Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[LTC8K6]

The picture has no scale, therefore it could still be bigfoot in his winter coat.
The 15cm statement is just an early error, like Glickman's 1,957 pound Patty.

 

[RayG]

Not with the way that entire event unfolded, the description of the miles-long trackway, and the timeline.

Can you elaborate? Timeline, for example. What timeline?

I think a "prank" is conducted to satisfy a sense of humor. I don't know if that fits Dfoot's motive.

'Prank' may not capture the intent exactly, but it seems a closer description than 'hoax'. Maybe 'test' is even closer.

test n. 1. A procedure for critical evaluation; a means of determining the presence, quality, or truth of something; a trial: a test of one's eyesight; subjecting a hypothesis to a test; a test of an athlete's endurance.

2. A series of questions, problems, or physical responses designed to determine knowledge, intelligence, or ability.

A few years ago I did some sub-contract work processing dental claims, and was constantly being inundated with all sorts of urban legends and hoaxes forwarded by uninformed co-workers via email. My usual response was to send a return email with a link to the truth about the specific hoax or legend they had unwittingly sent along to me. One day I finally had enough, and sent an email to my co-workers asking for their support in banning Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO), that "colorless and odorless chemical compound, also referred to by some as Dihydrogen Oxide, Hydrogen Hydroxide, Hydronium Hydroxide, or simply Hydric acid. Its basis is the unstable radical Hydroxide, the components of which are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol."

I clearly pointed out the dangers associated with DHMO in my email:

• Death due to accidental inhalation of DHMO, even in small quantities.
• Prolonged exposure to solid DHMO causes severe tissue damage.
• Excessive ingestion produces a number of unpleasant though not typically life-threatening side-effects.
• DHMO is a major component of acid rain.
• Gaseous DHMO can cause severe burns.
• Contributes to soil erosion.
• Leads to corrosion and oxidation of many metals.
• Contamination of electrical systems often causes short-circuits.
• Exposure decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes.
• Found in biopsies of pre-cancerous tumors and lesions.
• Often associated with killer cyclones in the U.S. Midwest and elsewhere.
• Thermal variations in DHMO are a suspected contributor to the El Nino weather effect.

Only ONE of my co-workers instantly recognized DHMO for what it was, and NONE of the others recognized nor investigated further, even though I provided links. Some were even willing to donate if I decided to setup a donation jar.

What was my motive? It was an experiment (a test if you will) to get them to THINK for themselves, so the NEXT time they got an email telling them that the Budweiser Frogs screen saver would cause multiple computer problems, or that a human-eating snake was responsible for an oil workers demise, they would actually confirm the information before believing it. Once I revealed that my email was as bogus as DHMO, my co-workers considered it one of my usual pranks, and nothing negative came of it.

It seems Dfoot's biggest problem was not announcing it was a test/experiment (which would have defeated the purpose), yet it's turned into a question of his honesty, integrity, and credibility.

You, Green, and Dahinden are quite likely correct. It is possible that Marx hoaxed the prints too. I certainly understand your unwillingness to allow the Bossburg prints any glimmer of possibility, especially around a crowd like this.

If a known hoaxer hadn't been intimately involved in the whole fiasco my opinion might be more favorable.

However, I remain unconvinced that Marx hoaxed the first set of tracks at the dump, then (especially) the other, long trackway later, then perpetrated the film hoax a year later.

Well, we KNOW he hoaxed the film (not as a prank either), we KNOW that he lived in Bossburg both during and prior to the hub-bub over the prints, and we KNOW he was the one finding tidbits to keep Dahinden interested. Why is it so hard to believe he may have hoaxed the prints as well?

RayG

 

[LTC8K6]

The initial Bossburg trackway was 1/2 mile long, not miles long.

The other set of tracks may not even be those of the cripplefoot.

Five days after the finding of the tracks, a U.S. border patrol man discovered sets of what appeared to be the same ones on the far side of the river, presumably where the thing had either entered or left the water. These tracks were in an area normally closed to all but a logging company's personnel and, unfortunately, they were largely washed out by recent rains. There were the toe marks, seemingly matching the cripple's, but little else that could be defined.

 

[Correa Neto]

...snip...Well, we KNOW he hoaxed the film (not as a prank either), we KNOW that he lived in Bossburg both during and prior to the hub-bub over the prints, and we KNOW he was the one finding tidbits to keep Dahinden interested. Why is it so hard to believe he may have hoaxed the prints as well?

RayG

Because Bossburg is one of the key unquestionable dogmas (like PGF and the Skookum cast). But some footers will say that its because:

You can't prove he hoaxed the first tracks.
You can't throw the baby with the bathwater.
No hoaxer could do that.
The footprints were labelled as "authentic" by the infailible bigfoot popes.
[add your preferred lame excuse here]

 

[Correa Neto]

Five days after the finding of the tracks, a U.S. border patrol man discovered sets of what appeared to be the same ones on the far side of the river, presumably where the thing had either entered or left the water.

Uh wait... either entered or left the water? How come one would be able to state those were bigfoot tracks and yet not be able to figure out wich way they go?

These tracks were in an area normally closed to all but a logging company's personnel and, unfortunately, they were largely washed out by recent rains. There were the toe marks, seemingly matching the cripple's, but little else that could be defined.

See, if there are toe marks, one can see where the tracks are heading to... Note that its stated that the tracks seemingly match those from cripplefoot.

Logic 101 anyone?

 

[LTC8K6]

Subsequently in the same area Marx and Rene Dahinden discovered a set of tracks and followed them for half a mile. Rene Dahinden has told me that he counted 1,089 prints in all.

All of this is from the bigfoot encounters Bossburg page.

 

[LTC8K6]

Uh wait... either entered or left the water?

Yeah, kinda odd that they could sorta claim they were cripplefoot tracks, but couldn't say which way he was going.

I refer you to The Talking Heads:

Stop Making Sense....

 

[Correa Neto]

Yeah, kinda odd that they could sorta claim they were cripplefoot tracks, but couldn't say which way he was going.

Hey, how can you know that cripplefoot was a he?

I refer you to The Talking Heads:

Stop Making Sense....

Oh... Got it...

Another way of telling me to stop behaving as a lawyer... But wait... Who said lawyers always make sense?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

It seems Dfoot's biggest problem was not announcing it was a test/experiment (which would have defeated the purpose), yet it's turned into a question of his honesty, integrity, and credibility.

In my mind, he did announce it as a test, with lot's of clues as to what he was doing...

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=13887&view=findpost&p=300099

I hesitate to show this as it's too early... but... This weekend I had my neighbor get into a temporary version of the suit I want to make to try another experiment. This is just my dummy's head, hands and feet on him. I made an undersuit by duct-taping the foam muscles to spandex pants and a shirt and then sewed black fake fur onto this. (That's a clear close up of the black fur on the right)

I was experimenting to see where I need the hair to be more sparse and where I need it to be longer. I may have made the buttocks a bit too rounded though with my padding. I wanted to snap a digital photo and degrade it to see how much this would look like Patty.

Before anyone says anything, it's true that he stared at the ground the whole time and he started walking in the wrong direction before I knew he was going to do that. I just snapped the pic as he didn't want any of the other neighbors to see him doing this and we ran back inside. Plus, he said something about "I'm going to pass out in here" or something to that effect. laugh.gif He also tended to walk with both arms hanging down in front and didn't give me a decent attempt at a loose-armed Herionimus gait, but I forgive him.

He thinks the image is a 100% dead-on accurate imitation of what is seen on the Patterson film. I have to say it's more like 99% due to the walk. Still... it wasn't even a finished suit and I can already confirm that what Patterson did wasn't that hard at all. All he needed was a decent suit and camera. Too bad he didn't know that in the future people would be able to examine the film closer and spot those flaws.

What do you think?

- Dfoot

How else could this have worked ?

Dfoot:

“ Hey guys, I’m going to paste some crops of Patty into some pics of
my neighborhood, tell you it’s my suit, and see if you can tell it’s Patty .. “

Yeah riiiiiiiiight ..!



I’m trying to understand why this was a bad thing to do..

Sure it was deceptive, but the whole point of the PG forum, is that skeptics think
believers are being deceived in the first place..

Dfoot just showed us how easy it was to do..


It is not like he came in under a sock puppet and posted the pics in
“ Sightings & Encounters “

Is ‘ Candid Camera ‘ evil ? Wouldn’t be much point in telling them about the camera
from the git go …

Sure is quiet over there.. I’m sure it’s jut a coincidence, and nothing to do with
Dfoot’s prank…

 

[LTC8K6]

Hey, how can you know that cripplefoot was a he?

The same way Meldrum knew it was a he?

When you look at the shape, proportions, and relative positions of the toes, they're from the same guy. I say guy because it looks like a big male."

 

[Huntster]

So, when did Marx make the suit?...

I suspect he started soon after learning that $55K was being offered to Metlow for "his sasquatch".

... How did he make the suit?...

Poorly.

... When did he shoot the film?...

After making the suit, and before October, 1970.

...The film looked genuine to lots of people, apparently.

Not me.

Does it look genuine to you?

....If you believe he only made the suit and the film after the Bossburg cripple tracks showed up, then you accept the amount of time Marx had to do it....

Yes, I do.

...So, how come Marx could make a fairly convincing suit & movie a few months after Patterson supposedly couldn't?

I don't believe the Marx film is convincing at all, and the Patterson film is.

 

[Huntster]

HUNTSTER: Here's what happened... As you said you and others had asked me to build a Patty suit. I told you all that I'd never built anything in my life and that I only directed stunt people wearing creature suits. I then messed around and learned a few things about what these creature fx guys had been talking about all these years and found out they were right.

But I came to the conclusion (after witnessing plenty of strange hoop jumping) that even if someone did build a suit very similar to the one used in the PG film it would do no good....

I believe that was a poorly drawn conclusion, and it lead to you making a poor decision.

...I can see that you still haven't understood what I did even though I've explained it... You just said that you thought I'd mixed an image of Patty with an image of "my suit" to make a fake image. But I've said over and over now EXACTLY what I did in order to demonstrate the point that people over there would not be able to see any suit as being as good as "Patty".

Let me say it one more time ---

I didn't make a suit.....

So, the lie was from the beginning.

Yeah, that revelation ought to rebuild the trust with some that you may have lost.

...Your response was to tell me that the limb ratios were not correct and that the legs were too thin. But those are the legs of Patty. Those are Patty's limb proportions....

You are an admitted liar, and I think you are lying again.

Prove otherwise.

....So the motive should be very clear. The motive was to use an image of Patty without telling anyone in order to get to the truth of the matter. And clearly that is just what happened

.

Beautiful. Keep writing. I love how these kinds of things work out in the end.

You essentially lied in order to reveal the truth?

...The point I was making isn't lost on some, believe me....

I do believe you. Now consider this:

Those people don't matter, either, in my opinion.

...Huntster, I'm sure that you may now since his death, have come to realize that Wallace was lying all these years about what transpired on his work sites....

No, that's not what I realize.

I realize that he is a liar. Was he lying then, or was he lying on his deathbed?

...One night on the BUFFY set I overheard several people talking about magician DAVID BLAINE'S first special. There was a big build-up to his attempt to levitate at the end of his show. Most of the crew knew it was a trick but didn't understand how it was done. A few were deeply into that special brand of "Hollywood Spiritualism" that still appears now and then....

I've gotta tell ya, Dfoot, I was born in Hollywood. In the Kaiser Hospital on Sunset Blvd. It's still there, though now it's a Kaiser heart center.

I couldn't wait to leave L.A. I joined the Army at 17 years of age and volunteered to go to Vietnam. Anything, just get me out of this wacky hellhole.

I just don't fit. Still don't. I don't understand you people at all.

Lying to reveal the truth.........Right is wrong, and wrong is right.........

It's all ********.

I don't believe a damned thing you write. I don't believe you work in the industry.

Prove it.

....Now the question is: Will PG flick worshippers realize the point of all this? Or will they continue to see a magic gorilla, draw lines on pictures and attack messengers bringing news they don't like to hear....

I don't know about film worshippers (I don't even watch your Hollywood films; they're all a bunch of BS), but I will continue to believe that what I see looks like an animal, and not a man in a suit, until evidence strong enough convinces me otherwise.

And lies won't cut it for me as "evidence".

....the Sasquatch story has nothing to do with these pranksters....

It certainly doesn't have anything to do with you. You have admitted lying on a sustained basis to people who have been researching this phenomena. You are part of the problem, not part of the resolution to this question.

You, sir, are an admitted liar.

 

[LTC8K6]

Clearly the film was convincing to some of the leading bigfooters of the time, Huntster, including John Green, who had already seen and purchased a copy of the PGF. So, John Green had seen Patty, and he ruled Marx's film authentic.

So, Ivan Marx was able to make a suit and a movie that convinced some of the leading bigfoot proponents just months* after the PGF was made. So how come Marx is able to do these things but it is ruled as impossible (by footers) for Patterson to have done so?

If Marx could have done so, then Patterson could have done so, imo.

Remember that many folks who saw the PGF ruled it phoney.

* This is an error. It would have been a year and a half or so.

 

[LTC8K6]

Another thing, if John Green was convinced that Marx's movie star was genuine, why should we believe his opinion about Patterson's movie star?

 

[Huntster]

...If that's the case you must not see any difference between --a deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain-- and --a mischievous trick or practical joke.-- One's fraud, the other a prank. Huge difference, and I'm surprised you can say you don't see any....

The intent is different, but the result isn't (as far as that person's credibility is concerned).

...Seems like you're holding Dfoot to a higher standard than Marx...

Not at all. Marx was a liar and a fool. Now that Dfoot has admitted that he never even built a suit (which I was suspecting some time back), he has also proven himself to be a liar and a fool.

The more he writes, the more lies get exposed. That's why I have invited him to keep writing.

...But don't you don your 'skepticals' when dealing with any evidence, regardless of the source?...

Unfortunately, there is very, very scant evidence worth looking at.

Regarding the "spectacles", sure I do; when I can find the damned things. They're always where I don't need them when I need them (like hanging from the collar of my shirt, or sitting on the top of my hat, or on the bathroom counter).

 

[Correa Neto]

The same way Meldrum knew it was a he?

When you look at the shape, proportions, and relative positions of the toes, they're from the same guy. I say guy because it looks like a big male."

Yep. Sure.
That was very... Anatomic... Must be true.

 

[Huntster]

Clearly the film was convincing to some of the leading bigfooters of the time, Huntster, including John Green, who had already seen and purchased a copy of the PGF. So, John Green had seen Patty, and he ruled Marx's film authentic.

So, Ivan Marx was able to make a suit and a movie that convinced some of the leading bigfoot proponents just months after the PGF was made. So how come Marx is able to do these things but it is ruled as impossible (by footers) for Patterson to have done so?.....

Why can you not understand my point?:

I considered the Marx film a hoax the very first time I saw it, and today, 35 years after it was made, I still feel that way.

I considered the Patterson film authentic the very first time I saw it (as a young teen), and today, after many years of hearing people like yourself blast at it, people like Dfoot and Long go to great lengths (even lying) to discredit it, it still looks like an animal to me, not a man in a suit.

I cannot speak for Green, Dahinden, RayG, you, or President Bush, and frankly, don't give a damn what you think. I make up my own mind, based upon what I see and learn.

Call me a skeptic, but I don't think I'm inclined to believe what you write any more than I believe Dfoot. I haven't caught you in a lie yet, but I've seen some pretty biased opinion.

 

[LTC8K6]

I have never blasted at the PGF, Huntster. I have always maintained that I do not know. I have blasted P & G and the circumstances of the PGF.

My point has nothing to do with what you or I think of either film.

It has to do with what people thought at the time.

At the time, Marx essentially duplicated the PGF. He filmed bigfoot, according to bigfoot experts. Experts that had seen the PGF and believed it to be real as well.

Earlier I did make an error. It would not have been months after the PGF, but more like a year and a half or so. Calling that months was stretching things.

 

[Starrman]

I believe that was a poorly drawn conclusion, and it lead to you making a poor decision.



So, the lie was from the beginning.

Yeah, that revelation ought to rebuild the trust with some that you may have lost.



You are an admitted liar, and I think you are lying again.

Prove otherwise.

.

Beautiful. Keep writing. I love how these kinds of things work out in the end.

You essentially lied in order to reveal the truth?



I do believe you. Now consider this:

Those people don't matter, either, in my opinion.



No, that's not what I realize.

I realize that he is a liar. Was he lying then, or was he lying on his deathbed?



I've gotta tell ya, Dfoot, I was born in Hollywood. In the Kaiser Hospital on Sunset Blvd. It's still there, though now it's a Kaiser heart center.

I couldn't wait to leave L.A. I joined the Army at 17 years of age and volunteered to go to Vietnam. Anything, just get me out of this wacky hellhole.

I just don't fit. Still don't. I don't understand you people at all.

Lying to reveal the truth.........Right is wrong, and wrong is right.........

It's all ********.

I don't believe a damned thing you write. I don't believe you work in the industry.

Prove it.



I don't know about film worshippers (I don't even watch your Hollywood films; they're all a bunch of BS), but I will continue to believe that what I see looks like an animal, and not a man in a suit, until evidence strong enough convinces me otherwise.

And lies won't cut it for me as "evidence".



It certainly doesn't have anything to do with you. You have admitted lying on a sustained basis to people who have been researching this phenomena. You are part of the problem, not part of the resolution to this question.

You, sir, are an admitted liar.

Just my opinion, but this post smells a lot of pouting about being fooled. Ignoring what he did, what do you think the results showed?

 

[Starrman]

Why can you not understand my point?:
I considered the Patterson film authentic the very first time I saw it (as a young teen), and today, after many years of hearing people like yourself blast at it, people like Dfoot and Long go to great lengths (even lying) to discredit it, it still looks like an animal to me, not a man in a suit.

But the first time you saw Patty the imposter from Dfoot you agreed it was a suit and not a real animal. How do you justify that with the statement above? You didn't think his picture, taken directly from the same film, looked like an animal.