Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[LTC8K6]

LTC8K6:

The toes don't appear to be curved enough to match the photo, though.

Lu:

Toes articulate......living ones, anyway.

The curve of the toes from left to right should match from cast to print, shouldn't it? It doesn't appear to match to me, but then again 9 days can take a toll on a footprint and a photo can distort things.

The heel in the cast doesn't appear nearly as deep as the print either, but that could be due to the amount of plaster used or 9 days of deterioration plus rain filling in the prints with silt.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Think this might be a hernia on Patty's upper arm ?

Why is Patty's left foot so different from her right foot, seen here?

I can't see a mid tarsal break either.. Toes, but no break..


Not that I expect you to explain these discrepencies, but surely you have something from Kranze or Meldrum, or is this just one of those persistent perplexities?

 

[LTC8K6]

There were three Sasquatches in the area leaving tracks.

Evidence?

Hmmmm....there were three, and Patterson was able to film one, and still no one made much of an effort to go back?

It makes absolutely no sense at all.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

The stories contradict each other every which way..

Sounds like Patterson and Gimlin...

Do you think you would remember if a horse fell on your foot?

 

[LAL]

Lu, you yourself posted about this organization called "American National - whatever", somewhere in your 920+ postings about Bigfoot. What was the name of that organization? It was supposed to be based on the finding and filming of Bigfoots after the PGF. Patterson was the key man to hunt down and create more footage for this organization. Was this organization paying Patterson a salary to keep looking for more Bigfoots?

The organization was Patterson and his brother-in-law, apparently. I don't think either was salaried. I don't think I brought it up (and I don't know much about it), unless it was referred to in one of the many articles I've linked to; I can think of two that may mention the company, but I'm finding neither right now in My Favorites. I saw one recently where Green says he was the one with the film deal, not Patterson, as Long claimed.

Frustrating.

Are you saying that Patterson & DeAtley were tossing around $75,000 cash in a hotel room?

No. No specific amount was given. De Atley said he made about $75,000 total. Read Long.

Whose money was that? The story goes that Patterson was hurling it around and suddenly feeling rich. Was it actually DeAtley's cash that Roger was tossing around?

They took the film on tour. The money was proceeds from that.

Regardless, you say "DeAtley said he only made about $75,000 off the film." So, is this $75K in 1968-69 dollars?

Yes. De Atley made his money in construction, as I recall.

It has been said that people first saw the PGF when it played in theaters as a "short" before a feature film. Did you say that you saw it this way? Who was being paid the money for each of these short presentations of the copyrighted PGF in theaters?

I saw it between 1972-74 as part of a documentary in a Portland, Oregon, theater. The documentary also featured a Florida expedition and my friend Ed talking about the double trackway that was found above his farm in 1969 that he, Roy Craft and camera crews from the Columbian followed for seven miles. I'm sure I've mentioned this a couple of times in my 925+ (by now) posts.

I don't recall any feature film with it.

 

[LAL]

So, what did Bob Titmus cast?

How did Patty walk across the sand and dirt of the creek bed without leaving a track?

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

Titmus was able to track her to where she sat or squatted and watch them. She may have walked up the creek for awhile and they missed the tracks where she emered. I don't think this proves she was a paranormal shape-shifter.

 

[LTC8K6]

Titmus was able to track her to where she sat or squatted and watch them.

Nine days later after a lot of rain and a flood on the creek? Who knows what the heck he was tracking by then. I actually don't buy this tracking at all.

If she squatted, then Titmus has a nice photo and casts of her two feet side by side, doesn't he? Maybe a butt print too? A butt print is the only way he can know that Patty squatted, isn't it?

I wonder if Patty is even capable of squatting given her supposed weight, body construction, and foot construction.

 

[Thurkon]

Sources? Does he make as much as, say, Bill Clinton?

Why in the world would he?

These groups don't have much money, and most haven't been around very long. If he's reimbursed for time and travel now, I see nothing wrong with that.

You don't think he makes any money for these appearances? You think he wastes his time flying around the country just because he likes to talk about Bigfoot?

Definitely source that.

Source what? Gimlin appears as a "special guest" on BFRO Bigfoot Roundups. If you go, you get to talk to the great Gimlin. Why would Gimlin even be there, if he wasn't being paid? You're much too naive, Lu.

How does your dog mean I'm "too funny"? Some dogs have chased Sasquatches ........... with fatal results.

But your point was that dogs, in general, aren't effective at tracking squatches because they are afraid of them. That's absurd. Dogs don't have a patently standard response to anything. While one dog may be timid, others are blatantly agressive to the point of stupidity.

Why can't anyone find dogs that can track squatch? Maybe because there's no squatch to track?

 

[LAL]

Evidence?

Hmmmm....there were three, and Patterson was able to film one, and still no one made much of an effort to go back?

It makes absolutely no sense at all.

Patterson expected scientists to swoop down on Bluff Creek. That didn't happen.

 

[LAL]

The variations in the stories around the P/G film are well documented here and on the web, Lu. Those variations include the casts.

http://cryptozoo.monstrous.com/roger_patterson.htm

IOW, you aren't going to give me anything specific.

The heavy showers should have damaged the prints even if they were under pieces of bark. Water would have run under the bark and filled in any prints that were deep, too.

Even if they'd been faked, huh?

You don't know how hard it rained in that area, or whether the location allowed rapid runoff. The tracks Titmus found were rain-damaged, but some were still good enough for casting. They were impressed an inch deep in sand that barely took a boot print. This wasn't Virginia Beach.

In this history of the film, the Bluff Creek road had "caved away".

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/biology/pgf_history.htm

"They observed and filmed (on the second film roll) the creature's footprints in the soil and later made plaster casts of the left and right foot. In that part of Bluff Creek, there is a sandy clay soil with a blue-gray tinge. This type of soil holds footprints remarkably well for a long period of time. The footprints measured 14.5-inches long by 6-inches wide. Gimlin jumped off a stump to see how far his footprints would sink into the soil in comparison with the creature's prints. The results were that the creature's foot prints were deeper. Patterson also took movie footage of this experiment together with footage of horse prints alongside the creature's prints, and the mens' cast-making activities. "

She wasn't on the road.

Here, Titmus has made 10 casts from the sand bars of the Bluff Creek bed "soon" after the incident. Why would those tracks still be there in sand bars in the creek bed? We know from BG that the creek rose way up the night of the filming.

"The little creek that was six or seven feet across was now ten or twelve feet across and four feet deep!" (From JG / BG interview.)

There's an aerial photo of the site on pg. 56 of Murphy's book. You can see how far her path was from the creek.

http://www.bfro.net/NEWS/wcmuseum.htm

"Patterson and Gimlin's Bigfoot sighting experience at Bluff Creek was highly unique for three main reasons. First, there were two witnesses to the event, so their stories could be cross-checked. Second, there was photographic evidence in the form of the movie Patterson took which could be analyzed. Third, the men had plaster casts of the footprints made by the creature to further confirm the sighting. Moreover, many of the footprints at the film site remained intact and could be seen, photographed and cast by other researchers. All of this evidence was certainly very credible. Important questions, however, remained unanswered on the credibility of Patterson and Gimlin themselves. These questions was diligently pursued by René Dahinden.

Dahinden attacked the issue from the negative perspective. In other words, he looked for evidence that the film was a hoax. He got together with John Green and they researched the backgrounds of both Patterson and Gimlin. Nothing was found to indicate the men had hoaxed the film."

 

[LAL]

Somehow, that face image got converted or translated to this...

LAL, talks about Patty's lips in this BFF thread: "Patty's lips, the lips of a hominid?"

Davis removed color layers and that's what emerged.

Is there something weird about an unidentified hominid possibly having everted lips? Identified hominids (such as humans) do.

 

[LAL]

LTC8K6:

Lu:


The curve of the toes from left to right should match from cast to print, shouldn't it? It doesn't appear to match to me, but then again 9 days can take a toll on a footprint and a photo can distort things.

The heel in the cast doesn't appear nearly as deep as the print either, but that could be due to the amount of plaster used or 9 days of deterioration plus rain filling in the prints with silt.

Now you're thinking.

From the paragraph above the photo it seems those were tracks cast earlier in 1967. They weren't from the filming event.

Patterson and Gimlin came down because of reports of new tracks, but most of the ones they saw were too deteriorated for casting.

 

[LAL]

Links? Any bigfoot DNA or hairs found on the dog's bodies?

I don't know that anyone looked. Testing is expensive.

Did you know that the copy of the P/G film used in LMS was zoomed, Lu?

Of course. It's enhanced, as well. It's zoomed even more in the extras section.

 

[LAL]

Remember my opinion.... Bigfoot is hoaxes stacked on top of other hoaxes.

Not unlike baseless conjecture stacked on top of baseless conjecture..........

Dahinden wasn't sceptical enough for you? Montagna?

These things aren't decided by majority vote, but if they were there's a poll that reportedly shows 80% of Americans now believe they're real.

I'm in a majority. I hate that.

 

[LAL]

Gotta go and I haven't found my poles post yet, but I was wrong. I didn't read the whole thread. Noll solved the mystery here:

"OK... just reviewed the "Ohma Enigma", a short film made by Peter Byrne (date unknown). It shows a lot of snow tracks they found on the Olympic Peninsula (they look pretty good) and the P/G film. It is not a very good copy of the show. I got it from Dr. Jeff Meldrum awhile back. It is on VHS tape.

Anyway, there is some pre-patty frames showing a man on a horse riding away from the camera, with a white hat on in the lower right corner and then the camera pans up to the left through the autumn foliage to the two poles and tree trunk we have been discussing in this thread. The man on the horse is shown for only a few frames before the pan starts and it looks like he is leading another pack horse. But these poles are definitely not part of their camp. The poles or whatever they are, looks like broken saplings to me; they are up on a cut bank along the dirt road Roger is riding filming from.

This ends any mystery presented here for me. Maybe if I get any free time I might digitize this and screen cap them to make a panorama of the entire scene. But I don't know if that is worth the effort. Maybe it is."

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=7220&st=300

 

[Skeptical Greg]

First, there were two witnesses to the event, so their stories could be cross-checked.

And guess what? They didn't match..

They couldn't even tell the same story from telling to telling..


The poles ? Who cares?

What about the mismatched feet? The lump on her arm ?

 

[LTC8K6]

Even if they'd been faked, huh?

Well now, that depends on when they were faked, doesn't it?

I don't know that anyone looked. Testing is expensive.

Proof of bigfoot is priceless.

Of course. It's enhanced, as well. It's zoomed even more in the extras section.

Just to be clear, I mean the 16mm film itself is zoomed, not that the makers of LMS zoomed in on the film when they put it on dvd.

Whoever made the film copy of PGF, zoomed their film copy. Presumably so Patty would appear larger on the film, except that sometimes it cut Patty off at the knees.

I presume they sacrificed those early fuzzy images of Patty to make the clearer ones of her later in the film larger.

I would like to know who made the zoomed 16mm copy of PGF and when.

Now you're thinking.

i was always thinking, that's why I immediately doubted it was the correct cast. However, you haven't ruled it in or out.

They were impressed an inch deep in sand that barely took a boot print.

I recall Bob saying his boot prints were almost as deep. Let me find the interview. I have quoted it already around here somewhere. Now if we could only see that film.......

 

[LAL]

Why in the world would he?

I don't think it's a high-paying job. You seem to be assuming a lot here.

You don't think he makes any money for these appearances? You think he wastes his time flying around the country just because he likes to talk about Bigfoot?

There's an upcoming Eastern Conference, admission $5. I didn't see him on the roster. I don't know what he makes. Do you?

Source what? Gimlin appears as a "special guest" on BFRO Bigfoot Roundups. If you go, you get to talk to the great Gimlin. Why would Gimlin even be there, if he wasn't being paid? You're much too naive, Lu.

What "BFRO Bigfoot Roundups"? The BFRO has had paid expeditions for a couple of years, which apparently started the trouble (along with MM's attitude). I'm rather certain Gimlin was on none of those. What conferences has the BFRO sponsored? Gimlin appeared at the Willow Creek Symposium 2003 (the Great Green was there too) and the recent Bellingham Conference. The latter was not organized by the BFRO and I don't think they had much to do with Willow Creek either. I don't know much about their involvement with any conferences. I've sent an inquiry to a cyber friend who's still a member (just barely). Maybe he can tell me more. I think there were decades where Gimlin made no money off this at all. If he's getting something from it now, that's good. He certainly was cut out by Patterson and De Atley. That didn't seem fair.

I asked for a source and you gave me conjecture. I don't know that Gimlin has had any dealings with the BFRO. They've mainly been a base for data gathering, as I understand it. I don't think it's fair to trash all their efforts just because MM decided to live up to his name.

I'd appreciate it if you'd stop judging me. You don't even know me.

But your point was that dogs, in general, aren't effective at tracking squatches because they are afraid of them. That's absurd. Dogs don't have a patently standard response to anything. While one dog may be timid, others are blatantly agressive to the point of stupidity.

Why can't anyone find dogs that can track squatch? Maybe because there's no squatch to track?

I never made that point. I noted dogs are often noted to show terror. I also noted some dogs have tried to attack and ended up in pieces. Ed and Roy evidently wanted to get dogs to track the pair into the forest North of Carson in 1969. None were available, as I recall from my conversation with Ed. The animals in that case had a several days head start anyway. Evidently there are some dogs that are known to react to Sasquatch smell. There's a thread on this on BFF if you want to know more.

The "ambulance chasing" method has been shown to be ineffective, dogs or no dogs. Noll has noted pursuit would be seen as an act of aggression, which could be another reason the people on the Skookum Expedition didn't try to take off in hot pursuit. They would have destroyed any chance of further contact with that animal.

 

[LAL]

Well now, that depends on when they were faked, doesn't it?

Between the rainstorm and Laverty showing up? Got him on this now too? Dang, it's a regular conspiracy.

Proof of bigfoot is priceless.

Just to be clear, I mean the 16mm film itself is zoomed, not that the makers of LMS zoomed in on the film when they put it on dvd.

Whoever made the film copy of PGF, zoomed their film copy. Presumably so Patty would appear larger on the film, except that sometimes it cut Patty off at the knees.

I presume they sacrificed those early fuzzy images of Patty to make the clearer ones of her later in the film larger.

I would like to know who made the zoomed 16mm copy of PGF and when.

?????? Green has a first generation copy of the whole first role. Zoomed? I think not.

i was always thinking, that's why I immediately doubted it was the correct cast. However, you haven't ruled it in or out.

You were thinking here:

"The curve of the toes from left to right should match from cast to print, shouldn't it? It doesn't appear to match to me, but then again 9 days can take a toll on a footprint and a photo can distort things.

The heel in the cast doesn't appear nearly as deep as the print either, but that could be due to the amount of plaster used or 9 days of deterioration plus rain filling in the prints with silt. "

What do you mean by "correct cast"?

You posted photos that were evidently of casts taken prior to the filming event. Green, et al, were in the area earlier that year before Patterson and Gimlin came down.

I recall Bob saying his boot prints were almost as deep. Let me find the interview. I have quoted it already around here somewhere. Now if we could only see that film.......

Try the library. You've said a couple of times you wouldn't buy LMS.

On Ancient Mysteries it's just as enlarged, if not moreso, but not enhanced. It's pretty dark.

I'm not finding anything on who did the enchancement, but it seems to have been part of the LMS project. Hajicek has spent over four years applying technology to the mystery in hopes of coming up with a better understanding. Reuben Steindorf of Vision Realm did the animation (he was a sceptic and his bid was lower).

Gimlin jumped off a stump and his boot prints were not that deep.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

The "ambulance chasing" method has been shown to be ineffective...

As opposed to what ?


I think we know why it's ineffective Lu..