Merged Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 4

[GT/CS]

My opinion, take it for what it's worth, is that most 'footers believe the PGF is of a real bigfoot.

 

[OntarioSquatch]

The impact of Patterson's film on the world of Bigfootery is larger than what most footers realize. I'm pretty sure it was the PGF that started a trend of walking in front of a camera while wearing a gorilla costume. You can rest assured though, the PGF isn't some guy in a poorly constructed halloween costume that was purchased down the street.

 

[William Parcher]

But don't think that a lot of people ever believed that the PGF was real. They still don't.

It's always been a fringe belief. For people who can keep blind faith through all the obvious bunk. It's a small select group who really are weirdos.

What I meant was that an accurate poll in (say) 1968 would have shown very few people believing that the PGF was authentic. That same poll now would again show very few people with positive PGF belief.

The reason is that the great majority of people (society in general) understand that Bigfoot is a myth and of course the PGF is a hoax. It always has been that way.

I wasn't making a comparison of Bigfooters who believe in the PGF and those who don't.

The good thing about the PGF is that hardly anybody in society thinks that it shows a genuine Bigfoot. With most of those people also going on to say that Bigfoot doesn't exist in the first place.

 

[GT/CS]

The impact of Patterson's film on the world of Bigfootery is larger than what most footers realize. I'm pretty sure it was the PGF that started a trend of walking in front of a camera while wearing a gorilla costume. You can rest assured though, the PGF isn't some guy in a poorly constructed halloween costume that was purchased down the street.

Please don't tell us how we can rest assured. Try "in my opinion" instead.

Thanks

 

[HarryHenderson]

What I meant was that an accurate poll in (say) 1968 would have shown very few people believing that the PGF was authentic. That same poll now would again show very few people with positive PGF belief.

The reason is that the great majority of people (society in general) understand that Bigfoot is a myth and of course the PGF is a hoax. It always has been that way.

I wasn't making a comparison of Bigfooters who believe in the PGF and those who don't.

The good thing about the PGF is that hardly anybody in society thinks that it shows a genuine Bigfoot. With most of those people also going on to say that Bigfoot doesn't exist in the first place.

I appreciate you clearing that up. And FTR I wasn't judgin' I was just sayin'.

To make myself as clear regarding the PGF, I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt the PGF is the single largest agent (by far) by which Bigfoot has been given so much 'life' all these now many years later. Perhaps independent of 'regular society' buying it or not - the Bigfoot fable itself took on gargantuan proportions the minute the PGF came out and it literally leapfrogged out of the 'fable' stage into the 'possible reality' stage for a good many people. "That looks like a real dang monster to me Vern." Seriously, take the PGF out and you lose the only face of Bigfoot anyone's ever known (pretty much), bleever or not. If Patty goes, they're looking at charcoal sketches and shoddily made stick figures as their next best evidence. I mean, besides all that hot air.

 

[EHocking]

...You can rest assured though, the PGF isn't some guy in a poorly constructed halloween costume that was purchased down the street.

Declaring that the costume was not a cheap consumer job, but rather, a more expensive, semi-professional job is proof of what exactly?

 

[STRONG LIKE BEAR]

The impact of Patterson's film on the world of Bigfootery is larger than what most footers realize. I'm pretty sure it was the PGF that started a trend of walking in front of a camera while wearing a gorilla costume. You can rest assured though, the PGF isn't some guy in a poorly constructed halloween costume that was purchased down the street.

Is the bigfoot in the film real?

Or do you now concede that the Patterson film is hoaxed?

 

[Northern Lights]

Is the bigfoot in the film real?

Or do you now concede that the Patterson film is hoaxed?

I've always believed it is real and not hoaxed.

 

[Resume]

I've always believed it is real and not hoaxed.

Why?

 

[eerok]

Is the bigfoot in the film real?

Or do you now concede that the Patterson film is hoaxed?

I've always believed it is real and not hoaxed.

When I first saw the PGF I laughed out loud. It never occurred to me that it wasn't a crudely executed hoax.

We all have different thresholds of credulity, I guess.

 

[dafydd]

I've always believed it is real and not hoaxed.

Why? It wouldn't fool a child.

 

[STRONG LIKE BEAR]

I've always believed it is real and not hoaxed.

Have you read the information in these (Patterson-Gimlin Parts 1,2,3) threads? It is an undertaking to go through every page of all of them, but it is definitely worth it for those with an interest in the film. I believe you said in one these threads that you have read some of them, but I strongly suggest making a point to go through them.

 

[Chris L]

I've always believed it is real and not hoaxed.

Considering what a bad character Patterson turned out to be, and the many holes in the narrative he presented, and the problems with the film itself, you might want to reconsider that assessment.

 

[OntarioSquatch]

People here sometimes nitpick certain things that are not relevant to the authenticity of the animal caught on film. Roger Patterson could have been a thief and a conman, but it doesn't change the film in any way in my opinion.

 

[rockinkt]

People here sometimes nitpick certain things that are not relevant to the authenticity of the animal caught on film. Roger Patterson could have been a thief and a conman, but it doesn't change the film in any way in my opinion.

You are right. Patterson being a con man does not automatically negate the film.

Could you please explain what you see in the actual footage that compels you to believe that a real creature - not a man in a suit - is being filmed?

Thanks.

 

[LTC8K6]

Ahhh...so we are expected to believe that a con man who wrote about bigfoot, practiced casting bigfoot tracks, and was filming a documentary about bigfoot, just got lucky and had a female bigfoot sashay across his bow in broad daylight while he was out filming the local scenery?

 

[Resume]

People here sometimes nitpick certain things that are not relevant to the authenticity of the animal caught on film.

Which animal? The guy in the suit?

Roger Patterson could have been a thief and a conman, but it doesn't change the film in any way in my opinion.

It's part of the art of the con. But you're correct, it doesn't change the fact that it's a film of a guy in a suit.

 

[GT/CS]

People here sometimes nitpick certain things that are not relevant to the authenticity of the animal caught on film. Roger Patterson could have been a thief and a conman, but it doesn't change the film in any way in my opinion.

So you don't give any weight to the fact that a known liar and deceiver made a film that most of the world thinks is a hoax?
It doesn't need to be all or nothing but you may want to give that fact some thought and see if it may influence how you view the PGF, even if just a little.

 

[OntarioSquatch]

When someone in Bigfootery presents a wild claim, the first thing I like to do nowadays is check to see if they have any history of hoaxing. Roger Patterson didn't have any history of hoaxing prior to the film and his small history of unethical behavior is not something that I would consider damaging to any personal interests he had. Roger Patterson was actually a hoaxee:

Krantz reports that "[a] few years after the film was made, Patterson received a written letter from a man in Thailand who assured him a Sasquatch was being held in a Buddhist monastery. Patterson spent most of his remaining money preparing an expedition to retrieve this creature" only to learn it was a hoax.

Someone who believes in the existence of Bigfoot would fall for such a hoax, not the typical Rick Dyer type.

But all of that aside, if we are going to declare the creature a hoax, we need to be clear on why. In my opinion, the detail of her body is unreasonably realistic for a costume of that size. Especially a costume that was supposedly made over 45 years ago. I've seen pictures some of the tight realistic looking ape suits that were made back then and none of them are like what's in the PGF. I'd be very impressed if an artist could make something like it today.

 

[STRONG LIKE BEAR]

Roger Patterson didn't have any history of hoaxing prior to the film

Not true. Patterson engaged in several hoaxes before the PGF. Oh wait, you probably think there was a bigfoot at Jerry Merrits house? And his dog got a mouthful of a real bigfoot balls? What a *********** joke.

and his small history of unethical behavior is not something that I would consider damaging to any personal interests he had.

Can I interest you with an excellent, once in a life-time opportunity to make an investment into a timeshare?

Roger Patterson was actually a hoaxee:

LOL

Yeah, Patricia, I'm headin' off to Thailand for a lil, naw don't worry, I'm tryin' ta see if this feller has himself a bigfoot or not.

Please.

In my opinion, the detail of her body is unreasonably realistic for a costume of that size. Especially a costume that was supposedly made over 45 years ago.

BFF is that way >>>>>>/BFF/