crash into the water, something very large, but just one splash. we walked over without using lights and could hear something in the water. It was walking against the current and on two feet. We could see nothing so we used our lights and still nothing was visible, though we could see across the entire width of the creek. There were four or five coyotes trying to leave the area as fast as they could, they seemed scared, but did not yelp. There was no noise except the creature walking in the water. we could clearly hear it and followed along side the creek bank until the brush stopped us. We all felt and extremely evil pressence and all felt afraid. We left the area. A few minutes later the scope operator spotted something stocking two other agent in the same area. The scope was the type that picked up heat signatures; the operator said the object following the Agents towered over them, he had never seen such a large signature. I've heard of a other encounters in the Otay and Tecate Mountains, and know a few Agents who tried to track it. But the tracks always just dissappeared. They were not fake tracks, we do this everyday for a living. Anyway I don't think bigfoot is an animal, he is something else. I also don't think he can ever be encountered on purpose or will ever be captured. As unbelieveable as it sounds, I think he can just vanish at will.

OMG! Neal! The infrared!