Added: 4 years ago
From: TheBurnin8or
Views: 376,204
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (1,730)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • thats not big foot. its just my mom power walking. gosh. you guys are jerks!

    

  • Ahem, it's not fake actually. First, it may not even be an ape. The being seen here doesn't have uniform hair either, suits do. It's quite the contrary, it's messy and spotty showing skin and muscles underneath. Go on, imitate that. The gait's typical Bigfoot gait, something you can only superficially recreate. For one thing, that joker BobH locks his knees which the Bigfoot doesn't. So obviously this wanna-be hoaxer didn't do his homework, he failed big time.

  • This is a fake film....apes in the natural wild do not have uniform hair..typical of a suit...not a primate. Everything else is grainy and NOT difficult to immitate..Grover Krants could do it and Bob Herinimous looked even better in his gait...but there are always the believers.

  • @1927Norma You can accept bigfoot, just not as your savior.

  • Dad?

  • Its shot in a place called bluff creek no further comment

  • What's a "crick"?

  • It's just buddy the elf

  • No fake, real Bigfoot with real Bigfoot feet. So mutant, you don't know much about costumes, fake feet are separate not a direct part of one. Duh.

  • I mean do

  • You Dili realist the were the other side of the river right

  • FAKE. And, they didn't try to follow it .....just let her walk away???? The feet look like the bottom of a COSTUME

  • It's obviously a close relative of Rosie O'Donnell's.  I'd bet my life on it.

  • Still real Bigfoot, moron.

  • komo the fag trolling his utter clueless crap...still a suit moron

  • Only twats use big letters.

  • I love how you read comments wrong retro, probably deliberately, the shaking referred to was in jest about your room.

  • You're being silly, retrolly.

  • Slightest repositioning of hands will cause movement, everyone except you seem to understand that.

  • Your daily trolling makes no sense, retroll.

  • Gotta love retroll's dumb spam, getting dumber by the minute now.

  • The Freeman footage would also be difficult to hoax,especially when the adult bigfoot picks up another one at the end-not shown in most Youtube clips of this.I don't remember any measurements of ratios of limbs, etc.,but it is very similar to the PG film.A size analysis suggests that the bigfoot is about 8.5 feet tall.The footprint left would add another degree of complexity to the hoax.I don't think that the people involved in these controversial films were sophistocated enough to hoax experts.

  • And again you're wrong, retroll. lol I feel sure enough to say it'll happen in your sad lifetime now, whether you're 70 then. Technology's finally too good for continuously hiding, it was poor 40+ years ago but not anymore. Besides, 4 decades is not a long time in this search, far from it. What exists can't hide from discovery forever, there's always new discoveries being made, even primates. And they do keep finding new apes.

  • Well retro, why do you babble on then? lol The footage's just visual proof, yes we already have proof basically right there, but I agree we'll need more to satisfy the dumbest skeptic. The notion they exist is based on all we know so far, not just this film but collectively. If you prefer the lame idea it's somehow a hoax, while every scientific examination of the footage says differently, then you're free to do that. We need suckers too, we can't all be right, you'll learn that in due time.

  • Comment removed

  • Dumb as fuck you are again, you haven't been here Long enough to convince us of your troll bullshit. lol It was actually eminaidiot who thought that nonsense's real where I think PGF's real, so you're clearly confusing us here, until I explained to her it was all fake grain and she had to cave in. Sorry, I don't believe in werewolves or dogmen like you, I'm not that far gone as old threads will show. But I think Bigfoots exist, the others you can keep for your fairytale carnival tours, haha.

  • Wrong idiot, the Gable film is the worst piece of shit ever made and only real clowns would ever say anything else...amazing really, there's a guy with his digital gadgets in our day and age and he can't even make that look convincing enough to fool anyone - but according to a wanker like you the PGF is supposed to be a 'bad suit', yet it blows everything ever created in Hollywood clean away...hahaha. The biggest comedian here sadly is you retroller, troll a new tune for a change will ya...

  • U thought wrong as usual, retroll. Can U walk, retroll? If yes, so can they. Can U run, retroll? If yes, so can they. Gable's a digital fake, suit or computer, fakes are easy to spot. Every time. The clips mentioned are real BFs, your daily babble of fear - just like your other half eminaidiot - kind of prove to the world U actually know it's true. You're well aware you're getting the same answer every day, yet you return, so your interest in what U pretend to think is a hoax isn't genuine. lol

  • Actually I only 'believe' three pieces of bigfootage show the genuine thing clearly, but keep overlooking that fact retro. They are PGF, Marble Mountain and Paul Freeman. Those three are certain, most others are terrible fakes, though a few others certainly could be real but are just too unclear for determination.

  • What evidence, retroll? BobH? lol That guy will make his real confession one day, when he's on his last leg so to speak, or maybe you think this good Christian church going man's gonna take a lie with him to his grave? Who the hell would wan to be remembered as a guy wearing fake hairy BF tits, especially when it wasn't and couldn't be him. As more evidence in favor of the new species gathers, the more pressure he'll feel to eventually spill the beans that he was taking you for a ride all aLong.

  • @reclaimerReclaimer Like I've posted before, the Bob H thing is just really really....really X 10,659 weak. If I was a doubter, I wouldn't put any faith in that claim. I even watched the crummy lie detector test on tv. He look really really scared. He probably trained on how to pass the test, and hoped that it would work. It is really unconvincing, honestly.

  • No, it's based on statistics in sighting reports. But I see you can't wait, retro...must be why you're here all the time, eh?

  • I'm not trying to convince you of anything retroll, just telling you what I think, to you on the other hand it seems very important that people think like you. Summer? I'm sure there's been some encounters already but most sightings are in October actually, but you wouldn't know that of course...haha...

  • Why do you keep discussing it then, retro...if you think it's not rational? lol

  • Clown feet. lmao Patty's look spot on exactly like they should, same shape and form as tracks found. You know very well how some of us get the 7ft. No suit's hiding the legs here, I trust you'll agree, because every normal person can see that. You, I'm not so sure about of course, but most do recognize they're clearly visible. So if that's BobH's legs we see, how can the figure be only 6ft, and him operate the top when it's much longer than his. See how it doesn't add up and can only be taller.

  • I think I'll ignore it, gilbert...like you ignore the obvious right in front of you... You still need to answer how we can see the legs in full, yet you still think it's BobH - whose legs look nothing like this. And that's not even the most crucial point, the crusher blow is the top... If that's a 6ft figure, and all of the legs seen, what happened to his upper body showing full arm/head movements. Interestingly enough, you don't see this... Can't be 6ft then, can it.

  • @reclaimerReclaimer

    I'll ask once again, do you have any measurements for Pattys inhuman torso?

  • Just all cheap excuses. Munns has basically shot down what Pruitt says, like the Charlie Gemora stuff, etc. None of these guys, apart from Munns, checked out the film itself upclose. Gimme a break with all the 'different pieces' or 'two pieces' stuff, it's perfectly clear even to me she's in one piece whatever she is. Whenever I hear or read their words, it seems to me f/x guys can't do BFs well & need the PGF to be fake in order higher themselves somehow. Any fucker can see it's not pieces. lol

  • @reclaimerReclaimer

    Munns was shot down by Pruitt when he claimed that no ape suit came in 2 pieces. Whether you want to deny this or ignore it is up to you, but Munns has no clue about 60's creature suits, something which Jeff looked into with great detail, i'm sure if you'd brought this up with him he'd clarify it for you. Many FX people claim that Patty is a man in a suit, there are pictures which show aspects of Patty in other suits, not in nature, but in monster suits.

  • It's either known or unknown, no two ways about it. Sure, contamination happens but not always. If they get enough over time, it shows something building up we can start to conclude things from. We're not there yet, but don't be surprised when we are, we should be perfectly prepared for it by now. It's either an ape/animal or something even more human, and if it's the latter we already know attacks are few if any so fears should fade. An 'uncontrollable wild ape' out there would confuse folks...

  • If they get enough DNA of it, and it's an unknown primate, surely that means it's real DNA...from a new unknown species.

  • @reclaimerReclaimer

    Primate DNA and human DNA are not very far removed, my point is, how do you know if you've got a contaminated sample of DNA that has been in contact with a person or persons, aswell as other creatures? "Unknown" DNA in the world of such matters, apparantly just means that not enough information is there to begin with.

    Its wishful thinking to latch onto unknown DNA as the term "unknown" is widely misused in most accounts.

  • No they wouldn't say that, gilbert. -They'd do what they're doing now already, waiting on their lazy behinds for more new crucial evidence. Eventually that waiting is over, especially when they get better DNA it's all over for ya...

  • @reclaimerReclaimer

    DNA has to be cross referenced with DNA of a matching species... You can't find crappy DNA that comes up as "unknown," which means "not enough data" and then claim that it belongs to a Sasquatch, thats so far away from being scientific that you might aswell start making up new species to go along with the millions of bad DNA collected.

  • There's plenty of evidence, retroll...it's you not seeing it as such. Movement? There's nothing but, that's why you see through the hair at times, skin remember, depending on her movements... I think your brain has separate pieces...hahaha, who was it...a Dr. Frank N. Stein that put it back together again, right? No close-ups? Hehe...old cameras didn't have zooms, sorry. All your lame excuses is why you're regarded a troll around here...hey, don't look so surprised now... lol

  • Jeez... Same old shot to shit crap. Doesn't make sense to leave stuff like that on an anatomically correct/realistic suit, now would it. It's been addressed with perfect sense 100s of times, but you refuse to listen, that's why we're still telling you until it sinks in. It is her skin, and it is her hair. There. That's not so hard to understand, now is it? You see those (perhaps less hairy) spots, all depending on her moves in the film and the sunlight on her. Still too difficult?

  • Huh, you're not making any sense there.

  • I've had EVERY skeptic from Emintardo to retroidiot tell me that there is NO line up a primates back like the one seen in the Patterson footage...google "Gorillas back'...well...behold!! The first, FIRST, I say FIRST image is a gorilla with a line up his back...(it's where all of the back muscle adhere)..I guess Janos Prohaska made that lowlanfd gorilla too...

  • @joeyvader

    Most great apes have a line running down their back, but they don't have visible panty lines downstairs... To this day, no'one has given an explanation, nor have they properly addressed this with logic. Patty is wearing undies... how is that a biological artifact? Its as clear as day, panty lines are visible.

  • @GilbertSyndrome If that was true, the entire scientific community would say, "yes, it's a hoax". But that is not even considered to be an issue to discuss. It's a similar analogy to the comments such as "you can see his face- what a joke, it's fake", or "he's wearing sneakers, it's fake".

  • @rockstarzep

    Well its there for you to see, unless you deny it, which would be odd if you believed you could see muscle movement.

    If this was a real Bigfoot then the entire scientific community would say "yes, its a real Bigfoot."

  • @GilbertSyndrome This 'diaper' issue is always brought up by you folks...I've NEVER heard any of the fx teams that have looked at it mention this obvious give-away of hoaxery...what do you think of the Henson shop and their findings?? Why does one of the premier creature crafters say "I have NO IDEA how they would have built a suit like this in 1967..!" Can't HE see the 'diaper'..??

  • @joeyvader

    Its there, plain as day, so you're outright denying that its even there?

    Name me 3 "FX teams" who've looked at it and said "its not a hoax,"

    The Henson shop who make puppets? Funny how you're naming one man, from a one team, and ignoring the many many others who say "its a suit."

  • Comment removed

  • I would ignore any team that does NO analysis to come up with their findings...I find it a little harder to listen to one of the BEST fx artists in his field who, after THE closest examination of the film to date,  comes away puzzled by what the subject really is..

  • @joeyvader

    A lot of people have brought up the diaper issue, including FX techs and costume makers who've visited forums like the BFF or the JREF. I can't find more than 3 costume makers who even think its a real Bigfoot.

  • @GilbertSyndrome Names credentials and research notes please...I will read them entirely...bet I will have NOTHING to read!!!

  • @joeyvader

    I'll get you some names and credentials and you do the same for me, eh?

  • @joeyvader

    Effects makeup artist Dave Kindlon, makeup artist Howard Berger, both are now head of KNB Effects Group and both have worked with Rick Baker, who i may add, also believes its a suit. Bob Burns, Hollywoods ape impersonator.

    Kindlon, Berger and Burns all commented that aspects of Patty looked similar to suits and tricks used by Charlie Gemora.

    John Vulich of Optic Nerve studios, effects artist Bart Mixon and makeup artist Jim McPherson. Werner Keppler, make up artist.

  • @joeyvader

    Tom Burman, one of Hollywood's top makeup artists, Stan Winston... there's a lot of names coming up here, and brief comments by some of them about how they think the suit was made. With a little more research i can find more names and comments, i remember seeing a full list on a forum somewhere, i'll dig that out.

  • @joeyvader

    Many of the names i just mentioned all speak of what many people here have spoken about, including Jeff Pruitt, that the suit was likely put together using different pieces. The main account i keep hearing is that the suit itself is a modified bear costume, not an ape costume.

  • @joeyvader

    Academy Award winning creature fx expert Chris Walas claimed that Patty was made in two sections as Heironimus described and Bill Munns claimed he had never seen any hair suit like that before. All professional ape suits of top quality used that design.

    

  • I've read all about all of the mentioned effects guys you have named..as can anyone with a computer...every single one of those effects guys mentioned say "Yeah...I heard that Rick Baker heard that it was made by John Chambers...etc. etc.." Not ONE of them has any analysis for me to peruse...not one..well..only the Henson shop put the subject under the microscope..but they don't count, because the Jim Henson Creature Shop only makes, as you maintain, 'puppets'.

  • @joeyvader

    Who is the premier creature-man at the Henson shop and what is his analysis of Patty, what does he point out that proves beyond a doubt that Patty is a real creature and not a man in a suit?

    Jeff Pruitt has done some of the more detailed research, explaining aspects of the suit, including the diaper, among other things, i can point you to certain pages at the JREF where he has listed these aspects and also showed pictures to demonstrate that they were being used pre PGF.

  • Why is Jeff Pruitt, a stuntman who has NEVER sculpted or cast a single fx prop of ANY kind to be listened too?? Peter Burke is the head of Henson's shop...watch him look into the footage here on yt 'AP Bigfoot" is the clip...it's in several parts, but very interesting to see him be surprised at all of the detail he finds from having the film to digitize..but...they only make 'puppets'...unlike Pruitt who's special effect credentials include..uhh...nothing...??

  • @joeyvader

    Jeff has created many suits, though he's not an acredited fx technician, he does make creature suits. He actually used to fly the flag for the PGF, then he was asked to write an article on the subject and he then changed his mind based on people he'd spoken to and things he's seen.

    He points out aspects of Patty that were being used prior to '67, he shows evidence of this through pictures and links. He's tried similar parts on and spoken to many fx techs about the process.

  • @joeyvader

    When i get back from my run i'll be happy to PM you some links to pages where Jeff explains everything i've mentioned in detail, he's even posted many pictures showing everything from the foam padding to the thigh pads (which appear as a line across the thigh in Patty aswell as on the legs of the wearers in the pictures) the diaper is also explained, and many other details that he uncovered when investigating the claims that it couldn't be a suit.

  • @joeyvader

    Jeff has created a few things, including anamatronic ape arms, i think you can see those in his video, he also made the static Bigfoot-looking statue in that video, he's reconstructed the foam padding reportedly used in the Patterson suit and has made his own, very similar looking Patty feet, he's overlayed these against a picture of the Patty feet, and they are identical.

    Like i said, i'll get ahold of these pages and PM them to you, i'm off for my nightly run.

  • @GilbertSyndrome Just saw yer quote from Dumb and Dumber...my personal fave is "Oh theres' lottsa jobs out ther' "Yeah, if ya wann work 40 hrs a week!!!" Classic morons!!...and "Look at the ass on THAT!!" "Yeah...he must work out..."

  • @joeyvader

    "According to the map we've only gone 4 inches...."

    

  • @GilbertSyndrome RIOT!!!

  • I BELIEVE. 

  • Paterson had found footprint evidence in the area years before and in other areas on occasion.He got lucky.The dynamics of movement of the creature should resemble a human and it matches the dynamics of the prints found and casted, not the balloons for feet that would have resulted from the claimed mask which is an over-the-top joke.Its not the simple, this and anything else must be analyzed and studied in detail before coming to a conclusion.I would not want to debate in court if I was a denier

  • @Astro1645

    Which guy in a suit does this footage look like? Please direct me to a clip of a guy in a suit that looks and walks like the Patterson subject. I bet you can't do that for me.

  • @LaughingGravy31

    Can you show me any other footage of a *cough cough* "Bigfoot," shot from 100 yards, for about 30 seconds on a grainy Kodachrome whilst the camera shakes? I bet you can't do that for me.

  • @GilbertSyndrome

    The camera doesn't 'shake' during the famous part of the footage and it's not actually 'grainy'. It's the blow ups that make it look grainy. The actual full footage isn't grainy.

    Please, do your homework. You are making beginner's mistakes.

  • @LaughingGravy31

    All Kodachrome was grainy, it certainly wasn't clear. The grain now comes from the fact that this footage has been copied and blown up more times than Jaws.

  • @GilbertSyndrome

    ""The grain now comes from the fact that this footage has been copied and blown up more times than Jaws.""

    Why are you repeating something I already pointed out to YOU?

  • Beginners mistakes? haha, i've been following this "mystery" for a long time, but nice try at making ASSumptions.

  • @GilbertSyndrome

    Yep beginner's mistakes. You've just made two beginner's whoppers.

    1. The camera isn't 'shaken'. It's moving due to forward locomotion from Patterson. He's moving towards the creature. Then he stops and gets stable footage. He isn't 'shaking' the camera.

    2. The footage isn't grainy. It's the blow ups that make it look grainy.

    The footage is actually reasonably clear and stable during the most important segment, especially for such an old camera.

  • wtf is this freak...?

  • @retrobloke78 @retrobloke78 Hahaha ok, by that description right there I can understand how you and others can be doubtful.Lol, but still, I stand by these facts. 1. Too many consistent sightings, thousands of sightings that all say the same thing. 2. We haven't discovered everything on Earth. 3. the evidence (tracks, pictures if a little fuzzy, and the sheer amount of sightings). Look at the patterson one. It's thigh has muscle movement. How can a suit do that?

  • @retrobloke78 People like you think we have found everything, until BOOM, something else pops up, and when something else pops up...what does that tell you? Perhaps that we just found something new which means there are probably other things that we haven't found.

  • @retrobloke78 So you really think we've seen every single thing that lives on land?

  • The main reason you don't see proof yet retro, is cos this is likely something entirely different and not your mere giant gorilla-like ape. America likes its myths and don't really want to give them up, so industries with an interest in certain areas have no interest in giving away footage/pics that could jeopardize their own livelihood, be it logging, hunting or whatever it is. Religion, even. lol You won't get the proof from any of those guys, you're lucky you even saw the Jacobs pix you did.

  • @retrobloke78 *sigh* I'm not gonna diss on someone for their beliefs, but close-minded people need to wake up and see that we haven't discovered every single tihng in the world. Do you think we have seen, recorded, and know about every single specie in the world today?

  • @retrobloke78 Another thing, look up giganto. It is a huge ape, extinct now I believe, but it exsisted. And thats a FACT. We have skeletal evidence of it. Now tell me why bigfoot can't be a relative of a giganto?

  • @retrobloke78 Haha, aren't really there? How have there been so many sightings across the world, and how have they been so consistent? It's either they're real...or like you and so many other close-minded people say, its a hoax...and the whole world and everyone who has ever saw one is in on it. Thats a pretty big hoax.

  • @zgomer1 explain how.

  • No attacks, you know this how?

  • I have no idea, what do you think they're gonna ask us first...square dancing or line dancing? Since they don't seem to want any attention, they probably want nothing from us as we see practically no attacks.

  • Let 'em watch ya...

  • Comment removed

  • Bigfoot's not that giant Asian ape, I'm afraid it's just a romantic idea that we're somehow innocently dealing with a harmless fluffy ape here, they're a kind of people. Which makes this whole thing that much more serious, and also explaining both the non-capture history and the daily desperation shown by so-called skeptics or more precisely deniers.

  • Bigfoot is said to be a Gigantopithecus. They were the biggest and most powerful/dangerous gorilla species of all time. But they were said to be extinct. Maybe Bigfoot ain't fake! :)

  • Maybe because he's not.

  • It doesn't look fake at all. YT is full of fake Bigfoot videos, this isn't one of them as I've actually explained many times. -It's got to do with her proportions how her whole build is safely ruling out a hoax here, long arms, long torso, muscle movement, hand movement, the whole nine yards. Unfakeable. You can't walk around as realistically and effortlessly in huge elaborate suits as you can without one, so the bozo saying it's him is pulling your leg just having a laugh...

  • Fans, retro. lol Think what you like, I still say this footage is 100% the real deal Sasquatch.

  • @tubengagements this is real and no there was no costume found

  • Hu-man, yeah, unknown species of usually between 7ft and 9ft. 

  • Nice joke. HarryH looked like what it was, tall skinny guy in longhaired costume with human shape, which is how all movie Bigfoots look - simply because it's the only way to do it due to our human anatomy. Our body proportions are virtually the exact opposite of the more apelike shaped Sasquatch; their shorter legs compared to their longer torso. Humans are the other way around, ie, just like we see Hollywood presenting the Bigfoot as they're aware it's the only way to operate inside a costume.

  • @digglyda Many Indians along the western coast speak of these 'hairy men' who are nocturnal, and steal fish from their nets...Spaniards? Indian totem poles that feature these creatures have a distinctive ape like face, complete with brow ridge and simian jawlines...Spaniards again? They all speak of how they are seldom seen, and best left alone...Spaniards yet again?

  • @joeyvader exactly...

  • DON'T WORRY GUYS FBI'S MAIN GOAL IS SEARCH AND DESTROY

  • Negative nastybob, it's called sense... 'We'...lol...it's only you, dummy...

  • I'll pitch in there...her face was not seen anywhere but here high up on her own head...where no man has ever gone before... lol Minnie Mouse resembles Patty Bigfootty more than your weird Wah mask, that's how laughable and insanely bad it is. Nuff said.

  • Yeah Truth, they tell themselves it's easy to fake her walk yet nobody's ever been able to do it, tests have been silly attempts where they've tried with a few steps but it's always the typical human-faking-slouched-ape stroll... I want them to don a realistically proportioned Bigfoot suit and do it out in the open terrain, then we'll really have something to laugh at... lol

  • Only to gullible imbeciles who can't think for themselves, so that should be about 85% of the Earth's population...and you're it, seyeydonkey...you're among there somewhere...trollin' aLong...laughin' like you need special care...

  • @seymourbbest Seymour... the footage has since been enhanced through computer technology to show muscle movement. Primatologist, Anthropologist, and Cryptozoologist have extensively studied this footage to find that the animals gait or walk is unlike a humans. You'll find the footage on other documentary studies of Sasquatch/ Gigantopithicus. "Masks from Star Trek"?? "Nessie"??? Ok Seymour.. time for bed... you've got a big Social Studies test tomorrow. "See More" by removing your head from..

  • ZetaTalk[.]com explanation: As we have mentioned, Bigfoot is quarantined from man, which means Bigfoot is assisted in staying hidden. On occasion there are feces or tracks which man finds, or a glimpse of a fleeting body at a distance, but nothing as concrete as a video capture has occurred. The video would have been ruined in some manner, due to the quarantine. This is a man in a suit, a well orchestrated hoax.

  • And why are you here, seyeyblockhead...? You have zero credibility for whatever your game is... Oh, and still no mask match...please don't be so bloody ridiculous... (:-p 

  • Yeah, right... Oh, and NOOOO mask match... lmao