Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[devnull]

well, anything more than $0 would seem exorbitant to most sane people.

 

[William Parcher]

Ok, maybe I exaggerated the money a bit, but you must admit it's been quite an exorbitant amount.

Remember where you are. This is Thunderdome.

 

[kitakaze]

I think Sweaty Yeti does not like the way this post exposes his erroneous arguments so he chooses to ignore it. Standard Sweaty procedure.

 

[Maldon]

Remember where you are. This is Thunderdome.

He-he, you should use this as a tag-line.

 

[SweatyYeti]

I'm sorry, but that was quite possibly one of the worst things I've ever seen attempted. Heh.

How's that for a first response?

Anyway, let me just say that I am 50/50 torn on the PG footage, I have gone from truly believing it's real to thinking it's utter rubbish. I am leaning a little more towards real at this point and hope to get into some of these conversations. I definitely do believe in bigfoot, after all what's so hard to believe about a large primate other than human living in North America, they live in Africa right? We're not talking about something completely off the wall here folks, primates do exist.

But in terms of the PG footage specifically, Patterson certainly did everything in his power to screw himself over for critics review later on it would seem. But you can't base judgment just on the type of person he was or what he wanted to film.

It is undeniable that no adequate replica has ever been made since, and people have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in the decades following to try to duplicate it, with little to no result.

Great post, Sgoodman72....

It sounds like you're an open-minded person, interested in honestly discussing and analysing the evidence for Bigfoot.

Most of the skeptics on this board are people who are only interested in proof of Bigfoot's existence....and nothing else. For these "skeptics"....there is no such thing as "evidence". (See my signature line.)


I'll comment on that highlighted statement of yours, later.

 

[devnull]

So you are saying that blind faith is a virtue?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

......

It is undeniable that no adequate replica has ever been made since, and people have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in the decades following to try to duplicate it, with little to no result.

Evidence ?

What's the big deal about duplicating the film ?
How about duplicating the creature ?

What is undeniable, is that the creature in the film has never been substantiated..

Even Roger Patterson gave little more than lip service to trying to track down the Bigfoot he claims he caught on film ...

.......after all what's so hard to believe about a large primate other than human living in North America, ...........

Uhhhh. That would be, because there is nothing more than anecdotal evidence in that regard..

You really ought to take the time to read through this thread, then decide if you have something new to offer..

 

[Drewbot]

Note the demand for PGF doubters to recreate a costume film similar to Patty, when the obvious requirement should be for Believers to present a film of a living Bigfoot.

Excellent Corriganville website here. I've been scanning photos, and noted the presence of a long-haired Indian Cheif that was one of the Characters on the Corrigan Ranch.
http://faculty.oxy.edu/jerry/corrigan/corrigan.htm

 

[sgoodman72]

Evidence ?

What's the big deal about duplicating the film ?
How about duplicating the creature ?

What is undeniable, is that the creature in the film has never been substantiated..

Even Roger Patterson gave little more than lip service to trying to track down the Bigfoot he claims he caught on film ...



Uhhhh. That would be, because there is nothing more than anecdotal evidence in that regard..

You really ought to take the time to read through this thread, then decide if you have something new to offer..

As a matter of fact, I actually have read through most of this thread, as much of it as I could stomach anyway.

Before you idly brush me aside, I do believe that I gave something new to offer that everyone (including yourself) has completely overlooked, and all the skeptics continue to belabor and banter over meaningless posts. I guess that's how it works on this forum, the skeptics just feed off of each other and rally around attempts at humor.

Uh oh, it's Thunderdome...guess I better watch out! How about instead of trying to be funny you answer my questions? Allow me to reiterate.

My observation and thought is that it makes no difference whether the walk can be replicated by a human or not. Who cares if it can be copied? That means nothing. Bigfoot along with all other primates are our closest evolutionary ancestors. So maybe it should walk like a human, and who are you and what are your credentials to determine how a potentially new species should or shouldn't walk?

I contend that by the fact that it actually DOES walk in somewhat of a human fashion is, if anything, a strong point for believers.

Let me also provide a slight disclaimer here that I am playing Devil's advocate as I am not 100% convinced by the footage, however looking at both sides of the argument from the outside, I couldn't help but support the believers because I see nothing but jokes and jabs from the skeptics.

 

[drapier]

My observation and thought is that it makes no difference whether the walk can be replicated by a human or not. Who cares if it can be copied? That means nothing. Bigfoot along with all other primates are our closest evolutionary ancestors. So maybe it should walk like a human, and who are you and what are your credentials to determine how a potentially new species should or shouldn't walk?

A lot of the proponents seem to think it is important that the walk not be human.

I contend that by the fact that it actually DOES walk in somewhat of a human fashion is, if anything, a strong point for believers.

Let me get this straight: the fact that the creature walks like a human is a strong point that the creature captured on the PGF is not a human?

 

[William Parcher]

Ok, maybe I exaggerated the money a bit, but you must admit it's been quite an exorbitant amount.

Uh oh, it's Thunderdome...guess I better watch out! How about instead of trying to be funny you answer my questions? Allow me to reiterate.

How about you start by substanciating your original claim? List the various Patty recreation attempts and their costs. Then we can get a grand total and you can decide again (or not) if it is exorbitant.

I'll give you a start.

Steindorf attempted to recreate an animated Patty skeleton for the "Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science" DVD. Cost: $75,000.

 

[Drewbot]

My observation and thought is that it makes no difference whether the walk can be replicated by a human or not. Who cares if it can be copied? That means nothing. Bigfoot along with all other primates are our closest evolutionary ancestors. So maybe it should walk like a human, and who are you and what are your credentials to determine how a potentially new species should or shouldn't walk?

I contend that by the fact that it actually DOES walk in somewhat of a human fashion is, if anything, a strong point for believers.

So you are saying that an Unclassified, Hairy, North American, Primate, Should walk like humans? What are you basing this on? No other primate walks like humans. Oh wait, you are basing this on footprints, a bad video, and people who say they have seen them. At least as a Bigfoot believer, you have the advantage of not needing any verifiable evidence to back up your theories.

 

[William Parcher]

The Pattycakes have set themselves up perfectly and can catch any fish with their wide net.

We now know that if Patty walks like a human, that supports her being a Bigfoot because they are closely related to humans (goodman made the error by calling them "our closest evolutionary ancestors").

But we have also been told that if Patty does not walk like a human, that supports her being a Bigfoot because they are different than humans and should be expected to walk differently.

Take your pick, but the Pattycake always wins.

 

[Correa Neto]

Sgoodman72, your observations have not been brushed aside. I think you are missing a point or two when it comes to your reasoning regarding the "Patty walk".

As you know, the "Patty walk" is quite often presented by those who defend PGF shows a real bigfoot as evidence. This is its importance, its supposed to be impossible to be repeated by humans and it can even reach the status of proof, for some. Under this perspective, its makes a hell of a difference if it can or not be replicated by a human. If it can (and indeed it can and Meldrum knows it), this piece of evidence (can it really be called evidence?) and related reasonings must be dumped. Insisting on such line would be bad research methodology, bad debate tactics, bad PR portfolio. This is a major point I try to make. Bad data and reasonings must be dumped - this is valid for both sides. By the way, you probably have already noticed that the "Patty walk" is presented as evidence quite often... Understood now? Its not an issue with you.

Regarding the text below,

Bigfoot along with all other primates are our closest evolutionary ancestors. So maybe it should walk like a human, and who are you and what are your credentials to determine how a potentially new species should or shouldn't walk?

Not all other primates are our ancestors. Most are distant relatives, cousins, and maybe even brothers. "Ancestors" is a term that must be used with great care, since exactly from wich species of the Homo genus we descend is still a matter of debate. Even if you assume bigfeet are real and belong to the Homo genus (and frankly, there are no reliable evidences to back any of the above claims) since they are supposed to be upright bipedals, calling them "evolutionary ancestors" is an error. I hope you don't see this as nitpicking.

And at last, but not least,

Let me also provide a slight disclaimer here that I am playing Devil's advocate as I am not 100% convinced by the footage, however looking at both sides of the argument from the outside, I couldn't help but support the believers because I see nothing but jokes and jabs from the skeptics.

I think perhaps you are presenting a biased opinion when you say you see nothing but stabs and jokes from skeptics here. The arguments and evidence presented at this as well as at the other bigfoot threads by the proponents were examined in detail and usually refuted. And the reasons for this were presented in all cases AFAIK. Unless you call countering an argument with evidence and reasonings a "jab", maybe you should reconsider your opinion. Actually I would say many a pro-bigfoot evidence or reasoning received a good (and deserved) jab with critical thinking here. Regarding the ad homs issue, all I'll say is that some proponents seem to have nothing but personal attacks to offer, but both sides are guilty.

As for the jokes, one or two are good. Not to mention that a number of claims (specially some of the most recent ones) deserve nothing but jokes.

One last note. Please understand that sometimes, after hearing the same flawed reasoning for the 10000000000 time, one's patience may run out.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

.... I couldn't help but support the believers because I see nothing but jokes and jabs from the skeptics.

If that is all you see, then it is clear you have actually read very little of this thread, and are disregarding anything counter to a belief that the subject of the film is a genuine non-human North American primate ...


So, we have established you don't have any thing new, so far...

Perhaps you could actually try reading the thread again, and we could go over a specific point you disagree or take issue with ..

 

[Hitch]

My observation and thought is that it makes no difference whether the walk can be replicated by a human or not. Who cares if it can be copied? That means nothing. Bigfoot along with all other primates are our closest evolutionary ancestors. So maybe it should walk like a human, and who are you and what are your credentials to determine how a potentially new species should or shouldn't walk?

I contend that by the fact that it actually DOES walk in somewhat of a human fashion is, if anything, a strong point for believers.

You seem to have (probably inadvertantly) fallen into a common Bigfooter practice of ignoring the original point of a discussion.

Bigfooters make the claim that bigfoot must be real because there is so much good evidence for it's existence. Skeptics ask what the evidence is. Bigfooters trot out the PGF as their best evidence. It gets dismissed by the skeptics as being not very convincing and there's nothing about the film that rules out a "bloke in a suit." The bigfooters then argue that it can't possibly be a suit because no human being could possibly reproduce the walk in the film. After way too much debate, the bigfooters reluctantly agree that "Patty's" walk is in no way remarkable. "But that doesn't prove anything. Is that they best you've got?"

Yes. The fact that humans can walk like "Patty" is significant. But only because bigfooters made it significant. Bigfooters are the ones that pointed out "Patty's inhuman gait" so a "human walk" should be a huge black eye for bigfooters.

 

[Aepervius]

You can hardly take your eye off of that popping thigh bulge which turns out to be a wardrobe malfunction.

Oh my god... Now that I saw the stabilised version in color that sweatyeti posted, and see the leg... It is screaming, yelling, howling "FAKE COSTUME" at my face... All shade of doubt are gone. How could anybody think that, this is normal skin and muscle which move like this ? Especially at the pace it is going on !

ETA: somebody should evaluate the mass of the muscle moved if it is a real muscle, estimate the speed and the quantity movement necessary to move the muscle so much... And compare to the energy imparted by the leg to the muscle. Then do the same with foam and suit, and see if the K.E. imparted by the leg movement is comparable to muscle or foam/costume...

 

[sgoodman72]

So you are saying that an Unclassified, Hairy, North American, Primate, Should walk like humans? What are you basing this on? No other primate walks like humans. Oh wait, you are basing this on footprints, a bad video, and people who say they have seen them. At least as a Bigfoot believer, you have the advantage of not needing any verifiable evidence to back up your theories.

To address all comments that were made:

William, first let's get 1 thing straight, I don't want you to get hung up on the money aspect. I appreciate your efforts on fueling that discussion and finding that production value of the DVD, however I'm not debating that. I was merely just pointing out that it was being spent. Again you're belaboring issues that don't really matter. I've tried a few times to steer away from that and obviously you won't let it go, so this is for you. Congratulations, I concede this fact to you, I don't care, next topic.

Drewbot, I didn't say that an Unclassified, Hairy, North American, Primate, Should walk like humans. I did say however that it wouldn't be surprising or alarming if this creature did actually walk in somewhat of a human fashion.

No other primates walk like humans eh? You're right I've never seen chimps walk on 2 legs. You need to define what you mean when you say none. Let me say that I'm not claiming that any of the other primates walk on 2 legs all the time, I'm just saying that the mere fact that the gait of the Bigfoot can be duplicated doesn't mean squat because no one knows how it should walk at all. Whether it be human-like, on all 4's or whatever.

drapier, you're absolutely correct, a lot of proponents feel that it's important that the walk isn't human like. I couldn't disagree with those people more. And to address your other point, yes, I do feel that the fact that it walks somewhat like a human is a strong point that the creature on film maybe be a closer relative to humans than any other chimp or monkey.

I look forward to your responses.

 

[Hitch]

No other primates walk like humans eh? You're right I've never seen chimps walk on 2 legs. You need to define what you mean when you say none. Let me say that I'm not claiming that any of the other primates walk on 2 legs all the time, I'm just saying that the mere fact that the gait of the Bigfoot can be duplicated doesn't mean squat because no one knows how it should walk at all. Whether it be human-like, on all 4's or whatever.

Still missing the point.

Bigfooters claim humans can't walk like "Patty."

The fact that "Patty's" walk can be duplicated means that particular bigfooter claim isn't worth squat.

 

[sgoodman72]

Wow, this is almost impossible to keep up with!! Hah. I will give you guys credit that you are very prompt and raise good issues.

To respond en masse, it's unfortunate that researchers staked so much claim into the fact that the walk couldn't be replicated. That couldn't have done more damage to the cause. I do not fall under the category of your standard researcher, I was never one of the originals that claimed the walk is impossible to duplicate. I am setting myself apart from those people, so try not to lump me into their category.

I am breaking the mold and stating that the fact that it isn't that different than humans doesn't mean much.

I apologize for some of my terminology like "ancestors." I understand that some are far distant relatives. I guess the fact that I wanted to convey is that we don't really know how close or far away they are, but if there is a creature that potentially exists, that we know nothing about, we can't say how it should walk. I understand that b/c humans can replicate means that it could be a guy in a suit, yes, but just because it could be doesn't mean that it automatically is.

And to the man that keeps telling me to re-read the thread to get my facts straight, how many more times would you like to insult me? I've read it plenty sir.

Sorry if I bounced around a lot, your comments come fast and furious!! I am sure I have some other points but am going to submit then and proceed from there.