• 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.

Continuation - The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

Status
Not open for further replies.
[qimg]http://i755.photobucket.com/albums/xx200/JamesChristopher_photos/TheHuckster.jpg[/qimg]

ETA: Roger Patterson - I'm probably the worst guy to have found one.

Bob Gimlin has already admitted to having Chico at Bluff Creek. Somebody needs to ask Gimlin if this is him riding Chico at Bluff Creek. Then ask him when this scene was filmed in relation to when Patty was filmed.


[qimg]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w310/william_parcher/d9af6e1c.jpg[/qimg]

I am creating a new thread on the PGF (Yes! Try and stop me!) for PGF researchers called "The PGF Image Resource Thread." Other people can call it "PGFIRT" or maybe "PFIRT", which makes me snicker, but I will simply call it the PIRT. Whatever it's called, we need the PIRT. I am finding the fact that I don't have my own website yet and the nature of an internet forum to often he a hinderance, for all the benefits posting research on a public forum has. In the near future I will be creating my own website, somewhat akin to Matt Crowley's Orgone Research. Matt has given me helpful advice on this.

Too many times my research has been sidetracked and bogged down by searching for some image I or somebody else posted, or something that I wrote. When it comes to my own posts, the forum search engine is helpful, but not really when it comes to older posts. Sometimes even fairly new things won't show up for some reason. The time restrictions are a pain as well when I am hurriedly trying to scrounge something up. I learned that plain old googling my own posts often works better.

What I would like is simply for PIRT to be an easy way to locate and use images related to the PGF. Obviously PGF frames would be included, but other things as well, such as frames from the South Fork film, or things like the Argosy magazine, scans from Patterson's book, etc. What I think would work best is that when you add an image to PIRT, you give it a brief summary and title. The title should have keywords that easily make it searchable. Take William's frame he posted there. How do you find that?

It could be given tag words like "unknown rider", "pack horse", "autumn", "dirt road" etc. They have to be things that the search engine won't exclude because they are too common, and things that won't help, like, "Gimlin". WP and JcR, could you add your images to the PIRT after I make it? And JcR, could you add your image as the original unaltered one with a description? If descriptions aren't fully known, we can discuss it in the current PGF thread.

I would like to make a stipulation that there are absolutely no crayon pics added. That means no images that have gobbledy-gook scribbled all over them. If they are added, they should be deleted as OT. Also, an effort should be made to exclude tampered images, such as Patty being squished or stretched. The image of the Morris recreation suit that Óðinn said had been highly tampered with is something I think that could be included and the details of the tampering listed. Also, I think there should be no discussion really of the images in that thread. If we let that happen, then suddenly we really just have another regular PGF thread. The point of the PIRT should be an online filing and retrieval resource for PGF researchers.
 
Thanks to WP for helping getting PIRT started. I think every post in there should follow that basic format and have an image in it. Once again, any comments on an image should quote from there and respond in the main PGF thread or here, whatever is appropriate.
 
This thread needs the Bobby Patty Strut...


70e82b59.gif
70e82b59.gif
70e82b59.gif
 
...I think that that depiction attempt is what led to the PGF hoax.

I have hinted at this more than once over at BFF ..

This in 2007:
I, personally don't think Patterson was planning a hoax when he made ( if he made.. ) the costume.
He made it to include it in his documentary .. ( IMO )
And this:
You are assuming I believe the PGF was originally conceived as a hoax. I don't assume that .

I see it more likely that in making his documentary ( which Patterson claims, and the evidence shows ), Patterson reviewed the ' Patty ' footage, and decided to try to float it as a real encounter..

The resulting reaction he got was self perpetuating, and the original documentary effort was lost in the shuffle..
Wow! I'm as good as sold on this scenario. An excellent theory. Just the premise itself answers any number of questions.

If that story is true, and it so could be, the 'really bad guy' in the end is gonna be Bob Gimlin. There's no way Patterson pulled it off without Bob's knowing participation. And if that's so, as Kit says, he's been LYING all along. Yet amongst an appreciable percentage of present-day Bigfooters, he's a literal Bigfoot demigod. I guess partly because it's precisely his integrity that actually represents Bigfoot to so many. If he's telling the truth then that's Bigfoot on the PGF and "YAY! There is a Bigfoot!" If he ever admits to lying, it's gonna be catastrophic.

BTW, would going to one's grave holding a deep dark secret like the PGF Hoax be considered having integrity? ;)

ETA:
This thread needs the Bobby Patty Strut...
Looking at that GIF for even just a few seconds and it's hard to deny that BH could have really been 'Patty'. He's sure got the walk mimicked pretty good if it's not him.
 
Last edited:
If he ever admits to lying, it's gonna be catastrophic.

BTW, would going to one's grave holding a deep dark secret like the PGF Hoax be considered having integrity? ;)

somehow I think Gimlin will give it up, in the end, unless he gets hit by a truck or something sudden. He's ashamed of the whole debacle, you can tell.
 
Kit, I wonder if the Squatchopedia site would be a better place to store this information. It would be easier to leave out the comments and wouldnt get lost if the thread got closed for whatever reason.

(sorry, I cant post a link)
 
I can't believe the way you skeptics think Bob H. was in a bigfoot suit in the PGF! You can see right there that Bob's hat is way too big to fit under Patty's so-called "mask."

Bwaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Perfect.
 
I need some help establishing the truthfulness of Opal Heironimus when she told Greg Long on February 24, 2001 that she saw Bob Gimlin's green one ton truck bringing Chico home the night of the day she saw the suit in her trunk. She said the truck had Chico and another horse inside. I just made the following post in the BFF BH thread...

Me @ BFF said:
John Green interviews Bob Gimlin in 1992...

Green:...and what were you traveling with?

Gimlin: I had a one ton truck with a horse van on it to haul the animals and all of our equipment. Of course we took all our supplies to stay as long as we needed to stay, the hay, the grain, our own food... because once we got there, we never went into town.

(We need to remember to things here. First, Bob said that he slept in his sleeping bag on top of hay in the over-hang of Gimlin's truck. Second, is that we should keep in mind that the place the PGF was shot was not in the middle of nowhere. They were actually fairly close to Highway 96 and Weitchpec.)

Green: How many horses did you have?

Gimlin: We had three horses, two saddle horses and a pack horse. I had a saddle horse and Roger had a saddle horse and of course we had a small pack horse along.

Green: And what was Al DeAtley's role in this?

Gimlin: Well, Al DeAtley was Roger's brother-in-law and he backed Roger financially with whatever it took to go to these places. He was supposed to help me on some of the expenses, which I never did receive.

(Note: Al DeAtley has explicitly denied that he ever funded any Bigfoot expedition of Roger's and that he always thought Bigfoot was a sham. Also, remember that we know for sure that Roger was in Northern California in the summer of 1967 with his VW bus that had a sign reading "Bigfoot 67 Expedition." Something in the water does not compute.)

Green: provided the truck and the...

Gimlin: Yeah, and the fuel, and my own horse and my own food. The agreement when we left on any of those investigations was that whatever Roger spent that we would split the expenses with me but Al DeAtley was backing Roger, because Roger didn't have a job at that particular time.

Green: So in fact he only financed Roger, he didn't finance your share at all?

Gimlin: No, he didn't finance my part of the trip at all. I had my own horse, my own equipment and my own food. I didn't expect somebody else to support me on that. It would be nice if I could have gotten part of the fuel pay paid and expenses on the truck.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/john.htm

OK, number one, no, Mr.Gimlin, you did not have your own horse. You had Bob Heironimus' horse. It took decades before somebody figured that out and put it to you, which you could not deny. You said you were breaking in Bob H's horse? Whaaa?? For three weeks? On a potentially dangerous trip with the oh My Sweet Fancy Moses Bigfoots rolling about? That sounds like a bunch of hooey to me.

Number two, let's think about this... Somebody asks you to go camping for a week or more and oh, BTW, please bring your great big truck and oh, BTW, please pay for all the gas, and oh, BTW, please pay for and bring all your own supplies. Can you imagine how much that costs? And remember, Gimlin was supposed to be lukewarm agnostic about the existence of Bigfoot, yet he's just going to shell out a small fortune and three weeks time that he could be working and making money? Say what? *bleep* *bleep* *bleep* Does not compute. I am supposed to spend three days next weekend hiking the Juan De Fuca trail, which would make Bluff Creek look like a gravel pit, and I don't know if I can get the time off. How is it that Gimlin went with any of that?

Now, here's some of the info we have...

Larry Lund showed Greg Long a photo of what he said was Gimlin's truck that he took to Bluff Creek (MoB, p. 39)...

Lund pointed to the cowboy on the left. "That's Roger. And," he tapped on the image of the Indian in the photo, "that's Bob Gimlin." I could see that Gimlin played the part well: his black Indian tresses hung to his chest. Lund's finger alighted on another photo. "This was Roger and Bob Gimlin's horse truck. They carried their horses in the back." The grainy black-and-white revealed an old-fashioned Chevrolet pickup.

I have seen a photo of this truck. It is not a one ton. It's white and it would be impossible to transport three horses, equipment, and supplies for three weeks in the woods.

Here is where I need the help of the BFF members. Check out this description for the October '07 issue of Daniel Perez' Bigfoot Times...
http://www.mcclean.org/bigfoottimes/blog/bigfootbuy.html

If any BFF member has that issue, we need to confirm what the photo of the truck shows. Does anyone have the October 2007 issue of Bigfoot Times?

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=29264&st=627&gopid=594746&#entry594746

I know tube/Matt Crowley used to get Bigfoot Times sent to him. Does anyone have the October 2007 issue? If anyone has that picture, could you please plave it in the PIRT (PGF image resource thread)?
 
Not to derail as I haven't read everything about the horses but wasn't it said that BG was working with Chico to break him in? Because I swear I read in one of the transcripts that BG was on a mature horse (seasoned?) that didn't spook easily. :confused:
 

You can buy a copy for $1.50 here:

http://www.mcclean.org/bigfoottimes/blog/bigfootbuy.html#backissues

If your short, I can help you out ..:D

Easy, moneybags. I don't know if I can shoulder that kind of debt. Could I get it back to you in installments?

Actually, Scott Herriott told me the same thing and I just went ahead and mailed Daniel Perez. Daniel got back to me almost immediately...

kitakaze said:
Yetifan said:
Kit asked:
In case you don't find someone with a copy, at Perez's website it says you can order back copies. He has a Paypal link and I'm pretty sure that issue would
be in pdf format. Here's the link...
http://www.mcclean.org/bigfoottimes/blog/b...html#backissues
SWEET! Thanks, Scott. I just sent the following email to Daniel Perez...

Hi, Daniel.

My name is Joshua. You may be familiar with me as kitakaze from the JREF skeptics forum. I am a researcher of the PGF and working on a > documentary project and need your assistance. Can you tell me what > is the color of Bob Gimlin's truck said to be used at Bluff Creek? A photo of it is featured in the October 2007 issue of Bigfoot Times. What would be ideal is if you could attach the photo to return email > to me, but just telling me the colour would be enough. Would you be able to do this? If you prefer, I have no problem buying the whole issue.

Thanks,

Joshua


Daniel got back to me right away...

Hello Joshua: I guess it would be a type of Green. I would check to with Chevy to see what colors they used as I think it is a stock Chevy color. Daniel Perez

This is a major confirmation for the honesty of Opal Heironimus. Yes!
 
Gimlin's horse truck was a green one ton flatbed, right? With a box that could hold three to 5 horses?
 
Gimlin's horse truck was a green one ton flatbed, right? With a box that could hold three to 5 horses?

I need to see a picture of it. JcR, do you still have the photo of the white pickup that is supposed to be Gimlin's?

And can someone please put the photo of Patterson's big red UPS truck Bigfootmobile in the PIRT? I'm lokking for it now. I just checked every page of this thread and it's not here.

ETA: Here's JcR's image with the white pickup...

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/283964bd63efa22ab6.jpg[/qimg]
 
Last edited:
I think that Gimlin's truck was similar to the package delivery truck shown here.

Second row, on the right. Click on the image or right click "view image" to see a bigger view and dimensions.
Or possibly like the Patrol and Ambulance truck. The point is it was a pickup frame with a one ton load rating. Not only is it going to have dimensions too small for three horses, it is not going to have the suspension to carry three horses, two guys, and a boatload of supplies.
 
Last edited:
Repost from the BFF...

Me @ BFF said:
I want to show the BFF what I think was the conception that would lead to the birth of Patty the real Bigfoot. I have already stated that I think that the PGF is the result of Patterson filming a Bigfoot suit for his movie Bigfoot: America's Abominable Snowman. The real beginning was in 1960 when Roger saw the March issue of True Magazine featuring an article written by Ivan T. Sanderson entitled A New Look at America's Mystery Giant. Ivan T Sanderson is the crypto-kook who literally believed that giant penguins were on the loose. Patterson was transfixed by the image of the female Bigfoot and the tale of the William Roe encounter. Taking a cue from the article, Patterson early on had often referred to Bigfoot simply as "giants." This was how he refered to the creature when he told Harvey Anderson of Anderson's Camera that a Bigfoot had lifted up the front of his car on a logging road in Yakima. That article made a huge impression on Roger, and it was this magazine that Roger left in a briefcase along with other Bigfoot swag when he approached Bob Swanson of Chinook Press in 1966 about printing a Bigfoot book for him. That book was Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist?. ...

Bob Swanson (MoB, pp. 218) "And, oh, maybe two or three weeks later, he brought in this suitcase in. Patterson said, 'I know you're busy. You haven't got time to look at it now. But I'm going to leave this. I want you to look at it, and I'll be back.' Well, naturally, the minute he went out the door, we had to open the briefcase. And here was this big, 18" plaster foot and an Argosy magazine. And... And something about True Adventures or something. And Boy's Life. And they all had articles about Bigfoot. I could hardly wait for him to come back... because I was sold!"

Patterson was a gifted artist and rather than paying Morton Kunstler to use his illustration of the Roe encounter in his book, he simply stole the art, redrawing it himself and slapping his initials on it. That was not the only stealing Patterson did with the book. When the book was printed, he decided he didn't think it necessary to pay for the services of Chinook Press and came by the printers office late at night and stole the books, telling the staff he had written Swanson a cheque.

Original by Morton Kunstler...

896148c3b674eb2b1.jpg


Rip-off by Roger Patterson...

896148c3abd3153db.jpg


The True Magazine that Roger showed to Bob Swanson of Chinook Press, stole Morton's art from and first got the inspiriation to make Patty...

picture.php


I can't help but ask, is the morally bankrupt and criminal behaviour of Roger Patterson overlooked by PGF supporters simply out of the sacred status the film has achieved and a desire hang on to an icon? Is it unreasonable and offensive for people to think that way, or is it a natural observation based on the facts at hand? I have to say that I am very encouraged by the number of Bigfoot supporters at the BFF who have been willing to let go of the film's vaunted status and really look hard at it, and the people that made it.

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=29264&st=627&gopid=594785&#entry594785
 
why Chico?

Why did Patterson and Gimlin borrow Chico, when Gimlin had a perfectly good horse, and so did Patterson?

Patterson could not transport his entire movie cast down to Bluff Creek, since most of them had jobs. and he didn't want to, either, because this was the super-secret part. Given that he could only have two actors (aside from the beast) and two horses (the truck was the limiting factor) he apparently decided that Gimlin the Indian wasn't going to be in this segment. So Gimlin's distinctive dappled grey horse (see the famous still of the cast of the movie, all six on horseback) couldn't be in it either. Gimlin is going to play a cowboy in this part of the movie, so he borrows the distinctive Chico, who appeared as a cowboy horse in other segments. That's one of the horses in the pickup sized truck. The other is the little white horse, which is Patterson's mount, but which appears in the movie in the role of the packhorse, with its little packhorse outfit. Patterson films this footage, obviously, while dismounted. It's all staged; why would you expect anything else?
Read Gimlin's description in the 1992 interview:
...this wasn't a full size horse Roger was riding either. It was a pony, a small horse. ....yeah we used to haul two of them in a VW bus. Roger rode these horses because they were easy to get on and off of because Roger wasn't a very big man. http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/john.htm

Now in the movie apparently we see at one point Patterson riding a horse which does not appear to be Chico (no blaze), but does appear to be a full-sized horse, not the little white one. Was it really Chico, who had gone to makeup before the shot, just as the little white horse had gone to costume?
It was all staged; why would we expect anything else?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom