Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

[DennyT]

Yeah, he doesn't say it, that was just me putting that in there in my own words. It just strikes me as odd that that's the only part he seems to want to challenge whilst on the subject of Bob H.

I mean, if anything, he could have just said "Bob is a liar..." That'd be effective in stamping out the possible 3 person situation.

yes but that might get him sued, and then the whole thing is revealed. Gimlin also qualifies his statements with "...that day.." meaning whatever he wants it to mean. Gimlin's behavior is so obvious, he's under a non disclosure agreement from the lawsuit that settled the ownership of the film. But the bleevers turn a blind eye to it. To me, that is one of the more amazing parts of bleeving.

 

[LTC8K6]

In this particular video, Gimlin mentions how he stepped off his horse to cover Roger during the "look-back" scene. I hadn't known he'd stepped off the horse at all during the encounter, but I haven't read every single account.

He mentions having his gun, but not feeling the need to shoot. There's no mention of a no-shoot policy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qdN9ho6hjI

In the original story, all of the horses ran away, and Roger injured his foot when his horse fell on him and bent a stirrup...

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/firstpgf.htm

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

In the original story, all of the horses ran away, and Roger injured his foot when his horse fell on him and bent a stirrup...

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/firstpgf.htm

Yeah, I'd heard that version, with Roger supposedly taking his bent stirrup around town to show people. Do you know what year that's from, is it '67?

In the video I posted before, the 4th part of Gimlin's "encounter" story from 2010, he's asked whether his horse acted nervous or not, and he claims "not that much," he also says that he never noticed Rogers horse acting up, although it was a "lively-type horse."

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I mean, I know it shouldn't be much of a suprise, as the whole story is frought with contradictions, but this is the first time I've heard Gimlin state these things recently, well as recent as 2010.

 

[AttorneyTom]

I mean, I know it shouldn't be much of a suprise, as the whole story is frought with contradictions, but this is the first time I've heard Gimlin state these things recently, well as recent as 2010.

GS:

There is no such thing as a BF ! It doesnt exit ? Dont let the topic slip the cracker, my friend !

I enjoy seeing the guys post things about bf.. and how they are not real but we are forgetting one important thing there is no proof of such a thing. I also enjoy seeing the other people do their thing too ! They are not doing so well in that regard.. but they sort of try. Enjoy the hullaballo !

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays !

Tom

 

[LTC8K6]

Yeah, I'd heard that version, with Roger supposedly taking his bent stirrup around town to show people. Do you know what year that's from, is it '67?

In the video I posted before, the 4th part of Gimlin's "encounter" story from 2010, he's asked whether his horse acted nervous or not, and he claims "not that much," he also says that he never noticed Rogers horse acting up, although it was a "lively-type horse."

That's from just a few hours after filming Patty.

"On it's way by plane to Roger's hometown for processing".

Note that they are sure they filmed Patty, despite Gimlin's later claim that they weren't sure they got anything on film.

They also already know that they only got 20-30 feet of film of Patty.

We also have Roger saying Patty's breasts "flopped when it moved", when in fact they barely move at all and certainly don't "flop". "Flopped" more resembles what Roger drew earlier, not Patty.

Two to four inch long hair as well. Pretty shaggy description.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/9-inch-track.htm

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

That's from just a few hours after filming Patty.

"On it's way by plane to Roger's hometown for processing".

Note that they are sure they filmed Patty, despite Gimlin's later claim that they weren't sure they got anything on film.

They also already know that they only got 20-30 feet of film of Patty.

We also have Roger saying Patty's breasts "flopped when it moved", when in fact they barely move at all and certainly don't "flop". "Flopped" more resembles what Roger drew earlier, not Patty.

Two to four inch long hair as well. Pretty shaggy description.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/9-inch-track.htm

Cheers, I wasn't sure on the exact details of the early interviews, although I'd read most of them, or thought I did, the details kind of became a blur to me.

Does anyone who posts here ever, or have they ever attended one of these conventions? Is the Gimlin "mafia" really as bad as it sounds?

 

[RedRatSnake]

Does anyone who posts here ever, or have they ever attended one of these conventions? Is the Gimlin "mafia" really as bad as it sounds?

I can remember back on the BFF a few prominent folks posted about not getting invites, some went to the conventions only to get turned away, some were told it was full, some got in but I guess if you ain't in the same click depending on who is popular at the time or don't whoreish worship the same BF God at the time, you aints gonna gets in.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

I can remember back on the BFF a few prominent folks posted about not getting invites, some went to the conventions only to get turned away, some were told it was full, some got in but I guess if you ain't in the same click depending on who is popular at the time or don't whoreish worship the same BF God at the time, you aints gonna gets in.

I travel to the States when I can, mainly Ohio, as my long suffering girlfriend is a native. If I could get into one of these conventions, I would. I'd have a journal of questions for Gimlin.

Anytime anyone asks him a challenging question related to Bob H, or a hoax in general, they never give it the full beans, they always seem to pander to him. I don't get it.

 

[RedRatSnake]

I travel to the States when I can, mainly Ohio, as my long suffering girlfriend is a native. If I could get into one of these conventions, I would. I'd have a journal of questions for Gimlin.

Anytime anyone asks him a challenging question related to Bob H, or a hoax in general, they never give it the full beans, they always seem to pander to him. I don't get it.

Sorry your girlfriend is suffering, If she is from Ohio I can see why, that bible belt is a pain in the ass for us all.

If you got to ask Gimlin a question I am sure it would be from a list of authorized questions, if you go outside that then he just would not answer and you would get a new buddie to help ya out of the building.

 

[LTC8K6]

Cheers, I wasn't sure on the exact details of the early interviews, although I'd read most of them, or thought I did, the details kind of became a blur to me.

Does anyone who posts here ever, or have they ever attended one of these conventions? Is the Gimlin "mafia" really as bad as it sounds?

I try not to go where I am not wanted.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Sorry your girlfriend is suffering, If she is from Ohio I can see why, that bible belt is a pain in the ass for us all.

If you got to ask Gimlin a question I am sure it would be from a list of authorized questions, if you go outside that then he just would not answer and you would get a new buddie to help ya out of the building.

Haha she sometimes gets fed up there, I actually like it, but then again, I am from England...

It's funny how Gimlin's always surrounded by a bunch of fellas who wouldn't look out of place in a Chuck Norris bar fight scene.

 

[clayflingythingy]

Just lurked the Kitikaze Patty suit thread over @ BBF. Seems KK has turned over all the info on the suit to Bill "Patty is a Real BF" Munns.

 

[RedRatSnake]

Kinda figured this saga was going to have a twisted ending, just like all the other possible BF evidence it ends up being nothing. I guess I was right all along, when this started on the BFF1 years ago I called it BS and was criticized for it, took some time, but it finally flushed out.

 

[kitakaze]

Just lurked the Kitikaze Patty suit thread over @ BBF. Seems KK has turned over all the info on the suit to Bill "Patty is a Real BF" Munns.

That's right. Clacking a keyboard about Bigfoot for me has become something one does indoors in disregard of knowing the following is occuring outside...

There're hairy SCUDS on a fake near 50 year old film and then there's sweet mother real life burning away while you do that. My Bigfoot time is up. I know Bill now in a way that is outside of keyboard wars. He thinks the PGF is actually real about as much as a 3 dollar bill. What he does with what I give him I no longer care. I've hit about .005% concern. Let the suit go up in flames. I don't care. Let the religion of Bigfoot spiral further and further into Internet nothingness. It's mermaid. I spent six years on Bigfoot while the above was outside. Face meet palm.

That's my 2 mins of residual Bigfoot activity for the day. And now I will go outside into a panorama of light and night where the above actually exists, unlike Bigfoot diaper hags from the 60's.

 

[clayflingythingy]

He thinks the PGF is actually real about as much as a 3 dollar bill.

Really? His posts over @ BFF state that Patty, without doubt, is real. He also states the suit you found couldn't be patty because, well, patty is real, you know.

So has Bill Munns admitted to you that he is a fraud? Have any evidence?

 

[GT/CS]

Bill is an obvious fraud. Always has been, always will be. All he cares about is fame, glory, and money.

Why did he abandon his original suit analysis?

 

[tsig]

for examples of self delusion, see Munns. He worked as a special fx guy for years (albeit a minor one) yet he has ignored all of the evidence pointing to a suit in favor of twisting the data to fit his belief that Patty is a forest monster.

He twisted it into this shape >>>$

 

[tsig]

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. It opens my eyes to what I guess I am closed-minded about.



Nope. I grew up in the woods. Every day running around either alone or with my brother, and the first time I heard of bigfoot was my father bringing home the Journal of Skeptical Inquiry article about it.

I didn't give it much thought, even my Dad bringing home that article hardly registered with me. It was the rising popularity that got me interested, for how ludicrous the idea was.

Something that really strikes me is how different it is with this kind of background. I always felt safe in the woods, especially at night. You don't fear the night stalker when you're the night stalker. These proponents are always framing the woods as this spooky, mysterious, unknown thing and bigfoot being so scary. There are so many riveting experiences you can have like kicking up a 2,000 lb Kodiak bear out of his bed and seeing that massive thing just feet away from you, locking eyes for a moment, and watching him mull over what he's going to do. Watching him think. Or sometimes they put on the big show of hissing loud. Hahahhaha like a little one that's really scared. You have to keep from laughing. Or the times I've had to shoot them.

The closest I've come to getting killed by an animal though was an enraged moose trying to stomp me when I was unarmed less than a hundred yards from the cabin. My dog saved my life for sure then, three times in rapid succession drawing the moose off me so I could escape. I've never been afraid. I had three charging bears on my tail once, thinking "you can't buy entertainment like this - I hope I live through it". They really just about got me. They did take my deer.

Even as a boy there was an adventure every day with real stuff so I didn't ever develop a romantic hope of an unknown thing. Even bunny rabbits, minnows, frogs, and crawdads were exciting things. Bigfoot never once struck me as even remotely interesting.

But I did see things like giant anacondas, alligators, jungle tigers and the like on different shows as a boy so when I grew up I organized my own expeditions to hunt them. And I have very clear pictures of the ones I shot or captured, unlike bigfoot "hunters" that pride themselves on 20 years of never finding them. So it is hard to hide my contempt for it all.

You had an advantage because what you were hunting for was real.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Good questions. I saw the footage on In Search of... when I was a kid in the 70s, and on re-runs in the 80s and 90s. I was never convinced, but I had a curiosity about the big fella, a "what if?" that developed into a willingness to believe. And like Jane Goodall, who was one of my early heroes, I have a lifelong affinity for apes that later turned into a romantic hope that bigfoot existed.

Flash forward to the internet age, when suddenly inspecting the PGF over and over again is as easy as clicking a button.

I was watching it one day in late 2008 or early 2009, and an excitement overtook me, a certainty that what I was looking at was not human.

Nice call, Vort....check out the difference between Patty's 'arm proportion' and a human's... ...

kitakaze wroteth:

That's my 2 mins of residual Bigfoot activity for the day. And now I will go outside...

Cool!