• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well folks you win!

Here it is Autumn arrived early in 1967 and the Bluff Creek region of Northern CA. Roger Patterson and his team arrived on Labor Day Weekend and filmed cohort Bob Hironimous wearing a Hollywood created creature suit as he walked across a sandbar at Bluff Creek. Then several weeks after the event Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin returned to the filmsite and created tracks and a track line that they then made casts of as a means to backup the film they had made several weeks earlier. Roger Patterson then made a plea for track dogs to be sent into the area to track the non existant creature. In the meantime Bob Titmus arrived at the filmsite and saw the trackline that Patterson and Gimlin had created.

So you've won pat yourselves on the back!
 
Last edited:
Crowlogic said:
Well folks you win!

Here it is Autumn arrived early in 1967 and the Bluff Creek region of Northern CA. Roger Patterson and his team arrived on Labor Day Weekend and filmed cohort Bob Hironimous wearing a Hollywood created creature suit as he walked across a sandbar at Bluff Creek. Then several weeks after the event Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin returned to the filmsite and created tracks and a track line that they then made casts of as a means to backup the film they had made several weeks earlier. Roger Patterson then made a plea for track dogs to be sent into the area to track the non existant creature. In the meantime Bob Titmus arrived at the filmsite and saw the trackline that Patterson and Gimlin had created.

So you've won pat yourselves on the back!
Click to expand...
Frustrated? Better arguments would help but some reliable evidence would be great.

Anyway, if it makes you feel better, would you like me to sign up at the BFF and make some blanket statements too? You know, even things out a bit.
 
Well folks you win! Here it is Autumn arrived early in 1967 and the Bluff Creek region of Northern CA. Roger Patterson and his team arrived on Labor Day Weekend and filmed cohort Bob Hironimous wearing a Holloywood created creature suit as he walked across a sandbar at Bluff Creek. Then several weeks after the event Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin returned to the filmsite and created tracks and a track line that they then made casts of as a means to backup the film they had made several weeks earlier. Roger Patterson then made a plea for track dogs to be sent into the area to track the non existant creature. In the meantime Bob Titmus arrived at the filmsite and saw the trackline that Patterson and Gimlin had created.

So you've won pat yourselfve on the back
Click to expand...

Autumn includes September.

Speculation about what may have happened is not an indication that anyone firmly believes the speculation.

One poster's belief is not everone's belief.

I don't think the PGF was shot on Labor Day weekend, for example.

It is well known that Roger filmed himself casting tracks for practice. It is not known if the stills we have seen are from that practice or from the day the PGF was filmed.

The timeline of the day the PGF was shot is very suspect, and the time of the encounter has been 3:30, 1:30, and now I hear it will be reset to before noon.

Speaking of Patterson's call for dogs...

Why would Patterson make a plea for tracking dogs when it was raining heavily and flooding the area and causing mudslides?

Did P/G follow Patty for a little bit, a lot, 3 miles, or 3.5 miles?

How did they follow her if she sat nearby and watched them?

Why doesn't Gimlin mention the stomp test in the 11/67 interview when they are discussing the weight of the creature?
 
No I'm sticking to the story that Dfoot has created which is the scenerio I've posted as to how the PGF came about. All eyes and ears shoud be now turned to Dfoot lean on every word as he is the one who has found the Holy Grail. Read his posts take it as gospel it is the truth he wouldn't lie. I'm just a numbskull who wouldn't know the time of year if I tripped over it.
 
Last edited:
In the meantime, at Patterson's request, Al Hodgson telephoned Dr. Don Abbott of the British Columbia Museum of Anthropology and asked him to come down to the film site with tracking dogs.
Click to expand...

Come to think of it, this makes no sense on several levels.

If you wanted tracking dogs, why not use local ones?
 
Crowlogic said:
No I'm sticking to the story that Dfoot has created which is the scenerio I've posted as to how the PGF came about. All eyes and ears shoud be now turned to Dfoot lean on every word as he is the one who has found the Holy Grail. Read his posts take it as gospel it is the truth he wouldn't lie. I'm just a numbskull who wouldn't know the time of year if I tripped over it.
Click to expand...
Again, Crowlogic, I understand that not being able to present arguments that cast the PGF as a real bigfoot idea in a credible light is frustrating you but you do understand this. don't you?

LTC8K6 said:
One poster's belief is not everone's belief.
Click to expand...
It's this mentality to generalize that is one aspect that impairs your judgement.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Come to think of it, this makes no sense on several levels.

If you wanted tracking dogs, why not use local ones?
Click to expand...
Or have them with you in the first place ..

Why do Footers ignore that a dog has never been used to track a Bigfoot, even when fresh tracks ( or body print fer crise sake.. ) were available ..

Oh I forgot.. Dogs will not track Bigfoot .. They are all, naturally a'scared of Bigfoot..
 
I love when they used bloodhounds following the mixed primate sexual secretions scent they concocted on the Monster Quest Swamp Thing episode. Here boys! Find this!
 
Maybe I should read Bill Mumm's words as the godspell.

Perhaps I should read Patterson's and Gimlim's words as the godspell, for they would not lie!

At such times I can't help but feeling very happy for being an atheist!
 
So I've handed you the PGF on a silver platter as a hoax. Right here on this forum and on the BBF forum is the person Dfoot who has uncovered the truth. Or am I to believe that the Dfoot scenerio is not accepted as gospel? He's produced photos of the mask, the suit, the personalities behind it, and he's followed the money trail. He nailed it across the board. Time to give it up shut it down put it to bed. The guy who wore the suit wore the suit on Labor Day Weekend 1967, according to Dfoot. But Dfoot can explain why that pesky hoax film just looks so gosh darn like it was shot in true Autumn.
 
Crowlogic said:
So I've handed you the PGF on a silver platter as a hoax. Right here on this forum and on the BBF forum is the person Dfoot who has uncovered the truth. Or am I to believe that the Dfoot scenerio is not accepted as gospel? He's produced photos of the mask, the suit, the personalities behind it, and he's followed the money trail. He nailed it across the board. Time to give it up shut it down put it to bed. The guy who wore the suit wore the suit on Labor Day Weekend 1967, according to Dfoot. But Dfoot can explain why that pesky hoax film just looks so gosh darn like it was shot in true Autumn.
Click to expand...

Did all this Dfoot bashing start soon after he posted his thread on the bigfoot site?
 
Crowlogic said:
So I've handed you the PGF on a silver platter as a hoax. Right here on this forum and on the BBF forum is the person Dfoot who has uncovered the truth. Or am I to believe that the Dfoot scenerio is not accepted as gospel? He's produced photos of the mask, the suit, the personalities behind it, and he's followed the money trail. He nailed it across the board. Time to give it up shut it down put it to bed. The guy who wore the suit wore the suit on Labor Day Weekend 1967, according to Dfoot. But Dfoot can explain why that pesky hoax film just looks so gosh darn like it was shot in true Autumn.
Click to expand...
Why are you behaving in this odd manner, Crowlogic? For the fourth time today you need to be told to stop trying to pidgeonhole a discussion. Whyever should it matter that you make a false concession concerning the film and try to get other members to adopt Dfoot's arguments wholesale? That is a bizarre and ineffective thing to do. I'm engaging you in a discussion but you don't seem to be willing to respond. If you would like to abandon the weird behaviour, you are free to address the following post point by point as I have done:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3392645#post3392645

I'm interested to hear what you have to say regarding those points.
 
Kitakaze,
You should go back and read your own responses to what I've posted. Why would you think that anyone would engage you in a discussion when you've posted responses that are both arrogant sanctimionous to my posts? Do you need further convincing that you're right? Winning is winning and the skeptics have won.
 
I have actually paid little attention to Dfoot, Crow.

I did not even know about the September claim until you mentioned it.

I have heard of some of his efforts and I have followed a few links to see them at other boards.

I don't post about bigfoot anywhere but here.

I think it's possible that the PGF may have been shot a day or two earlier than claimed, but not because of anything dfoot or anyone else says. I think it's possible because of my own research.

Again, this is just a possibility to me. One of many regarding the PGF and the issues surrounding it. By no means am I saying it's a fact.

Anyone who has followed this and other threads about bigfoot here at JREF knows that we have discussed and re-discussed and re-re-discussed all sorts of things about the PGF. We've corrected ourselves numerous times, sometimes with the help of bigfoot believers. We've been accurate, inaccurate, and way off the mark a few times, too.

I'm sure the trend will continue. :D
 
devnull said:
<reality check>We have nearly 11000 posts about a snippet of film showing a guy in a bad gorilla suit</reality check>
Click to expand...

You read my mind.

One of the reasons I don't post much on this topic is that, frankly, there's nothing more to say.

Film professionals -- save one -- look at the footage and see a hoax.

Many non-film professionals look at the footage and see a hoax.

Others see bigfoot.

When I realized that the last segment of population sees the footage as less a piece of evidence and more an article of faith, I lost most of my interest.

These days, I'm just here to eat popcorn and relax.

Nevertheless, the point still stands: Thousands and thousands of words, tons of digital imagery, all wasted on a piece of footage of clearly dubious origin.

Who needs Bigfoot when we have that weirdness smacking us in the face?

:)

Avindair
 
"I'm just a numbskull who wouldn't know the time of year if I tripped over it."

See we agree on something Logic. You seem to think that we just make this crap up. Dude I have been looking at an early October filming date for a couple years now. The perception of the mid October colors was about the easiest hurdle to get over. I'm not implying it was filmed at any other time than when it was said to have been filmed, what I am saying is that the possibility exists.


Quotes from this article. http://danr.ucop.edu/ihrmp/oak26.htm

The Effects of Drought on California Oaks

"In mid-August, 1987 and in early September the following year, many trees at the Station and on the surrounding foothills began turning brown prematurely and dropping their leaves. While most of the trees affected were deciduous species that normally do lose their leaves, the event was unusual in that it happened approximately 3 months ahead of schedule. During most years, deciduous oaks donít change color and drop their leaves until the short days and cold temperatures of November and December. One of the principal species affected was Quercus douglasii commonly called blue oak. This species grows in the foothills of the Sierra Nevadas and the Coast Range."

To get to brown they have to go through yellow and red.

"At the time the trees turned brown, it was believed that the leaf loss was directly attributable to exceedingly dry soil conditions in mid-summer. As the soil moisture became depleted, the oaks apparently dropped their leaves to reduce their moisture requirements, thus helping to offset the potentially disastrous consequences of dehydration."


"Long-term weather records do indicate that 5-year drought periods are not uncommon In California."

Weather archives http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/dwm/data_rescue_daily_weather_maps.html


More quotes from another article

Fall Foliage
Kay Hinkle

"You may have noticed that the color red has been prevalent in our woodland palette this year. That is probably the result of the stresses of drought in our area. A research plant physiologist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Forest Service has studied the impact of stresses like lack of rain on red leaf pigment for several years. His studies indicate that in drought-stricken years, "leaf peepers" will see more red, and the color will show earlier. All in all, the color of fall foliage tends to be more brilliant as the result of dry summer months."

"Red makes an interesting study because it varies from year to year. Green and yellow pigments are always present in leaves and don't change dramatically from year to year. Essentially, trees create red as the weather warrants."



m :bike:
 
mangler said:
"I'm just a numbskull who wouldn't know the time of year if I tripped over it."

See we agree on something Logic. You seem to think that we just make this crap up. Dude I have been looking at an early October filming date for a couple years now. The perception of the mid October colors was about the easiest hurdle to get over. I'm not implying it was filmed at any other time than when it was said to have been filmed, what I am saying is that the possibility exists.


Quotes from this article. http://danr.ucop.edu/ihrmp/oak26.htm

The Effects of Drought on California Oaks

"In mid-August, 1987 and in early September the following year, many trees at the Station and on the surrounding foothills began turning brown prematurely and dropping their leaves. While most of the trees affected were deciduous species that normally do lose their leaves, the event was unusual in that it happened approximately 3 months ahead of schedule. During most years, deciduous oaks donít change color and drop their leaves until the short days and cold temperatures of November and December. One of the principal species affected was Quercus douglasii commonly called blue oak. This species grows in the foothills of the Sierra Nevadas and the Coast Range."

To get to brown they have to go through yellow and red.

"At the time the trees turned brown, it was believed that the leaf loss was directly attributable to exceedingly dry soil conditions in mid-summer. As the soil moisture became depleted, the oaks apparently dropped their leaves to reduce their moisture requirements, thus helping to offset the potentially disastrous consequences of dehydration."


"Long-term weather records do indicate that 5-year drought periods are not uncommon In California."

Weather archives http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/dwm/data_rescue_daily_weather_maps.html


More quotes from another article

Fall Foliage
Kay Hinkle

"You may have noticed that the color red has been prevalent in our woodland palette this year. That is probably the result of the stresses of drought in our area. A research plant physiologist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Forest Service has studied the impact of stresses like lack of rain on red leaf pigment for several years. His studies indicate that in drought-stricken years, "leaf peepers" will see more red, and the color will show earlier. All in all, the color of fall foliage tends to be more brilliant as the result of dry summer months."

"Red makes an interesting study because it varies from year to year. Green and yellow pigments are always present in leaves and don't change dramatically from year to year. Essentially, trees create red as the weather warrants."



m :bike:
Click to expand...

Mangler I think I know why you go by the name Mangler. That said where I come from the quickest way to incrudulity is to use the word "dude". Once again I challange you to produce a photograph of Northern CA taken first week in September that shows dropping leaves and significant Autumn color. Both the photos you've posted and the photos I've posted go very far in dismissing some extravagant posts made here and elsewhere that point to the PGF having been shot during the first week of September 1967.
 
Crowlogic said:
Kitakaze,
You should go back and read your own responses to what I've posted. Why would you think that anyone would engage you in a discussion when you've posted responses that are both arrogant sanctimionous to my posts? Do you need further convincing that you're right? Winning is winning and the skeptics have won.
Click to expand...
Why am I not surprised that you characterize this discussion as being about winning? Crowlogic, if it was about winning, then unfortunately PGF proponents lost a very long time ago. If you interpret my posts as being arrogant and sanctimonious than so be it. Dealing with the same repetitive, poor bigfoot enthusiast arguments will often elicit the sense of distaste you are interpreting as otherwise.

Regardless, if I was the footer who thought the skeptic was injecting arrogance into his or her arguments and that mine were sound, then I'd be all the more motivated to counter with better conveyances of my points. Of course, if I knew my arguments were weak but I still wanted to believe in bigfoot anyway, then I could complain about arrogance and avoid addressing a single point that was addressed to me.
 
Last edited:
GT/CS said:
Did all this Dfoot bashing start soon after he posted his thread on the bigfoot site?
Click to expand...

Naw. It was only after he started offering a train of evidence that pointed to a hoax. Then they got all nasty. ;)

In all seriousness, the constant demand that Dfoot recreate the freaking PGF got tiresome really quickly. It didn't matter how many times you told them that:

  1. He wasn't trying to reproduce the PGF; he was just demonstrating the techniques involved.
  2. It's not up to the skeptic to prove anything; it's up to the individual making the extraordinary claim to provide evidence of said claim.

...it never stuck. Their Holy Grail had been polluted by Mountain Dew, and by gosh someone was gonna pay! :boggled:

Avindair
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom