Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[LAL]

You said that you found only a deer jawbone. Not something that would give you any idea-doubtful or certain-of how the animal perished. As well, I don't know any hunter who would be willing to guess on how the animal died just from a jawbone.

How about the one that shot it?

That proves nothing. You're not offering information on how many people, what area of the country, and whether any of them ever found remains of bears that died of unnatural causes. For all we know, he could have asked five people-hardly representative of the entire country.

PNW. Read the book.

Yet, these people whom Grover Krantz questioned, whenever they stumbled across the remains of a bear, could always decipher an unnatural cause of death?

I'll have to read it again myself, but I got the impression they weren't finding dead bears at all.

Sorry, but your original claim was the the remains of animals are rarely found in the woods. Now, it's the remains of animal who died from natural causes are rarely found in the woods.

Either way, respectfully, not so.

In the Columbia Gorge, where I lived, that appeared to be so.

The original claim is that sick and dying animals tend to hole up where they're hard to find. Animals that are trapped or shot don't have much chance to do that, do they?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Back to the dictionary Sweety ..

Implausible doesn't mean impossible ..

However, If the creature does exist, Patty ain't it ...

 

[William Parcher]

That would be William Parcher, Lu.

He's the skeptic here with the smallest mind (well, actually, he and Greg are running 'neck and neck' for that distintction)....and, according to him....time is now officially UP for all living Bigfoot creatures to have been found....across the globe.

Any living creatures still "undiscovered", forfeited their right to life when William proudly stated that Bigfoot absolutely, definitely does not exist, anywhere in the whole wide world.


It's a shame.....but that's the way it is!

That was great, Sweaty. You made me smile.

 

[LAL]

You present yourself as a Bigfoot researcher with a keen interest in the PGF. I expected you to follow conversations and information about the PGF on BFF even if you weren't posting there. It's what I do. Maybe you should consider me a great source because I find things that you don't. We consistently see examples showing that PGF skeptics can be more knowledgeable about the film and story than some of its strongest supporters. Two of the richest sources for PGF information are JREF and BFF. Ignore them at your own peril.

No, I do not present myself as a Bigfoot researcher. In fact, I requested my title on MABRC be changed. I'm an interested party.

I consider some of the posters on BFF to be rich sources of information, but I got tired of attacks by some of the others. JREF is almost nothing but attacks and any information tends to get lost in them. You're one of the worst, Parcher.

I get my information from people who knew Patterson and Gimlin, who've made a study of the film and site and written books about same. Those are rich sources of information. Even Greg Long had something to offer. The interview with Jerry Merritt stood out. There was another friend who got screwed but never called Roger a scam artist or a hoaxer.

I do not have the time I had when I was a regular on BFF. It was fun while it lasted, but I'd rather work my way through everything Richard Dawkins ever wrote.

 

[captain koolaid]

The reason why an 'eyewitness report' of a Bigfoot can carry a different weight than an 'eyewitness report' of another type of creature comes down to one simple factor.....the plausibility of the supposed creatures.

If someone says they've seen a flying elephant, their report would carry absolutely no weight, (a 0% probability of being true) because the notion of a "flying elephant" is implausible, to begin with....before ("a priori") the report is ever investigated.

The principle is explained in this article...

http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/extraproof.html


The notion of a flying elephant is implausible.

The notion of an upright-walking, very large primate is not implausible.
(Just ask Giganto. )

Using the same check box for "evidence", much more plausible than Bigfoot. You with us Sweaty? Lock and load, because something has to be done about the threat lurking in the woods. As a committed Dino hunter I am appalled at the lack of open mindedness on display from most Footers. After all, the Dinokiller community

is doing it's part to prevent footers from becoming Theropod chow, in their naive search for "Bigfoot". Be afraid. Be very afraid. They mostly come at night. Mostly.

 

[SweatyYeti]

captain koolaid wrote:

much more plausible than Bigfoot.

O.K.....it's time to make Captain Koolaid look like Captain Dino-Brains.


If Patty is so obviously a "suit", Dino-Brains....do you think you would be able to replicate just ONE small aspect of her obvious "suit"?

Not the whole obvious suit.....just one small, obvious part of it.


Obviously, if you know that that particular aspect of Patty is just a suit, then it should be quite easy for you to replicate it......right?

 

[LAL]

IOW, I'm getting the tar beat out of me and I refuse to admit I'm wrong so let's change the subject.

Good idea.

No, there was a hue and cry recently about getting off topic and there we were all over the place again. Just how is getting back to the topic changing the subject?

I haven't noticed anyone beating the tar out of me though several seem to be trying. That's just par for the course around here. It doesn't work.

An elusive animal that dies hidden in a remote area where there's no human activity is not likely to be found by humans. Case closed.

 

[LAL]

Yet, Bigfooters were coming into this area and finding tracks without any problem.

Just who would that be? P & G were looking for tracks to photograph for the documentary, but the only ones they saw were too old to be of use.

Ryerson wasn't a "Bigfooter". Neither were Graves, Hodgson or Jerry Crew.

JREF is a rich source of misinformation, I'll give it that.

 

[LTC8K6]

The above means nothing at all. How can you claim this as reasoning?
There's a Yellowstone show on Travel Channel, watch it. It shows a park ranger stating that he worked his whole life (over 20 years) there and never saw a cougar. Yet he knows they are there.

I already covered such examples...

Did he never see a bigfoot, too?

One of these creatures is plausible, and one is not...

 

[carcharodon]

Hey Lu and Sweaty,

I see you two are still running rings around the usual buffoons and braggarts here. Personally I don't know why you bother. People here who are obsessing over something they are sure doesn't exist are, well, obviously......not......right.....in......the....head.

That's like, er.........weird isn't it?

Quick rundown on the thought processes here:

"These buggers don't exist, but I'm gonna spend almost all of my waking hours talking about them because I've got nothing better to do with my life".

 

[Mad Hom]

captain koolaid wrote:

O.K.....it's time to make Captain Koolaid look like Captain Dino-Brains.


If Patty is so obviously a "suit", Dino-Brains....do you think you would be able to replicate just ONE small aspect of her obvious "suit"?

Not the whole obvious suit.....just one small, obvious part of it.


Obviously, if you know that that particular aspect of Patty is just a suit, then it should be quite easy for you to replicate it......right?

Blah blah blah....:::YAWWWWN::...replicate the suit...blah blah blah....should be easy...yada yada.... ad nauseum.

Sweety this plea to "replicate the suit" is getting a bit tired don't you think??

One more time dunderhead...

40 years... no DNA...none...zip zilch nada....nothing

40 years... no worthwhile film (yes I'm including the PGF in that)

40 years... 10,000 feetprints but NOT a single foot that may have made them

40 years... Bigfeets popping up in every state...yet nothing definitive

40 years Sweety and all the skpetics have wanted is ONE Bigfeetsus... in fact any ONE Bigfeetsus will do...yet Bigfoot Nation has repeatedly failed at fulfilling this request. The same Bigfoot Nation who by the way are the ones making the extraordinary claim that a Hairy Biped of Unusual Size is running amok across the entirety of the North American continent yet has heretofore alluded scientific discovery. It's you the Tru Bleevers in the High Church of Sasquatch who have to do all the work...not us.

You and Lu's contant reference to "other" recent large mammal discoveries are like comparing apples to oranges....these were animals that no one but natives in distant remote lands even knew about than once science heard of them they went looking and...POW...they were seen,clasified,shot,carved up,and added to the long list of previously discovered species....Bigfeetsus is seen all the time by people on one of the most populated and well travelled continents on Earth...so spare me the ***** comparison of Bigfeetsus and some zany never before filmed zebra striped giraffe relative (which by the way I saw 3 of at the San Diego Zoo way back in 1992)

Nearly every single shred of Sacred Bigfeetsus evidence has been shredded to ribbons in this forum so it would appear in your utter desperation you have once again fallen back on the tired old chestnut used by all of Bigfoot Nation...

Replicate the suit.

It's sad that your mind works this way sweety...very very sad.

You desperately cling to your desire for their to be mysterious beasties in them thar woods so vehemently that you won't allow yourself to see the forest for the trees.... every thing has been blown up...the evidence presented has been weighed and measured and unfortunately been found wanting..at this point the suit is irrelavent....because all the circumstantial evidence swirling around Rodge and his one in a million stroke of luck is damning to the point of absurdity.

How's this though...I promise to produce you a suit that replicates Patty to exact measurements the same day Bobby G agrees to take a lie detector test... I wouldn't hold your breath for that lie detector test anytime soon though ...so best to just get on with your life already.

There is no Bigfeetsus ....they are not there.... sorry to be the bearer of bad news there my simpleminded chum....keep clicking your heels though Dorothy...maybe someday your wishes will come true.

 

[Mad Hom]

Hey Lu and Sweaty,

I see you two are still running rings around the usual buffoons and braggarts here. Personally I don't know why you bother. People here who are obsessing over something they are sure doesn't exist are, well, obviously......not......right.....in......the....head.

That's like, er.........weird isn't it?

Quick rundown on the thought processes here:

"These buggers don't exist, but I'm gonna spend almost all of my waking hours talking about them because I've got nothing better to do with my life".

Pathetic Carch...just pathetic....so now your trying to turn the tables and color us with the "obsessed" brush.

Were you tossed into the ceiling fan alot as a child Carch??

Lu spams the forum with her personal experiences and vivid yet irrelavent factoids about her limited experiences in the woods and Sweety rambles on and on like a drunken spider monkey about..."replicate the suit"....Aaaahhh...should be easy...aaaaahhh"

and they're running rings around us....excuse me while I laugh directly in your face..

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!

40 years + No real proof= Tru Bleevers who don't know when to let the dream die.

 

[kitakaze]

Hey Lu and Sweaty,

I see you two are still running rings around the usual buffoons and braggarts here.

If by "running rings" you mean to say hurriedly moving goal posts and repeatedly evading questions then I know exactly what you mean. So what's up, Lyndon? Anger management class having a pro-d day or what?

 

[LAL]

Hey Lu and Sweaty,

I see you two are still running rings around the usual buffoons and braggarts here. Personally I don't know why you bother. People here who are obsessing over something they are sure doesn't exist are, well, obviously......not......right.....in......the....head.

That's like, er.........weird isn't it?

Quick rundown on the thought processes here:

"These buggers don't exist, but I'm gonna spend almost all of my waking hours talking about them because I've got nothing better to do with my life".

Yes. Are they all retired or on disability or posting at work? Obsessed, I'd call it.

I bothered because I got bored. I could count on this board to revive my interest and get my adrenalin flowing. It's the only one I know of where bad behavior is allowed such a free rein. It gives me a break from moderating a board where most of the posters are civil.

 

[kitakaze]

Bump for Lu:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4058478#post4058478

 

[clayflingythingy]

An elusive animal that dies hidden in a remote area where there's no human activity is not likely to be found by humans. Case closed.

What about Ky bigfeet? Would Ky bigfeet bodies disappear magically overnite too?

Ky woods are overrun each year by berry pickers, nut gatherers, ginseng hunters, hikers, campers, hunters, trappers, and woods loafers. How come no one has found the carcass of a Ky bigfoot?

 

[desertgal]

How about the one that shot it?

WTH are you talking about? First, it was "ask any hunter", and now that scenario only works if I manage to find a hunter who shot a deer and hope that he recognizes it by the jawbone? You're not making any sense.

PNW. Read the book.

I don't need to read the book. I'm not the one vaguely quoting the book.

I'll have to read it again myself, but I got the impression they weren't finding dead bears at all.

Ah. So originally, they weren't finding dead bears who died of natural causes, and now they weren't finding any dead bears at all. Okey dokey.

In the Columbia Gorge, where I lived, that appeared to be so.

In your opinion.

The original claim is that sick and dying animals tend to hole up where they're hard to find. Animals that are trapped or shot don't have much chance to do that, do they?

And that would explain the total absence of discovered Bigfoot bodies how? These animals must be absolute wizards at avoiding cars, trains, hunters, rock slides, traps, avalanches, etc.

 

[desertgal]

Yes. Are they all retired or on disability or posting at work? Obsessed, I'd call it.

I bothered because I got bored. I could count on this board to revive my interest and get my adrenalin flowing. It's the only one I know of where bad behavior is allowed such a free rein. It gives me a break from moderating a board where most of the posters are civil.

And here we go...attack the posters, not the discrepancies in your own statements. Classic.

 

[kitakaze]

WTH are you talking about?

I'm glad you got that because it was sticking out at me like a sore thumb.

And that would explain the total absence of discovered Bigfoot bodies how? These animals must be absolute wizards at avoiding cars, trains, hunters, rock slides, traps, avalanches, etc.

Whilst doing it in vitrually all the marketable timber in the U.S. as Lu tells us.

She sees no problem.

 

[William Parcher]

Yet, Bigfooters were coming into this area and finding tracks without any problem.

Just who would that be? P & G were looking for tracks to photograph for the documentary, but the only ones they saw were too old to be of use.

Ryerson wasn't a "Bigfooter". Neither were Graves, Hodgson or Jerry Crew.

JREF is a rich source of misinformation, I'll give it that.

Notice Creek, California:
June 13, 1963. BF tracks 16 inches long are found crossing Notice Creek near Bluff Creek only 100 feet away from where 3 men were sleeping in a car.

October 20, 1967. Bob Gimlin and Roger Patterson see and film motion pictures of a female BF just above Notice Creek between Onion Mountain, Bee Mountain and Fish Creek Butte. Her tracks measure 14½ inches long.

December. 1968. BF tracks 16 inches long are found for 3 miles on Bluff Creek Road going from East Fork to Notice Creek.


Bluff Creek, California:
1958. Lawrence Omeg sees a Bigfoot outside his shack after work on a logging job. He quits his job and leaves the following day.

September, 1958. Bigfoot tracks are seen 4 different times on Bluff Creek Road.

October 1, 1958. Jerry Crew finds a quarter mile of BF tracks on Bluff Creek Road and makes casts.

October 12, 1958. Ray Kerr and Leslie Brezeale see a BF cross a 20" road in 2 strides and find tracks several miles south of where they are usually seen on Bluff Creek Road. Hired by Ray Wallace to track BF, they redouble their hunting effort but their dogs disappear a few days later and are never seen again.

1959. A husband and wife flying a private plane over Bluff Creek see and follow BF tracks until they pass over the BF making them.

Mid October, 1958. BF tracks are seen again in Bluff Creek.

October 23, 1958. BF tracks are seen on Bluff Creek Road once again.

October 28, 1958. 2 miles of BF tracks are seen on Bluff Creek Road.

October 30, 1958. BF tracks are seen going down a hill from Bluff Creek Road.

November 2, 1958. Bob Titmus and Ed Patrick find BF tracks on a Bluff Creek Sandbar.

December 18. 1958. Betty Allen finds 6 miles of BF tracks on Bluff Creek Road.

August 16, 1959. Bob Titmus finds 300 yards of BF tracks along Bluff Creek Sandbar.

August 30, 1959. Bob Titmus finds more BF tracks at Bluff Creek Sandbar.

November 1, 1959. Bob Titmus finds more BF tracks at Bluff Creek Sandbar.

November 2, 1959. Betty Allen finds BF tracks coming down a canyon and along Bluff Creek Road.

January 30, 1960. Betty Allen finds BF tracks around a shovel loader on Humboldt Fir logging road at Bluff Creek.

1969. Peter Byrne, Brian Matthes and Steve Matthes find Bigfoot tracks along Bluff Creek.

June 19, 1960. Dr. Charles Johnson and his family find BF tracks on both sides of the Klamath River a half mile west of Bluff Creek.

August 19, 1962. Skip Clark finds and casts Bigfoot tracks at Bluff Creek sandbar.

September 26, 1962. Bob Titmus finds miles of BF tracks on Bluff Creek Road and in the creek bottom itself.

June 22, 1963. Skip Clark finds and casts a 15 inch BF track on Bluff Creek sandbar.

1963. Thomas Sourwine says a 300 pound boulder was used to repeatedly hit road building equipment near Bluff Creek.

June 30, 1963. BF tracks 10 to 15 inches long are found and cast in the Bluff Creek area.

1963. Pat Graves follows BF tracks for 5 miles from Laird Meadow to Bluff Creek Road at Notice Creek. Sticks 1¼ in thick are found broken in the tracks.

1963. Dave Blake finds BF tracks where a barrel of diesel fuel was thrown off the road.

1963. BF tracks 15 inches long are found at Bluff Creek logging operations, with boxes of spikes thrown around and sticks of dynamite bitten into.

August, 1963. BF tracks are found on Bluff Creek Road at Notice Creek bridge.

October 1963. Al Hodgson finds a set of BF tracks a few hundred yards above the Notice Creek bridge at Bluff Creek sandbar. The sandbar was washed away in the 1964 flood.

July 1964. Scout Master Joe Christensen Sr., and Boy Scout Camp medic Dick Beathel found (a mile from the camp) 17 inch by 7 1/2 inch bare footprints in the mud and cast them. The stride was around five feet between imprints; five toes. Photo of casts were published in the Modesto Bee on July 16, 1964. The location was 7 miles northeast of Mariposa, Mariposa County, California

Summer 1964. Dave Blake often finds BF tracks at Laid Meadow at Blake and Tregoning Logging operation west of Bluff Creek. A culvert 4 feet in diameter and 20 feet long is thrown into the canyon and 450 pound barrels of diesel fuel are moved around.

August 21, 1964. Roger Patterson finds and casts 17 inch tracks with a 52 inch stride on Laird Meadow Road.

September, 1964. Samuel Brewer Jr. finds and casts a 15½ inch BF tracks with a 47 inch stride along Bluff Creek.

Fall, 1964 . Dave Blake sees BF tracks around his logging equipment every morning for a week. A trailer load of 18 inch culverts is overturned while men are working nearby.

1965. Jay Roland finds BF tracks along Bluff Creek.

July, 1965. Steve Sanders and 2 others sleeping the a tent awake to see a large finger or stick opening their tent flap. Their yells scare it off. Investigating the next day, they find BF tracks 17 inches long and 7 inches wide around their tent at Blue Lake near Bluff Creek.

1966. Richard Sides sees a BF squatting at Bluff Creek drinking water with cupped hands.

Fall, 1966. Jay Roland sees BF tracks on a road a Scorpion Creek in the Bluff Creek area.

August, 1967. Several BF tracks are found and cast by a road crew on Onion Mountain, west of Bluff Creek. The tracks measure 13 and 15 inches long.

August 1967. Bud Ryerson sees hundreds of 13 to 15 inch BF tracks on the road he is building on Blue Creek Mountain, west of Bluff Creek. Tractor parts are scattered all over the area.

October 25, 1967. Dan Mullens finds BF tracks and an unopened case of oil cans crushed on Notice Creek.

November, 1967 - In remote area John Wenger of Summit City, found huge footprints showing only ball and five toes, no claws on the north shore of Shasta Lake. The tracks went across sand isthmus towards brush covered two acre island off shore two miles east of Shasta Dam. Wenger counted seven clear tracks. Barry Hennings of the Record Searchlight newspaper took casts and photographs; published them November 10, 1967.

June 1968. Steve Marlin and Bruce Cornwall find BF tracks between Bluff Creek and Fish Lake.

January 1969. Pat Graves sees BF tracks from a plane between Blue Creek Divide and Nikowitz Road.

Late May, 1969. Dr. Bernard Northrup and a party of San Francisco Theological Seminary Students find over 1000 16" BF tracks in the Bluff Creek area. They also find loose bark stripped from the trees near the tracks.

August, 1969. The owner of the Bluff Creek Resort finds 16 inch BF tracks in the sandbar at the mouth of Bull Creek in the Bluff Creek area.

Lots of other track findings in the region around Bluff Creek