Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[Huntster]

....Huntster, have you seen Grizzly Man? Just curious.

Yes, just recently.

As an Alaskan, I was able to get in depth and current information on the Treadwell event from the Anchorage Daily News. I was well aware of Treadwell’s activities long before his death.

Being active in the ADFG policy process as well as active in state government, I proposed a few regulatory change proposals to all 60 state legislators as well as to the ADFG Board of Game after the Treadwell tragedy. I was ignored by nearly all because my proposals would have brought a political firestorm along with equity. I have kept full records and all responding correspondence. If there is a recurrence of such activities by a Treadwell copy-cat, there may be hell to pay for some in political power here.

I have also attempted to hold the Katmai National Park Superintendent accountable for allowing Treadwell to maintain his silly and illegal activities going for 13 long years, but have run into a similar political block wall.

Again, all records and responding correspondence have been kept.

 

[LTC8K6]

Well, we are in agreement with all of that.

Someone should have explained to him that he was actually doing the bears no good.

He wouldn't have listened, though.

 

[Correa Neto]

I think this is a good example of someone who would describe themselves as a skeptic or critical thinker second-guessing someone who had an actual experience.

Note that RayG does not seemed to feel anoyed by the questions. Thanks for the answers RayG.

So, Huntster, if this were presented as the report of a bigfoot sighting, what sort of investigation you would carry on? Just accept it as it was provided? Is this the sort of data you consider reliable? And is this the sort of methodology you consider adequate?

No wonder there are a lot of difficulties in the footer's path... Most of them created by the footers themselves and their dogmas.

Even had Ray stated that he had seen the bear, there would have been doubt.

Another hollow claim of yours. Back it if you can. How can you possibly know this?

It is suggested that it was an echo.

Sure. Given the details avaliable at the first post, it was a reasonable explanation. Check RayG's original post and his answer and you'll see that.

BTW, your diversionay tactic was noted.

Huntster, you should place your prejudices aside and try to start using dispassionate critical reasoning.

 

[Huntster]

Note that RayG does not seemed to feel anoyed by the questions. Thanks for the answers RayG.

So, Huntster, if this were presented as the report of a bigfoot sighting, what sort of investigation you would carry on?....

None. I'd assume it was a bear or other animal.

... Just accept it as it was provided? Is this the sort of data you consider reliable? And is this the sort of methodology you consider adequate?...

Nope, nope, and nope.

...No wonder there are a lot of difficulties in the footer's path... Most of them created by the footers themselves and their dogmas....

Huh?

Originally Posted by Huntster :
Even had Ray stated that he had seen the bear, there would have been doubt.

Another hollow claim of yours. Back it if you can. How can you possibly know this?

Because you are "skeptical", aren't you?

...BTW, your diversionay tactic was noted....

Who did I attempt to divert, and from what?

Huntster, you should place your prejudices aside and try to start using dispassionate critical reasoning.

Yes, I should. Just like so many others here.

I doubt any of that will happen. Call me a skeptic.

 

[RayG]

RayG, your experience sounds kinda like a cougar...except that you heard it.

I don't have any experience with cougars either, though I'm pretty sure there aren't any on the Queen Charlotte Islands (off British Columbia), where this 'encounter' happened.

Even though I had already read about bigfoot prior to this incident, and John Green reports bigfoot sightings on the QCI, I never, ever, thought I had been stalked by a bigfoot that night. I had always speculated it was either bear or human in origin. I'm leaning more toward the bear scenario now.

RayG

 

[Huntster]

I don't have any experience with cougars either, though I'm pretty sure there aren't any on the Queen Charlotte Islands (off British Columbia), where this 'encounter' happened.....

The Queen Charlottes have a high density of black bears.

 

[LTC8K6]

The cougar occurs in B.C. from the Canada/USA border to Big Muddy River on the Alaska Highway. Although they have not yet reached the Queen Charlotte Islands, they can be found on most other coastal islands. This animal is found only in the western hemisphere of the Americas generally in mountainous areas.

Maybe this info is out of date?

Have you got any of those automatic cameras you can plant?

 

[LAL]

Is this it? http://www.bigfootbiologist.org/page2.html

Yep.

Bindernagel and his wife found tracks while hiking in a wilderness area in Canada.

He notes reports of throwing behavior, which is common in primates but would be a neat trick for a bear or an elk.

He's presented papers at wildlife conferences, the first in 1991. Here are some abstracts:

http://www.bigfootbiologist.org/page8.html

 

[LAL]

My guess is that some footers would just go ahead and say tha Patty is a different species or race of bigfoot. If this thread is any indication, even non-wacko believers like Lu would still find a way to excuse the fraud, by pointing out that BF was real, and the fraudsters were just frustrated by the skeptics, trying to jar the scientific community into taking it seriously.

The PGF is immortal. If you found the original, and the edited portions showed the suit being zipped on, someone would still find a way to spin it in bigfoot's favor.

Well, thanks for calling me a non-wacko.

Personally I don't think the "suitniks" are ever going to be able to prove the PGF was a hoax, so I'm not even thinking about making excuses for Patterson and Gimlin. The film was presented to scientists before it became the centerpiece of the documentary Patterson was making. Strange behavior for a hoaxer, don't you think?

The original film was studied and found not to be tampered with, there are still first generation copies around, and even if a body is brought in and found not to be an exact match for Patty, it would mean nothing except that there's variation in the species, just as there is in ours.

 

[LAL]

Well, you have to wonder about a guy who paid a lot of money for a known hoaxer's stash....

I have to wonder about this poster's apparent inability to read snippets he posts himself.

 

[LTC8K6]

^Deliberate obtuseness^

Does anyone think Lu is actually unaware of Meldrum's purchase of Freeman's casts?

 

[LAL]

Notice how polite Meldrum is when challenged. Click the link for the next best thing to handling an actual cast.

"Nice animation of the footstep. First let me clarify two points before going further with this. One, you have superimposed the skeleton on a photo of the track taken from an oblique angle with foreshortening. There is a clear photo of the cast of that track in the PDF article. Second, the tarsometarsal joint (between the blue and green elements)of the foot, in humans or apes, does not flex. So unless you wish to propose a totally novel kinematic of the foot skeleton for sasquatch, let's set that notion aside for the moment. I could be off a little (but I don't think by much) on the placement of the midtarsal joint -- the metatarsals could be a bit shorter and perhaps the navicular tuberosity project a bit more proximally This would further reduce the bending stresses imposed on the metatarsals. But the green and blues parts of your foot figure effectively act as a single unit (sure there is some slight mobilitybetween elementsat points of articulation, otherwise the joints would be stenosed, but it is slight by comparison to the "midtarsal break" that is evident in apes -- and, I conclude, in the sasquatch foot).

I concurr with your assessment of the substrate and dynamics evident in the footprint. Spot on.

Take a look at http://ivl.imnh.isu.edu/SpecimenLibrary/foot1.html

This is part of an archiving project I am working on at The Idaho Virtualization Lab (IVL). It is lower resolution than the actual scan for the sake of the animation program, but it allows examination of the cast from various perspectives. You will notice the concentration of plantar pressure beneath the forefoot, just ahead of the pressure ridge.


Gotta run,
Jeff Meldrum"

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=14342&st=0

I don't see Correa posting there yet.

Colobus' overlay from the next page is below:

 

[LTC8K6]

"Polite" doesn't equal "correct" or "unable to be fooled".

 

[LTC8K6]

So unless you wish to propose a totally novel kinematic of the foot skeleton for sasquatch, let's set that notion aside for the moment.

ROFL - good lord! Totally novel indeed!

No one has any idea whatsoever of the "kinematic of the foot skeleton for sasquatch", let alone anything at all about the foot of sasquatch.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

ROFL - good lord! Totally novel indeed!

No one has any idea whatsoever of the "kinematic of the foot skeleton for sasquatch", let alone anything at all about the foot of sasquatch.

I might have to bring that up over there, in as polite a way as I can...

 

[Skeptical Greg]

.... it became the centerpiece of the documentary Patterson was making.

You see the problem with this don't you ?

No ?

 

[LTC8K6]

The original film was studied and found not to be tampered with

This statement doesn't mean anything at all, but just for kicks, who studied the original film and made such a determination?

 

[LTC8K6]

The film was presented to scientists before it became the centerpiece of the documentary Patterson was making.

And many of them thought it was fake.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

ROFL - good lord! Totally novel indeed!

No one has any idea whatsoever of the "kinematic of the foot skeleton for sasquatch", let alone anything at all about the foot of sasquatch.

Here's what I said..

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=14342&view=findpost&p=300425


Let me know, or P.M. me if you feel I should do more...( or less.. guess it's too late for that now.. )

 

[LAL]

Not at all.
I'm pretty good at moving quietly myself, but I was surprised that whatever it was had seemed to have crossed the road and was now on our right instead of our left. Unless, of course, there were two individuals, but if that's the case, the one on our left never moved again.

RayG

The loudest crashing through the brush I've ever heard was a small rabbit. I was expecting a bear (at least). It was at night; I didn't know rabbits were active at night.

I heard an extremely loud call/bellow at dawn once with another up the road seconds later. That was one moving animal or two of something. As much as I wanted to believe it was a Sasquatch (it sounded like part of a recording I'd heard in, probably, the original Sunn Pictures version of The Mysterious Monsters, I can't rule out Roosevelt Elk. There was no sign and no sound of crashing through the brush. I didn't know they came down that far, but years later I saw a couple of cows below my place on the county road.