Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
bobbieshort said:
==============
It is believed to be videotape that was filmed by Rene Dahinden, he's the guy behind the camera in that video. The men in that photo are: from L-R Don Abbot from the Vancouver Museum, Dale Moffit, the tracking dog handler; "Lady" the tracking dog; John Green and Bob Titmus. I don't know who the guy is on the right. That area (I believe) is part of the sandbar of Bluff Creek; the well-known if not familiar log is in the background...the one that is seen w/backhoe tracks in the Patterson film. Notice John Green has a long-lens camera shouldered on his left shoulder throughout this footage yet that I have seen, the only photos he ever released were up on Blue Creek Mountain Road of the footprints, (maybe Titmus walking on that road) nothing else, you can see those in Murphy's book)....the logging road you can see in the background. "If" that is NOT Blue Crk Mtn road, then it is the old logging road that used to flank Bluff Creek drainage back in the day; I'll have to go back and look again. That logging road no longer exists...it is the same road that Gimlin is seen riding with the packhorse and the wooden boxes...see pg 42 Murphy's book. John Green flew in by chartered plane, -the dog handler, the guy from the Vancouver museum, himself, the dog, Dahinden and another man in a white t-shirt (on the far far right) that I haven't been able to identify. The backhoe that was used belonged to Charlie Whitson but I don't believe that is him in the movie because Al Hodgson said in the October 2008 interview that he was furious with Patterson for using the backhoe without permission....one assumes that Patterson must have eaten up the gas or something (which had to be trucked in there in those days) If I read the video that JcR uploaded the link too above correctly, the suggestion is that there were dog tracks on the sandbar in the Patterson film as well as these in the Dahinden footage ....implicating a lot of names?? In that footage, there are splices; we don't ever see who is behind the camera...my thoughts are it was probably Dahinden. Another thing Al Hodgson talked about in that October 2008 interview was that Roger cast a quote child's track unquote...a small 9" track that can be seen in Patterson's track-collection-photograph.... fwiw....
Click to expand...

Thanks really appreciated ... This area has kept Green and Titmus busy from time to time with Bigfoot tracks. :)
Though I did realize that John Green, tracking dog with trainer, along with other researchers, had gone up into the Blue Ridge area after the Patterson event, it was something else I was questioning... The footage of the dog at Bluff Creek that I have never seen before, and the implication and assertions that these videos portray kinda threw me off a bit.
I wasn't positive of "who was who" in the Photos, so thanks for that help.
I hear they were clearing trees for a road up in the ridge area, so I thinking this was the road. I wish I had some more quality pictures of the events, when they went back up with the tracking dog.
Is this the Patterson's track-collection-photograph you are referring to?


It was the videos with the tracking dog at the Bluff Creek site that I haven't seen before.

This material was actually what I was questioning more. I didn't realize they
had any footage of the tracking dog at the PGF site. I can only imagine that Dahinden took a few quality photos of this event.
 
Vortigern99 said:
That's an excellent idea, and I'll request that SMiles do just that.
Click to expand...

That's great; thanks!

Yes, the publicity still that shows Weismuller as Tarzan on the right and the man-in-chimp-suit on the left. I have the first few Wesimuller movies on videotape, so while I cannot take screencaps from them I can certainly examine one or more of them to see if the suit depicted has been airbrushed as alleged.
Click to expand...

I look forward to hearing more about this.

Yes, and as even skeptics seem to forget or overlook, it's also demonstrable in a mirror using one's own anatomy.All one need do is stoop a bit while walking or standing, bend the knee somewhat as the figure does, and the baseline of the fingers comes "inhumanly" close to the knees.
Click to expand...

Oh, we've brought that up before. It's just that I find that people tend to respond better to visual aids than they do to things that require them to do any extra work. I found this to be especially true when discussing how the length of Patty's outstretched, swinging arms can be due to an optical illusion of sorts, as demonstrated by Dfoot in these two images.

I list the mechanical prosthetics mainly to refute the NASI report's contention that as of 1967 no such prostheses existed.
Click to expand...

Ah, okay.

Intriguing theory, but as it's sheer speculation I'll probably opt not to include it in the article.
Click to expand...

Completely understood. To be honest, I was more concerned about the proper classification (and unfinished status) of Patterson's movie.

Even though this kind if thing is circumstantial evidence at best, this could make its way into my article to further support the contention that Patterson was untrustworthy and fully capable of perpetrating a hoax.
Click to expand...

Awhile back, some proponents seemed to realize how silly it was to argue the PGF's authenticity while agreeing that Roger Patterson was a shady guy. This led to an attempt to clean up his image, first by trying to argue away the label "con man" and then trying to claim that there was no documented evidence that Roger Patterson had done any wrong. If I remember correctly, some tried to imply that Greg Long might have paid off people to get negative comments about Patterson or that people who were upset with (or jealous of) Roger Patterson used the opportunity presented by Long to smear him. However, the Radford document and Bossburg story put that to rest (as far as I can tell). I think that the testimony of respected Bigfoot proponents (which you already had with Dr. Krantz, but a few more examples can only help) adds a little extra weight when arguing the point to proponents.
 
JcR said:
Thanks really appreciated ... This area has kept Green and Titmus busy from time to time with Bigfoot tracks. :)
Though I did realize that John Green, tracking dog with trainer, along with other researchers, had gone up into the Blue Ridge area after the Patterson event, it was something else I was questioning... The footage of the dog at Bluff Creek that I have never seen before, and the implication and assertions that these videos portray kinda threw me off a bit.
I wasn't positive of "who was who" in the Photos, so thanks for that help.
I hear they were clearing trees for a road up in the ridge area, so I thinking this was the road. I wish I had some more quality pictures of the events, when they went back up with the tracking dog.
Is this the Patterson's track-collection-photograph you are referring to?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_2839649d1cce73f43a.jpg
====================
Yes...that is the photograph I referred too
====================
It was the videos with the tracking dog at the Bluff Creek site that I haven't seen before.

This material was actually what I was questioning more. I didn't realize they had any footage of the tracking dog at the PGF site. I can only imagine that Dahinden took a few quality photos of this event.
Click to expand...
=====================
I didn't know there were additional cameras rolling either, not until this footage surfaced. It's all new to me too; the implications of it make me dizzy.
=====================
JcR...
I didn't have my facts exactly right for I see John Green writes that Don Abbot arrived after all the principles were already at Bluff Crk; in fact he claims that it took Don Abbot two days to get to the scene @ Bluff Creek. So, of the 2 chartered plane trips into Orleans, Abbot was not on board either plane. Sorry, I misspoke. Abbot arrived later, when JG had already been there the second time with Rene as the new footage shows!

You'll get JG's perspective by reading his book, 1978 "Sasquatch, the Apes among Us." Begin Chapter 4....page 73, second paragraph....if you don't have that book, I have it in text that I can paste here if anyone is interested.

Green had only been home from trip #1 a few hours when Bud Ryerson phoned him saying only, "what you were looking for is here." What was Ryerson referring too? Certainly not tracks, that was a given. Whatever the verbal signal - JG chartered plane #2 and left that afternoon back to Orleans pocketing $500 advance from The Vancouver Sun (alot of money in those days)...in the mean time Patterson & Gimlin were already there, having had prior notice from Al Hodgson the day before.

Recalling Chapter 4 again.. October of 1967...JG makes two mistakes in his recollections. He identifies the tracking dog as an Alsatian but Lady is clearly a white German shepherd. We would not ever have known this bit of trivia had the Dahinden video never surfaced and JG probably figured it never would become public (it too has been spliced) I'll bet JG has some great footage somewhere!!

Going back to the book again, the second major mistake JG makes in Chapter 4 was in the way he detailed what everyone did except that he never mentions the part his good friend & neighbor Bob Titmus played and again, had this Dahinden video never surfaced, we wouldn't have known either. But we see Titmus walking the Bluff Creek sandbar with his rifle at the ready with Dale Moffit, the tracking dog and JG in the picture. By process of elimination, that footage must have been taken by Dahinden, he is the only one not in the picture....leaving me to believe there was probably at least 3 cameras rolling on Bluff Crk that week…. Dahinden's, Green's and Patterson's. This might explain some of the splicing work done on the Patterson film and also reasons why some of that footage looks to have been photographed by a camera of better quality than Patterson's K-100. I don't know what movie camera Rene owned, maybe someone here does, help?
But JG's appears to be a more expensive long lens shoulder-mount camera, which we would never have known had this footage not turned up. I could go on talking forever about the new implications, but I have to get back to work.....
 
An Alsatian is a German Shepard. For a while, believe it or not, calling something German was a Bad Thing, so the breed was renamed.
 
I don't know. Leroy Blevins, who posted that video, has made some extremely questionable claims about a wide variety of topics, including being able to see Noah's Ark in aerial pictures of totally normal-looking mountaintops, and other woo-ish claims. His tendency toward apophenia and pareidolia is par none.

If this is the suit, why isn't Blevins telling us where he got the pic? Why is he able to suddenly produce a pic of a suit that people have been looking for for 41 years? Did someone provide the pic, and if so, are there others with perhaps better angles on the suit? Or did Blevins just find the pic somewhere and decry "Eureka! I hath found it!"?

EDIT: Oh, I see. Blevins explains it's a Chambers "LOST IN SPACE" suit. Hmmm.
 
Last edited:
Leroy Blevins said:
The photo I show is a suit from the 1960's. I had to do a lot of research and look over 1000's of photos to find this 1 photo. For you see it is told that Mr. Morris made the suit and then it is told that Mr. Chang made the suit and also it is told that Mr. Chambers made the suit. And this photo is a costume made by one of the men I just told you about. However I am the only knows who made this costume. That I show

....

The photo in this video can be found on a John Chambers site of the suits he made. For this suit was used in a old lost in space series.
Click to expand...

If this is the best he can do after looking at 1000 photos, I think it's time to hang up the search for the suit.

Psuit.jpg
 
Last edited:
That sure looks like the suit. Especially when looking at his pinpointed comparisons in the link.

I don't think expressing interest in Noah's ark automatically disqualifies him from being able to find pertinent information to this thread without end. Whole governments have officially searched for Noah's ark.
U.S. pilots thought they saw Noah's ark. Richard F. Burton proclaimed that he knew the whereabouts of Noah's ark.

Which is more woo, Noah's ark or bigfoot?

Anybody have a working woo-o-meter?
 
Last edited:
It's not that Blevins "expresses" interest in Noah's Ark. My first name is Noah and I have a deep interest in the subject as well. I levy no criticism against the man for searching for answers. I applaud his search and hope that it one day proves fruitful.

But manofthesea, if you will actually watch Blevins' videos detailing his pareidoliac spotting of ship remnants in perfectly natural and otherwise unidentifiable rock formations, you'll understand what I'm talking about.

As to bigfoot, Blevins believes they are descended from biblical giants and recounts stories of speaking with and being visited by them in his backyard. (Check out his youtube page for more on this fascinating subject.) His purpose in debunking the P-G film is personal, emotional, metaphysical and highly suspect on all points.

All that aside, if the pic of the Chambers suit was at all convincing, I would be among the first to say so. I've theorized through careful examination of the evidence (such as it is) that the film very probably depicts a person in a suit. It follows that I would welcome any hard evidence in support of that theory.

But this pic isn't hard evidence. It's just another baggy, shapeless hair suit, like any of the thousands already known to exist. Blevins, or anyone, might as well claim the Japanese Kong is the P-G suit, and expect the skeptical community to take him just as seriously:

3348601665_91f870a47c.jpg


We need better evidence than a muddy B&W photo of a shapeless ape suit before we can say we've found "THE" costume.
 
Vortigern99 said:
If this is the best he can do after looking at 1000 photos, I think it's time to hang up the search for the suit.

[qimg]http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w178/Ty426/Psuit.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

That suit could easily have come from one of the many used on Star Trek and Lost In Space in the 1960's.

The fact that Mr Blevins has seen Bob Gimlin in the woods beyond Patty already puts him in the beyond reason camp.
 
Crowlogic said:
That suit could easily have come from one of the many used on Star Trek and Lost In Space in the 1960's.

The fact that Mr Blevins has seen Bob Gimlin in the woods beyond Patty already puts him in the beyond reason camp.
Click to expand...

Pareidolia at its finest. The face is at least possibly a three-quarters view of a man's face, but the twisted tree trunk Blevins identifies as Gimlin's "figure" is patently absurd.
 
Vortigern99 said:
. Blevins, or anyone, might as well claim the Japanese Kong is the P-G suit, and expect the skeptical community to take him just as seriously:

[qimg]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3540/3348601665_91f870a47c.jpg[/qimg]

We need better evidence than a muddy B&W photo of a shapeless ape suit before we can say we've found "THE" costume.
Click to expand...

Well, now that you mention it both suits do have similar heavily padded legs, and the arms seem to have the same lumps and bumps.
 
Nipponese Kong is also depicted throwing a rock, or rather about to, which is a known and reported bigfoot behavior. Coincidence? I think... yes. ;)
 
Ladies and gentlemen, in order to flesh out my upcoming article with pics, I'm looking for the following jpegs, which I cannot track down (owing to the plethora of BF threads in this forum and my inability to recall which threads I saw which pic in and on what page!). If anyone can help me locate these, I will be much obliged, and will gladly mention you -- by username or real name -- in the AnomalyMAgazine article. Thanks in advance!

* The B&W marketing pic of Johnny Weismuller's Tarzan and a man in a hairy ape-suit, on set during the making of a 1930s Tarzan film.

* The B&W collage pic of mechanical metal hand and face prosthetics used in 1940s gorilla suits.

* The original "breasted female BF" illustration Patterson used as a source for his own drawing.

In addition to these pics, I'm looking for detailed accounts of the five separate measurements which show that Patty is 6'5" or under (barring Krantz', which I have in his 1992 book). These will help me inordinately in showing that Patty is most likely a person in a suit. Thanks again!
 
Vortigern99 said:
Ladies and gentlemen, in order to flesh out my upcoming article with pics, I'm looking for the following jpegs, which I cannot track down (owing to the plethora of BF threads in this forum and my inability to recall which threads I saw which pic in and on what page!). If anyone can help me locate these, I will be much obliged, and will gladly mention you -- by username or real name -- in the AnomalyMAgazine article. Thanks in advance!

* The B&W marketing pic of Johnny Weismuller's Tarzan and a man in a hairy ape-suit, on set during the making of a 1930s Tarzan film.

* The B&W collage pic of mechanical metal hand and face prosthetics used in 1940s gorilla suits.

* The original "breasted female BF" illustration Patterson used as a source for his own drawing.

In addition to these pics, I'm looking for detailed accounts of the five separate measurements which show that Patty is 6'5" or under (barring Krantz', which I have in his 1992 book). These will help me inordinately in showing that Patty is most likely a person in a suit. Thanks again!
Click to expand...

http://www.gorillamen.com/uploads/popmechanics.jpg

http://www.cryptomundo.com/wp-content/uploads/1966patterson4gp.jpg

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/mclarin_comparison.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom