Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[Huntster]

But you still don't get it. I have seen flying squirrels, and so have many many other people, including yourself...

No, you don't get it.

1) People report seeing sasquatches and their sign

2) I still have not seen a living flying squirrel

3) I still have not seen a sasquatch, alive or dead

...and so have many many other people killed, stuffed, photographed and even eaten them....

Yup.

It's easier to kill a reclusive squirrel than it is to kill a reclusive animal that weighs hundreds of pounds.

For example, the deceased flying squirrel that appeared in my yard was killed and deposited there by Mrs. Huntster's cat.

I doubt her cat would kill and deliver a sasquatch that might be passing by.

...Even if there are thousands or even millions of flying squirrels for every sasquatch, the fact remains that in all the years of human history, not one single specimen of sasquatch has been captured or killed or clearly photographed by anybody.....

Not according to recorded human testimony.

A creature closely resembling the description of a sasquatch was reportedly captured near Yale, BC, in 1884. It was recorded in the local newspaper.

The PG film is a clear, moving film of a sasquatch.

 

[Huntster]

Huntster, do you think an 800 pound sasquatch could have crapped on that trail without leaving footprints?

I don't know.

But, clearly, an 800 lb bear did.

 

[Huntster]

I wasn't aware anyone had made any claims regarding scat and footprints, anyway. Who said they had to go together, Huntster?

Nobody.

But you are the one who has indicated that wherever something walks, it must leave footprints.

You just did it again:

Huntster, do you think an 800 pound sasquatch could have crapped on that trail without leaving footprints?

 

[RayG]

A creature closely resembling the description of a sasquatch was reportedly captured near Yale, BC, in 1884. It was recorded in the local newspaper.

You mean this 'creature'?

RayG

 

[Huntster]

You mean this 'creature'?

Yeah, that's the one.

Funny, I never heard or read this before. How is it that I read this from Coleman and not Green?

Once again, it's "he said, she said". That's why I called this story "reportedly".

 

[Spektator]

You mean this 'creature'?

RayG

Alas, Jacko, we hardly knew ye.

 

[Huntster]

More:

Other comments concerning Jacko:

John Green and Sabrina Sanderson (Mrs. Ivan Sanderson) wrote about the Jacko story being
"a newspaper hoax" in an article entitled, "Alas, Poor Jacko," in Pursuit 8: 1 (Jan 1975), pages 18-19. Pursuit was a Journal published by Ivan T. Sanderson's “Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained,” long defunct.

Looking at other contemporary (i.e. 1884) news articles, Green was able to discover that other newspapers had looked into the report of the "What Is It" (Jacko) and had concluded that no such animal was caught.

Green, at the time, felt The Jacko Story was a piece of fiction and unknown persons fooled the newspaper, The Colonist into printing it.
- ---
In response, John Kirk wrote: "I therefore must ask the question: why did people like Chilco Choate, who is quoted in Green's own book, "Sasquatch Apes Among Us" Hancock House 1978 (note this is three years after The Pursuit article was published), relate that his grandfather was there at the time and described Jacko as an ape?

There is also the letter to John Green from Adela Bastin whose mother remembered the stories of Jacko as they were still being discussed by the people of Yale. I am very curious to know why the so-called contradictory reports in other papers accusing The Colonist of hoaxing do not occur in John's book?

If this was hoax and John and Mrs. Sanderson exposed it in The Pursuit in 1975, why was this not clearly stated in the book? I don't really care one way or the other if Jacko was a Sasquatch. I am just puzzled by the contradictory statements that have arisen over this whole episode. Let's please ask John Green to clarify this here once and for all. Over to you JG." Comment by John Kirk
- ---
John Green's reply:
"There is evidence on both sides of the question of Jacko. Unless something new comes to light there is no way to be sure whether the story was genuine or a hoax. John Green"
- ---
Rene Dahinden's response: "Green always straddles the fence. For years he said the Jacko story was true and had excellent sources, even published the piece in his own 'Advance' newspaper. Now Green claims otherwise. For 35 years, this has been John Green; says one thing one day and another the next, you can't always trust Green's word." ...Rene Dahinden
- ---
Grover Krantz on Jacko: "I tend to agree with Shackley, she mounted a huge investigation into the subject." Grover S. Krantz, Ph.D.
- ---
The Frazer River Canyon is where the strange creature, and by some people - thought to be a young Sasquatch, (called Jacko) was captured in 1884, all the rhetoric and speculation in the world won't resolve the Jacko story, we will never know the truth of it. Still, the most exhaustive investigation was launched by Dr. Myra Shackley, Ph.D.
..... Bobbie Short 1994

 

[UrsulaV]

Nope.

So you still insist your analogy holds up, despite the fact that if I really want to see a flying squirrel, there's a number of ways I can arrange to do so, whereas you yourself admit that there is no way to definitely say the same about a sasquatch?

Hey, I have an idea! Let's post photos of flying squirrels and sasquatches! If there's no good photos of either one, the analogy holds up!

I'll do the squirrels:
http://www.dcwild.com/images/Mammals/Flying Squirrel.jpg
http://www.newsday.com/other/specia...mammal28,0,1293913.photo?coll=ny-nw-nav-promo
http://www.scarysquirrel.org/current/flyingskwerl/

Go for it, Huntster--hold up your analogy with comparable Bigfoot photos, and I'll bow to your analogical skills.

 

[LTC8K6]

But you are the one who has indicated that wherever something walks, it must leave footprints.

For the record, I never indicated any such thing.

An 800 pound bear is not a relevant comparison to an 800 pound biped with MTB's.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Still, the most exhaustive investigation was launched by Dr. Myra Shackley, Ph.D.

Where do we find the conclusions of that investigation ?

 

[bruto]

No, you don't get it.

1) People report seeing sasquatches and their sign

2) I still have not seen a living flying squirrel

3) I still have not seen a sasquatch, alive or dead



Yup.

It's easier to kill a reclusive squirrel than it is to kill a reclusive animal that weighs hundreds of pounds.

For example, the deceased flying squirrel that appeared in my yard was killed and deposited there by Mrs. Huntster's cat.

I doubt her cat would kill and deliver a sasquatch that might be passing by.



Not according to recorded human testimony.

A creature closely resembling the description of a sasquatch was reportedly captured near Yale, BC, in 1884. It was recorded in the local newspaper.

The PG film is a clear, moving film of a sasquatch.

We don't seem to have old Jacko to look at now, though do we? And of course, after 90-odd pages here, it ought to be obvious even to you that it is a matter of highly disputable opinion whether or not the PG film is a clear moving film of a sasquatch. To me it looks like a rather unclear, moving film of a bloke in a suit. The case is still open. But there is still a pretty difficult statistical issue with your analogy.

 

[LTC8K6]

The PG film is a clear, moving film of a sasquatch.

When was this announced? Did I sleep through another one?

 

[Huntster]

The PG film is a clear, moving film of a sasquatch.

When was this announced? Did I sleep through another one?

I don't think you were sleeping, but it appears your eyes were closed..........

 

[Mad Hom]

I don't think you were sleeping, but it appears your eyes were closed..........

Geeeeeeez Fudd just come to grips with the fact that at best the PGF is "Inconclusive" already and move on. Just because you see an unknown primate doesn't mean that we don't see it differently. Just because you "Think" it's a Hairy Biped of Unusual Size doesn't make it so.

 

[Correa Neto]

Some belivers think repeating something countless times will make it real...

Oh, BTW, they will say its an attempt to see if "it will get through"...

I don´t consider them as game. So, spare your energy. Unless you want to have some fun, like a cat playing with a mouse...

 

[Huntster]

Geeeeeeez Fudd just come to grips with the fact that at best the PGF is "Inconclusive" already and move on....

I have done exactly that. It's just that my idea of moving on is different than yours.

Since it's inconclusive, I think it's reasonable to be prepared for the next such event (if actually not actively trying to perform an organized search), and respond appropriately.

...Just because you see an unknown primate doesn't mean that we don't see it differently. Just because you "Think" it's a Hairy Biped of Unusual Size doesn't make it so.

And your opinion that it's Bob in a suit doesn't make it so.

And it's one or the other. There are no other options.

 

[bruto]

Since it's inconclusive, I think it's reasonable to be prepared for the next such event (if actually not actively trying to perform an organized search), and respond appropriately.

Something which so far has not been very successfully done. The lack of preparation, initiative, organization and care that seems to be characteristic of bigfoot hunters in general does no credit to the cause. I hope you do better, really. I hope you find a sasquatch and get a good clear picture, or some other nice juicy evidence. If they're out there, somebody should be able to do this, and when somebody does, skeptics will stop scoffing. I hope you remember to pack a decent camera when you go out in the woods, and don't forget how to operate it in the heat of the moment.

 

[Huntster]

Originally Posted by Huntster :
Since it's inconclusive, I think it's reasonable to be prepared for the next such event (if actually not actively trying to perform an organized search), and respond appropriately.

Something which so far has not been very successfully done. The lack of preparation, initiative, organization and care that seems to be characteristic of bigfoot hunters in general does no credit to the cause. I hope you do better, really.

It's a huge problem. Greed, egos, basic human emotion, etc all play a role in dividing amateur sasquatch hunters, and organized science simply isn't in the hunt. Preparations (including a quick response capability in the event of hot, current activity) wouldn't cost much, but it requires preparation and resources in reserve.

...I hope you find a sasquatch and get a good clear picture, or some other nice juicy evidence. If they're out there, somebody should be able to do this, and when somebody does, skeptics will stop scoffing. I hope you remember to pack a decent camera when you go out in the woods, and don't forget how to operate it in the heat of the moment.

That just isn't going to happen in my case. I live in an area with little historical sasquatch activity, and I'm not hunting for a sasquatch. I now carry a waterproof Sony digital camera, but it's a snapshot type with no zoom at all, and only 2 meg.

This is the case for most people. Few folks enjoying the woods are prepared for the quick photograph that Patterson pulled off. By the time you get over the initial shock, get your expensive camera out of it's case, get it to your eye, and adjust the zoom, the shot is gone.

The same is often true for firearms.

I do carry a rifle and revolver out there. The rifle is always in the rack of my Argo, and the revolver is in my belt or pocket. However, I've had a few close brushes with bears, even with my rifle cradled in my arms, and I learned that even with a rifle in hand, an aimed shot at close quarters is often not possible.

 

[demonologist]

While I'm 99% sure that Patterson is a fraud, I'm not prepared to say that this is conclusively "debunked". The evidence that this is a fraud (i say fraud instead of hoax, because hoaxers reveal what they've done and don't rob people) seems to be based entirely on anecdotes. I'm not going to believe in bigfoot or aliens or ghosts based on anecdotes so why should I believe that this is a fraud based on anecdotes? Verifiable proof would help.

 

[demonologist]

Something which so far has not been very successfully done. The lack of preparation, initiative, organization and care that seems to be characteristic of bigfoot hunters in general does no credit to the cause. I hope you do better, really. I hope you find a sasquatch and get a good clear picture, or some other nice juicy evidence. If they're out there, somebody should be able to do this, and when somebody does, skeptics will stop scoffing. I hope you remember to pack a decent camera when you go out in the woods, and don't forget how to operate it in the heat of the moment.

To me, a picture tells very very little. I will never be convinced that something exist based on pictures. Bring me hair, scat, or bones. I'll be converted instantly. Pictures tell nothing.