Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[Mad Hom]

No, wait, bigfoot is more intelligent than all other animals with the exception of man (and some might argue even that point). He would obviously use some sort of tool to procure the fruit from the pile without leaving foot OR butt prints.

No, wait, they're curious about us hairless humans, and want to remain undiscovered, but interact with us as well. So, they hide beside roads and play some sort of squatch-chicken-tag-game where they dash across the road only when a vehicle comes along.

No, wait, the researchers realized they might get lucky, so they didn't want the plastering materials to be more than 15 or 20 feet away. That buttcast weighed a few hundred pounds ya know.

Take yer pick.

RayG

I've often wondered that if a Bigfeetsus was so damn smart why would'nt he/she just wait for the car to pass than cross the road..now I know it's because they enjoy playing chicken-tag...good...I got it.

 

[Hellbound]

I've often wondered that if a Bigfeetsus was so damn smart why would'nt he/she just wait for the car to pass than cross the road..now I know it's because they enjoy playing chicken-tag...good...I got it.

Well, see, if he had to wait, it'd slow him down, and he might not escape from all those BigFoot scinetists chasing him through the woods.

But he has it covered...Bigfeet buy a lot fo those "antler hats" to wear when crossing the road, so they get mistaken for deer. It's only when the hats fall off that they're in trouble.

So, next time a "deer" runs in front of your car, take a picture. That's Bigfoot.

 

[kitakaze]

"They try to stay out of view or at least in the shadows when near people or moving vehicles."

That is, unless they are wallowing in the mud, in the open, 25 feet from a roadway:

[qimg]http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m96/matthetube/post-1-1070760517.jpg[/qimg]

Words can not describe the overwhelming sense of stupidity I feel when I look at that picture... But I'll try anyway. It's like 'let's milk a cat' stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

[Geno]

Are those tire tracks going around the outside of the skookum cast area? It looks like this was photographed before it was casted. Maybe bigfoot does like being the center of attention.

 

[Correa Neto]

Nope. Bigfoot was driving, saw some fruits by the road, parked his car, ate the fruits and took a nap in the mud pool, before driving away.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

I asked repeatedly if the impression area ( bait site ) was photographed before the impression was found..

I have been told it was, but for some reason the photos cannot be produced.

For all we know, the elk impression was there all along..

 

[Chains]

I think the most plausible explanation that I read on the BFF was the Squatch used an elk as a land-bridge to get the fruit so not to leave any prints then disposed of the corpse and got the hell out of there.

I think he called it his "Sasgotcha' again suckers" theory.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

I see Loomy still hasn't bothered to find out anything about perspective in photography/filmography ..

http://www.mid-americabigfoot.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?p=8335#p8335

I have a question for Lu, or anyone that might have an answer. Why is Patty shown heading into the woods in these first two pictures (which are captures from the beginning of the P/G footage) but then suddenly she is shown heading in an entirely different direction? Was there anything in Murphy’s book that speaks of a direction change?

He also can't seem to understand what happens to perspective when the person holding the camera changes position ..

What is so sad, is anyone doing research on this film, can easily find maps of the ( alleged ) path the subject walked, and it clearly shows the subject heading in the same general direction during the entire film.
( Where the dashed line hangs a right, the filming has ended .. )

This map is from one of Kranz' books I believe.

Notice, in her reply, Lu doesn't make any attempt to point out Loomy's flawed thinking..

Titmus' map shows her heading to her left, then proceeding in a straight line then veering right straight again and then crossing the stream. I'll try to post that later; I don't have it handy in my files.

She may have been trying to draw them away from young ones. In a footnote (pg. 42), Murphy notes the camera noise or the fact they were now seen on foot made the creature uneasy.

Read Kranz Lu, and share with Loomy ...

 

[kitakaze]

I see Loomy still hasn't bothered to find out anything about perspective in photography/filmography ...

I guess I'd be more impressed with flailing ignorance if I wasn't already impressed upon by blatant lying.

Me too. Luminous, you knew about this, right? Speaking of holy sticks, if I may ask Luminous, are you religious at all? Just curious.

All I can say is that I hate religion!

Maybe the Pastor has a different slant.

 

[kitakaze]

From BFF thread 'John Green's Conclusion;, Go Ahead and Shoot One.'

*cue 'I Believe I Can Fly'*

IBS Report #: 1432

Location: LINN county, OR. United States

Sighting Type: 1

Latitude: +044˚ 37' N
Longitude: 121˚ 48' W
Day:
Month:
Year: 1976 OR 1977
Time:
Elevation: 5000

Data Source: TR20
Credibility: 1
Locality: CASCADES, GUESS MT JEFFERSON WILDERNESS AREA
Researcher: RICH GRUMLEY
Witness: GIRLS HIKING

Sighting Type: 1
Summary: 9-10 FT BF ATTACKS MAN, TEARS HIM APART, SHOTS FIRED

Sighting Text:
OR TR20 OR TR20 * I'd like to comment on something from your July 24 newsletter: "the article where the Troutdale, Or., grocery store had posted a sign, "Beware of Bigfoot," says Rich Grumley, Director of the California Bigfoot Organization. During the latter part of 1979 I was working as a security Guard in the Barbary Coast casino and Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada, packing a gun. I don't know how many of your readers know, but only "one" security guard per shift packs a gun at that casino and as "I shoot straight," I was "it." Anyway I met a "fine" looking lady that was a Keno Runner and I told her of my interest in Bigfoot, etc., and she told me, "that in about 1976 or 1977, she and several other girls from Vegas had gone to Oregon to go hiking in the forest. They had a "macho" looking (male) guide who led them up the trails (carried what I think was a Winchester lever action 30-.30 carbine for "bears" I think she said!)." Several hours up the trail, "something BIG" (an estimated 9 or 10 feet tall, "at least," she said), came walking downhill on it's hind legs toward them "through the brush and trees," and the guide opened "fire" on this "thing." She said that he fired 5 or 6 times and it didn't even slow this thing down, and it grabbed him and tore him apart. Then it turned and "walked" briskly on it's hind "feet" (never dropping to all fours at any time during the fight or escape) into the forest. One of the girls "ran" down the mountain to the Forest Ranger's office for help. Forest Rangers arrived "IN FORCE" a couple hours later with a helicopter, etc. And the rangers rushed everyone off the mountain, including "other hikers" and "grilled ALL the girls in the hiking party for approximately 7 hours," trying to” Convince" them that what they had seen was a bear. But the girl that told me the story said that she "maintained" that she had seen "many bears" in the zoo and in the wilds, and "WHAT THEY SAW WAS NO BEAR!" She also said that the respective Forest Rangers invited her to NEVER COME BACK! 8/31/92 follow - up, ed. ...as I recall , the woman that told me the story and "claimed" to be part of the group of girls that that had happened to, said, "that the THING tore him limb from branch and he was more dead than alive when the forest rangers (ARMED TO THE TEETH, with what she later identified to me as M-16 machine guns) took him by chopper off the mountain," but the girls in that party "never" did hear if he lived or "died!" Also, I'm sure that the girl told me the name of the mountain, and/or mountain range, but that was 1979 and I'll be damned if I can remember "exactly" where she said it was! Maybe under hypnosis I "might" remember, but that would be a long shot! Rich Grumley
Climate / Ecology:

Precip: SISTERS 2.30 1.56 1.11 0.77 0.70 0.54 0.41 0.45 0.42 0.91 2.23 2.22 13.63
Temp: SISTERS 31.06 34.31 38.60 42.79 49.45 56.71 63.10 62.27 55.28 46.15 36.59 31.05 45.73
Sun:
Snow: SISTERS 9.2 7.1 3.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 4.1 7.4 32.0
Ecology: Missing

 

[Luminous]

I can't argue with that. Your reasoning is sound. Nevertheless, it very much appears to be a foot impression IMO.

 

[Spektator]

I love the kind of report Kitakaze quoted. What an innovative use of punctuation.

-----
I was "walking" near the "woods" when a "bigfoot" appeared in "front" of "me." "Luckily" I was armed with a SMAW MK 153 "Mod 0" assault "weapon" and "hit" the "big"foot three "times" in the "chest," but this "just" seemed, to "aggravate" it and it "grabbed" me and "pounded" my head on the "ground" and then "told" me, "Boy, you do 'that' again you gone make me 'mad.'"

 

[Mad Hom]

From BFF thread 'John Green's Conclusion;, Go Ahead and Shoot One.'

*cue 'I Believe I Can Fly'*

Well I for one am convinced...them Bigfeetsus are some resilient hard skinned beasties...so much for shooting them...I guess we'll just have to keep trolling the woods for poo or out of focus camera shots...:::::sigh:::::

 

[LTC8K6]

Just a reminder that the Bossburg cripplefoot cast is not really what most people think it is. This is the cast from which the foot anatomy was ginned up by Krantz and Meldrum.

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

Dr. Krantz: "It was taken around to small towns... you paid a couple of bucks or something. Ahh... either Patterson or one of his colleges, who I saw, gave a little talk about it and then showed Patterson's documentary he was making, after came the footage of the Sasquatch. Ahh, a little later...very early 1970 when the Bossburg crippled foot tracks showed up, I made it a point to dash up there and see what I could find out about studying it for awhile. Went up there a second time, still in the winter, and ahm just by pure dumb chance I ran into John Green. He was there, with notebook or something, I don't know exactly what. I was there with a couple of friends. And he had covered up a lot of the footprints with cardboard, paper and whatever, from the snow. And each time he came down he would uncover one more print for some visiting person."

Rick: "Nice of him."

Dr. Krantz: "The very last one... the crippled foot, he uncovered for me when I was there."

Rick: "And that was in snow?"

Dr. Krantz: "Yes. So me and my friends made a cast of that and we still got it."

Rick: "How did you make the cast in snow?"

Dr. Krantz: "Just poured... ahmm mixed the plaster and poured it in. Everybody seems to think you can't make plaster casts in snow but you sure can. Ahmm we made that one and it turned out fine. I made plaster casts of my first Irish Wolfhound's footprints in snow, and everyone said you can't do it and so I tried it; worked perfectly. When the plaster is starting to set, it warms up considerably but it is already set to a degree where it is not going to move."

Rick: "Well, I think that is one of the things they say is a problem (talking about the generated heat). But I think the main problem is water in the plaster freezing, and not curing the plaster itself. And so what happens, I have seen it, the print has a bunch of dry spots afterwards, it just gets riddled. But if you mix a 5% solution of Potassium sulfate with the plaster, it lowers the freezing temperature of the water in the plaster and allows it to set up. But that is in really cold environments."

Dr. Krantz: "Yeah... I suspect I didn't run into that problem with the dogs footprints or the ahh Sasquatch track because the temperature of the air around was probably above freezing, and the snow was just barely."

Rick: "That's an excellent cast for being in snow."

Dr. Krantz: "Oh... that one you saw here is not from that."

Rick: "Oh..."

Dr. Krantz: "That one was taken in late '69. The previous event, where the same individual came through, ahh and it was in soft dirt, not snow. Somebody up in Colville, butcher by trade, made the two casts. Rene Dahinden has the originals. But somebody put those in a very fine bed of dirt and made copies of them, and I was able to get a hold of those and borrow them and make the molds."

Rick: "Ahhmm did you see any difference in the bone structure between the print that you saw the year before or years before and the ones you got casts of? Like maybe further deterioration or something over the years?"


Dr. Krantz: "Oh no. Basically the same anatomy, late '69 versus early '70. But when I was up there in, near Bossburg, I talked to an old farmer, who said that he had seen tracks just like that 20 years before. And some years after, I can't remember if it was 6 years or 10 years, a very excited student came down to talk to me and he had been up in that area and he saw tracks that exactly matched that."

 

[LTC8K6]

They were showing Patterson's documentary, then the section of the PGF.

Rick: "How did you see the movie?"

Dr. Krantz: "It was taken around to small towns... you paid a couple of bucks or something. Ahh... either Patterson or one of his colleagues, who I saw, gave a little talk about it and then showed Patterson's documentary he was making, after came the footage of the Sasquatch.

 

[William Parcher]

I can't argue with that. Your reasoning is sound. Nevertheless, it very much appears to be a foot impression IMO.

Maybe you could help yourself and others by doing something different. Instead of putting a red circle around the entire proposed footprint, you should draw an outline on the impression showing the whole foot and toes.

 

[Luminous]

Maybe you could help yourself and others by doing something different. Instead of putting a red circle around the entire proposed footprint, you should draw an outline on the impression showing the whole foot and toes.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_826446ca18fc395ab.jpg[/qimg]

Sounds like smething you could easily do. Only do it on the M.K. Davis cropped version, as it's closer and clearer.

 

[William Parcher]

You're asking me to draw an outline of a footprint that I don't see?

To me it looks like a shadow from the wood debris directly above it. If I outline the shadow I would get something that looks like the hoofprint of a large draft horse. But it's not an indentation in the sand anyway... it's a shadow cast onto the sand.

 

[LTC8K6]

WP, I think we'll have to help Luminous out with his own argument here.

I think the "heel" of what Luminous sees as a footprint is mostly cut off in the still you posted.

I think the "toe" and the "midtarsal break" bulge are visible.

IOW, if you could pan southeast a little in your still, the whole "footprint" would be visible in the corner.

Not that it's a footprint mind you.

Not that you don't realize this already, either.

 

[kitakaze]

*pfff* Amateurs.

ahem...

Think outside the box, man. Way, way outside the box.



btw, not that anybody's interested but it's just not so easy finding a satyr image that doesn't show its wang. Now you know.