• 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.

Bigfoot film just a hoax!!! There's no easter bunny either.

chrisberez

Thinker
C
Joined
Apr 9, 2004
Messages
234
So it turns out that the Patterson bigfoot film was just a hoax after all.

Well, duh. Is it just me, but I seem to remember Patterson's son or something coming out quite a while ago and affirming the same thing, that his dad was a big fan of practicle jokes.

Also what's with all these so-called experts (and where the hell do they get their degrees anyway?) that claim that "bigfoot" is moving in such a way that no human would be able to move? I really don't see it. I've seen that video many times and all I can see is some guy walking quickly. I honestly cannot tell what about the way he moves is supposed to be odd.

And for the record, I've also seen specials that replicated that footage exactly, and I've seen scientists demonstrate the walk. So anyone that still thinks bigfoot is real is an idiot. I can't believe anyone fell for that hooey in the first place.
 
chrisberez said:
So it turns out that the Patterson bigfoot film was just a hoax after all.

Well, duh. Is it just me, but I seem to remember Patterson's son or something coming out quite a while ago and affirming the same thing, that his dad was a big fan of practicle jokes.

Also what's with all these so-called experts (and where the hell do they get their degrees anyway?) that claim that "bigfoot" is moving in such a way that no human would be able to move? I really don't see it. I've seen that video many times and all I can see is some guy walking quickly. I honestly cannot tell what about the way he moves is supposed to be odd.

And for the record, I've also seen specials that replicated that footage exactly, and I've seen scientists demonstrate the walk. So anyone that still thinks bigfoot is real is an idiot. I can't believe anyone fell for that hooey in the first place.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that article requires registration. :hb:

Maybe you can sum up what it says?
 
Re: Re: Bigfoot film just a hoax!!! There's no easter bunny either.

UnTrickaBLe said:


Unfortunately, that article requires registration. :hb:

Maybe you can sum up what it says?
Click to expand...

Wow that's weird. The link still works for me just fine and I never had to register. Basicly what it says is this guy Phillip Morris came out and said that he was a costume designer and he sold a gorilla suite to Patterson. Patterson called him a little later and asked for advise on how to make the sute more acurate. Then later when Morris saw the footage on the news he recognized his suite.
 
Re: Re: Re: Bigfoot film just a hoax!!! There's no easter bunny either.

chrisberez said:


Wow that's weird. The link still works for me just fine and I never had to register. Basicly what it says is this guy Phillip Morris came out and said that he was a costume designer and he sold a gorilla suite to Patterson. Patterson called him a little later and asked for advise on how to make the sute more acurate. Then later when Morris saw the footage on the news he recognized his suite.
Click to expand...

Hahaha. Well maybe I'll have to register just to read that.

:D
 
Hey, hold on a minute, just because we have evidence that bigfoot doesn't exist doesn't mean that we should jump to conclusions about the easter bunny.
 
Agammamon said:
Hey, hold on a minute, just because we have evidence that bigfoot doesn't exist doesn't mean that we should jump to conclusions about the easter bunny.
Click to expand...

Well, technically we don't have evidence that bigfoot doesn't exist; all we've done is debunk one of the major pieces of evidence given for bigfoot.

Actually there is some serious scientific work going on to prove the existance of bigfood. I refer you to the Yeti @ Home site:
http://www.phobe.com/yeti/
 
Segnosaur said:


Well, technically we don't have evidence that bigfoot doesn't exist; all we've done is debunk one of the major pieces of evidence given for bigfoot.
Click to expand...

To play devils advocate, actually we dont even have that.

All we have is 1 man stating that he sold Patterson a gorilla suit, why didnt he come forward 40 years ago (I think it was 1963)?

If this was all the evidence we had for speaking to the dead would you accept one mans word?

if not why should it be accepted in this case, just because it supports the sceptical case?
He cant prove that he sold the costume to Patterson, nor can he prove (even if he did) that it was used in the footage.
 
Archangel said:


To play devils advocate, actually we dont even have that.

All we have is 1 man stating that he sold Patterson a gorilla suit, why didnt he come forward 40 years ago (I think it was 1963)?

If this was all the evidence we had for speaking to the dead would you accept one mans word?

if not why should it be accepted in this case, just because it supports the sceptical case?
He cant prove that he sold the costume to Patterson, nor can he prove (even if he did) that it was used in the footage.
Click to expand...
http://www.parascope.com/articles/1196/bigfoot.htm
To play the devils advocate's devils advocate, check this link out. Patterson shot the film in 1967, not 1963, not to nit pick.

But the fact of the matter is, it's not just one man's word.

Just more food for thought.
 
I took this photograph in a huge Danish forest on a camping trip (unfortunately the camera was a little bit out of focus):

largefoot.jpg


You should've seen how this creature moved, no man can move like this creature did. The neck and the joints.. Well, you should have seen it! Some skeptics would probably say that it could have been a costume with a man inside, but I damn well know a costume when I see one, I'm not stupid, and this wasn't one of them!

I have named this creature: LargeFoot - the danish forest monkey.

I belive they live in small groups, and they are very shy creatures. They often stay in out-of-camera-focus areas, and only show themselves to people who belive they exist. Therefore I don't think we will ever get any conclusive evidence concerning these creatures, but I'm content with the fact, that I for one know they exist. I guess that makes me sort of special.
 
Thomas said:
I took this photograph in a huge Danish forest on a camping trip (unfortunately the camera was a little bit out of focus):

largefoot.jpg


You should seen how this creature moved, no man can move like this creature did. The neck and the joints.. Well, you should have seen it! Some skeptics would probably say that it could have been a costume with a man inside, but I damn well know a costume when I see one, I'm not stupid, and this wasn't one of them!

I have named this creature: LargeFoot - the danish forest monkey.
Click to expand...
Unless my eyes deceive me, I'd swear that's the creature some call a Uuarrgh. It's been reported in several places around the globe and is characterized by its noisy yelps and deep barks. No man has seen it and lived to tell about it. Scientists have been searching for it for years, and not even a fossil has turned up. Whoever took that photo (if he/she lived) is bound to make a fortune!
 
Nigel said:

Unless my eyes deceive me, I'd swear that's the creature some call a Uuarrgh. It's been reported in several places around the globe and is characterized by its noisy yelps and deep barks. No man has seen it and lived to tell about it. Scientists have been searching for it for years, and not even a fossil has turned up. Whoever took that photo (if he/she lived) is bound to make a fortune!
Click to expand...

As I said, I'm the one who took that photo, but most of them who belive me lives in poverty for some reason. I don't expect to ever get the credit I deserve for this extraordinary discovery.
 
Thomas said:


As I said, I'm the one who took that photo, but most of them who belive me lives in poverty for some reason. I don't expect to ever get the credit I deserve for this extraordinary discovery.
Click to expand...
Yow! Say, Thomas, you did say you took the picture! How silly of me! Guess I wasn't looking. Apologies.

Now, then, have you tried selling the photo to the trades? Bet they'd pay some fine money for it.
 
Well, Thomas, I can honestly say I've never had my skepticism as close to being blown out the window... as well.. :re:
 
Nigel said:
Now, then, have you tried selling the photo to the trades?
Click to expand...
I'm not in it for the money. I think it's more important that mankind get this knowledge. If people knew I became rich because of this photo, they would probably think that I'm a fraud.
 
Thomas said:

I'm not in it for the money. I think it's more important that mankind get this knowledge. If people knew I became rich because of this photo, they would probably think that I'm a fraud.
Click to expand...
Very noble of you. You've just gone up in my estimation, and I agree, knowledge should be free for the people. Knowledge to the people!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom