You can clearly see flexing muscle movement in the thigh, I've made fur suits for 30 years some of them gorilla and even a Bigfoot suit which I made for a 1998 BBC documentary. We could not replicate the Patterson film after spending thousands and thousands ,If ur telling me make up artists and high tech material of today cannot copy it What a chance in hell have they got?. No amount of padding on Bob heironimus would show what we see here ,Padding does not stretch the material does not stretch
Got any proof of that...? Other than that, I do agree they're not apes/animals per se but an unknown human species, flesh and blood and all that jazz....
Bigfoot and Yeti are not animals, they are primitive beings from distant star systems.there planet died out 1000s of years ago. so they were bought to
earth for survival purposes by the celestial beings of light.they will leave earth shortly
as a new planet is now being prepared for them. they are highly intelligent can run very fast and are extremely powerful, they can survive on planets which wud kill humans.
@brianbuck70 Close examinations have revealed NO seams in the suit...at all...National Geographic did an analysis of the BEST footage they could find...a copy of the film right from Patterson's widow...each frame was closely scrutinized, prompting Peter Burke from the Henson Creature fx Shop to say "I have NO idea how they would have made this suit in 1967." Burke observed flexing achilles tendons, calf flexing, and lat movement...
Yes. Everything on BobH's body fits Patty about as much as a hippo in a matchbox. To me it's especially his torso giving his junk status away with bells on, there's no way he or any other man could reach her head to pop it inside one of those adorable Chang masks the opposition revels in so madly. It's simply flatout not doable, and it's not doable cos Patty as far as I can tell, sports the exact anatomy description witnesses give on the BFs. Failing to be BF has never been easier knowing this.
I watched this footage with the vid of Bob H in the list to the right, where I could directly compare the proportions. Bob H is so far off from the subject in the Patterson film it isn't even funny. The proportions are impossible to fit into one another. Those who think they are the same are seriously stubborn individuals who just want to have something they can claim is "proof" that there is no bigfoot. Too bad the "proof" is so lame, huh?
Hi there, that bozo's still around and posting as usual under a landslide of different names also, lately accusing some of us of sending threats! What a big loser. lol
you are the type of moron who thinks they have all the answers to all things because you can look at an old piece of Bigfoot footage and discover "evidence" that is is not real. Interesting how no one else in 40 years has mentioned anything about ass tissue not jiggling around. Go kill yourself IdiotMonster
nastymonster, you're one indeed. Actually, Patty's arms and her too long Humerus bones are one of the key points in proving her real, since suit arms no matter how much padding outwards are always operated by the actor himself (due to being stuck to his own body for natural reasons), except in this case where the arms begin/swing at the ends of way too broad shoulders for a guy inside to reach over. Plus her long torso doesn't make human sense, so him reaching any part incl. the head is a no-no.
They most certainly exist, and they'd snap your neck before you'd ever pull the trigger - berta...that 8footer running your way would make you crap your pants...
They most certainly exist, and they'd snap your neck before you'd ever pull the trigger - berta...that 8footer running your way would make you crap your pants...
@jackhowiedocherty ..have u seen big runners from maawillaru?..he is resting in nandikadaal lagoon! he abandoned us all on mulathive beach & ran to save his psuusy/eelam!
@deadleader1 have you seen buddhists who do not accept the main teaching of gotama (i will not call him enlightened) it was the doctrine of anatman (a sanskrit word) anatman means 'no soul' gotama taught that when you are dead you are dead i studied sanskrit and early indian buddhism (which now only survives on lanka) when gotama died he ceased to exist he exists no longer that was his teaching 'nirvana' is a sanskrit word it means 'snuffing out' as when a candle is put out forever
annaa..country come first,gautama & his teaching comes second! sinhalses die 4 contry not 4 goutama!
altimate dead leader abandoded u all on mulathive beach &on run,thanks to budhist tamils are alive ( after resquing them from ltte`s dead leader velu )in this island!
seymour, you're the blindest of all the gullible pretenders here yet, ever... Well, you and your alter ego deiter... You obviously don't understand what possible oand what's not in f/x, because you clearly choose to be this ignorant. Fine, but read banthamobile's post there.
I have looked at this film many times and I can't say for sure what it is, if it is a man in a costume it is not a simple pull on Halloween costume but something that you'd need to have a full body cast made for and someone with the exact physique. This does not mean that it isn't fake however, the ones who took the shot were not in a position to be paying someone for something this elaborate.
There's detail because it's not a guy in an ape suit... Check for details in all - any - Bigfoot monster movie ever made, and ever going to be made with suits...no detail, no muscle movement and all human anatomy. That's the only suit reality there is, seymour, the only. Makes no sense to debate that. Case really ought to be closed by now, except for the denying dreamers, this shows a real Bigfoot. Case closed. Next subject.
A lot of detail? Where? Where's the details in filming a few seconds of some guy in an ape suit walking around? Patterson rented an ape suit and a camera to film a movie about bigfoot---that detail tells you all you need to know about this film.
Why are you so obsessed with debunking??? All the more strange as you are losing credence daily because you cant put forward a hypothesis any more structured than "its a guy in a rented ape suit"
its alot of detail for a bunch of folks to go threw with the camera they used back IN THE 60S WHILE MOVING ON A HORSE. but with todays help look what we have.
if they had all been in on it they wouldnt have had to try so hardto get the detail, I believe this is a female bigfoot I think its really is possible to fake a big foot now but this just isent one I would ever call a FAKE. IT REALLY LOOKS TO BE THE REAL THING. IM A BELIEVER.
Meldrum's not keeping anything alive, he speaks when he's asked on a subject he knows more about than anyone around here, primate locomotion... Nor is this an Indian legend, all races have encountered them. The only one keeping anything alive is you seymour, a myth about an elusive ape beast that's actually human reality... You'll see.
Well I'm not taking any money to say bigfoot isn't real. Meldrum makes money by keeping the myth alive. I'd say that does give ME a bit more credibility.
How were they wrong, all 'these men'...seymour? Gimlin was there, sole man on the scene still alive. In other words, it's probably all about some sort of local jealousy thing, six-pack guys like DeAtley or whoever don't give a toss about Bigfoot or the subject, they're as indifferent to it as you or most other skeptics... More so, I guess, which means they're rolling with laughter at the suckers believing them of all people...
Why single out Biscardi? Geez, don't you know about his involvement with the Georgia hoax? How about those other silly pictures he was connected to?
Biscardi is not one of the classic figures of 'bigfootry'. I've been interested in bigfoot for over 30 years and I'd never even heard of Biscardi until a few years ago.
Green, Dahinden, Byrne, Krantz, Titmus, Patterson etc etc are all far more reknowned than nutjob Biscardi.
Plenty of people have been at it longer than Biscardi, there's Green or Byrne for two. Comparing Meldrum to showmen like Biscardi is an insult, quite frankly. lol
lol, seymour...if PGF's the first where are the follow-ups...? What's your answer there, if a 'bad' suit, why aren't we flooded with similar films? You know very well, that having neither a POTA ape or HarryH - in total body view - stroll along a forest path in broad daylight, wouldn't convince anyone... I find it strange that serious people want to delude themselves so much, and only have the line 'there is no proof of Bigfoot' to say. We have tons of good reasons why not.
""We discuss it because it was the first Bigfoot film anybody faked""
I see you didn't watch the recent NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC special on the Patterson footage? The scientific analysers didn't come to that conclusion. They supported the probablity of it's authenticity.
But hey, why listen to scientific analysis when folks can listen to ignorant armchair amateurs like you, seymourbrest??
Seymour, good point - why is this the only film we discuss...? If it's a bad suit, or even a good one, why aren't we talking about any other...? Where are they if this is a suit, shouldn't we be knee deep in clever hoaxes...? All Hollywood Bigfoots look like what they are, men in suits with tall human bodies and none of them would pass as real under similar conditions as PGF. Just try it, HarryH or whoever, all obvious fakes. BH couldn't be Patty for dozens of reasons.
Yes Seymour, except it's never done as Patty appears...basically, she's outside human reach with those massive shoulders and probably 7ft. tall. Padding or sticks for arms won't do it, not when you can't even reach over to fill them...Humerus arm bone's longer too. All movie ape monsters are well within human anatomy, otherwise you couldn't operate the arms. They're all legs too unlike Bigfoots, the only thing making an actor tall; legs.
Damn, you really have no clue do you, nasty... lol Patty's torso's her tall part and BlopH is not built that way, in order for him to function inside a suit like that they'd need to cut him in half... Shoulder to shoulder width is also massive, making it impossible for one's own shoulders to reach over...not only that, but the arms begin where the shoulders end. They're clearly swinging but a human couldn't fill, or reach as said, upper arm bones too long too. No fake.
It certainly supports its reality, and not only that but her figure is not typical of human-made movie Bigfoot monsters, they all have that typical lanky human shape - she does not. She's all muscle and bone, different anatomy with too wide shoulders for a human faker to reach across with his own arms. Patty's arms begin where shoulders end, no padding. Upper arm bone is longer than our own making it even more not doable, head also positioned too far outwards, all impossible factors for fakery.
Call me crazy, but I always maintained the one single best piece of evidence for this being credible is the fact that this creature has breasts. Think about this for a moment. If this indeed were suit, why on earth would you add breasts? It just does not seem logical to me as a thought process for a couple of guys constructing a costume of a bigfoot. It seems like a detail that would be such an afterthought, such an unneccessary thing that it kind of makes me scratch my head, always has.
Quite a bit of foresight there. The only problem with that is that I have never really seen many other bring up the point. I guess you can present opinions in any way that would support your beliefs. I love the sophistication these 2 men had back in 1963. They should have been working in Hollywood if this is indeed a hoax, because it is some of the best executed, well thought out, detailed and proffessional con job maybe of all time. I still think its real though.
@jasonjmj I don't think there was alot of sophistication, just a well made (yes, Hollywood quality) padded suit. Whoever made the suit probably did supply them to hollywood. I think it was definitley well thought out.
@jasonjmj Just another thought on sophistication. I've seen stuff on Youtube where they'll take a track, or Patty's hands, and try to say that it couldn't of been done without high tech animitronics. Then they jump from there to "lets consider if this was possible in '63." Well, it probably wasn't possible (or practical) but the notion that animitronics HAD to have been used is flawed, IMO. Don't know if that's where you were going, just my .02.
What do U guys think of Bigfoot hunter Chester Moore? The weirdo wants to bag one, & serve the scientists with a body, the very same scientists who think he's a freakin' goofball. Why do them a favor, be no hero anyway, just a footnote in history as the unlikeable guy who killed a Bigfoot. Even if a hunter gets a Bigfoot in his crosshairs, imagine it charges you, I don't think any person would stand his ground. You'd not know whether you'd die or it dies, way too risky. Survival juices set in...
Yes, if a fingerprint expert like Jimmy Chilcutt (one of the best in that biz) says something's not fake then it damn well is real. :) Now, whether the skeptics still choose to be skeptical that's their problem, not ours.
Hmm, it's good because it's no suit actually... Those feet are quite obviously not shoes or fake feet, but definitely the real thing. It's no full body suit or in parts, it's a real hairy body of a at least 7ft tall Bigfoot, spotty as life in the wilderness would be. Skin showing through all the hair, as the sun beams hit and the muscles flex.
Not saying that I believe in this shit but I have great computer software that I run, can do all kinds of shade, fade, shadow and color stuff. At 0:39 freeze the image in 1/2 stride and you will see the underside of the foot. The software I am using clearly shows defined toes and heel. Again, not saying I believe but Damn good job on the suit....
No, it's not strange at all, they're probably rarer than bears. There's tracks with dermal ridges on them that can't be faked, it's next to impossible. And any faker couldn't be certain it'd be found before the elements got to it, which pretty much also conclusively destroys the claim that all tracks are fakes. Sightings may not be the scientific proof most want, but unless the witnesses are lying or 'seeing things', then skeptics must start acting reasonably and accepting the possibility.
Thank you for very fair response and not going straight to name calling like the majority of people do on YouTube. I would never say that it is impossible that Bigfoot exists, but I will say that it is extremely unlikely that to this day no strong evidence exists. Funny you bring up tracks. I have a friend who's Grandpa faked some Bigfoot tracks in Willow Creek, Ca. He never admitted that it was fake until much later out of fear of getting in trouble from the large reaction. True story!
I think things like this video could have easily been the same as the story about my friend's grandfather. Patterson could have likely been in the same situation.
no patterson was dying in the early 70s and maintaned on his death bed that the creature was real. by that point there was no reason to lie. some will say he wanted money for his widow but thats a pretty harsh aligation. alot of tracks are fake but many are real according to certain scientists that study these things.
I find it hilarious that people really believe that there is a "Bigfoot". You don't find it suspicious that after all of this time, there has been no proof that has arisen stronger than this film? I was born and raised near the area where this footage was shot. There are a ton of hunters and a ton of pot growers in this area. If there really was a Bigfoot, someone would have shot one and there would be a body by now.
Like a pot grower is going to go to the authorities about seeing or shooting one, ain't gonna happen, pot growers don't go to the authorities for ANYTHING, and hunters don't shoot anything they don't have a license for. NEXT
'You cant prove a negative!' as the saying goes! Hopefully somebody will shoot a pot grower and show the corpse to the authorities and ask - "is this a druggie, or is it a bigfoot?"
@sgberta I find it hilarious that someone who is'nt even remotely interesting, would even stop by, let alone post about what they don't believe...I know you posted over a year ago.. ....here's the deal for me......this footage is the most interesting thing to ever come about this idea of a creature, but the Native Americans of the great North spoke about and painted about the idea of this creature, yet how could they even imagine an animal that does'nt resemble anything they've seen?
@revskull The ancient Egyptians drew pictures of people with bird and dog heads, it doesn't mean they are real. Let me put it this way: What is more likely? People have found clever ways to fake the existence of a "Bigfoot" for financial gain or that a species of giant bipedal apes has existed in the American Northwest for the thousands of years that people have also inhibited that area and no physical evidence has ever been found?
@PostToastie By going to name calling, you make yourself look bad. I'm not going to digress to a pissing match like the majority of people do on Youtube. I welcome a rebuttal to my comment if you have one.
@sgberta 1. Of course some people have used the existence of bigfoot for their own profit, Boob Herroneous is a perfect example of that kind of lying for greed. You kind of seem to omit the fact that there are thousands and thousands of people that have filed sighting reports around the world for no financial gain at all.
2. No physical evidence? /user/4jaimeavalos#p/u watch for yourself. That's just one individual, unfunded, unofficial bigfoot researcher. Find some others, there are many.
@PostToastie Thank you for that very fair response. I am looking more into the subject. My opinion hasn't changed but I will admit that there are some very interesting perspectives/ideas. My natural reaction to your first point would be that in a world of several billion, it would be expected to have hoaxes and misidentifiations in large amounts as well ( 1 hoax or misidentification per million people equates to several thousand worldwide). That is how I see it. Best wishes and take care.
@sgberta From what I can tell, having watched many youtube bigfoot researchers' videos, I must say that Jaime Avalos seems too be the one that has the stuff. His scientific approach combined with his uncanny ability to understand the patterns that the groups he is studying adhere to as they wander around the Sierras and his survival skills used during his frequent overnight field research trips have made him the foremost field researcher in the nation. 1000s of reports and not one is true? hmmm.
@sgberta I believe that it is fairly bold to say that 100% of all official bigfoot reports filed by policemen are hoaxes or mis-identifications. In order to say that, you would have to have researched all bigfoot reports, I have at least read thousands of them including this one, not by a policeman. /watch?v=GAKhvk6L6-w If you can suffer through watching 4.5 minutes of another video of mine I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts about that story and many of the others that you have read.
@PostToastie If you are going to say that a large amount of claims implies that some are true, then wouldn't you also have to believe in ghosts, alien abductions, etc... I'm sure you would agree that many more people have claimed to have seen ghosts than have claimed to have seen Bigfoot. Does that mean that some claims are true and ghosts exist? If not ghosts, what about mermaids. There is a long documented history of mariners reporting to have seen mermaids. Does that imply mermaids exist?
I have not researched the existence of ghosts, but they may indeed exist, I try to keep an open mind about such things and I have not been to the mermaid sighting website, but would love to read some of the recent reports, if you could please send me the link I would not mind researching those reports a bit. Thanks for watching.
@PostToastie Any time I mention sightings from law enforcement, the reply I invariably get is "Well...one of the guys in Georgia was a cop.' as an anawer... The implication is, that, ipso facto, ALL cops who file Bigfoot reports are liars, because of the Georgia hoax...
BobH is simply not tall enough to have been Patty, not only is she taller she's also wider. And what does this mean, it means he could not reach the insides he'd have to reach (arms/head), in order to work the costume. Hence, no suit, thus, real creature.
if it was real, what religious implications would it have? they'll just say it's another one of god's creatures, end of story...so what the bible doesn't mention them, it doesn't mention gorillas either. and what scientific implications? most of science is going on theories that change all the time anyways. did the world turn upside down when they discovered gorillas were real? no, they just added them to the books and moved on. evolution asks you to take as many leaps of faith as any religion
Immense implications----we thought we were the only example of our species. If this is a primitive version of us, and can produce viable offspring through artificial insemination, then we have the potential to create a subspecies of ourselves. What are the moral and ethical standards we will set for the treatment of these "lesser" beings? Will we enslave them, or maybe breed them just for donor body parts? Will some seek to murder them out of fear? The implications are huge.
I fail to see how this animal would be any closer in relation to us then other great apes.
The idea that man is separated from the animal world by some great gap is arrogant. Lions and tigers are less closely related then we are to chimpanzees, yet nobody looks at them as drastically different species.
I'd have to disagree with you on the bible not mentioning them, read the story of esau and jacob. Esau was born as a red shaggy sheep covered head to toe and made the leader of the land of Edom. In the david and goliath story, Goliath was a slave child from the land of Edom and grew to be 9 feet tall. There's plenty of other references as well from that badly rehashed and rewritten book, the bible. 0-)
It's not like you have anything to fear by seeing the original still from the film instead of copies. Unless of course by analyzing something correctly you fear you would be proven wrong. 0-)
....corraling it's prey like i've seen other primates do. that or it's vegetarian. a 400 bi-pedal creature in the bush = slow. what would it do? grab the deer and rip it apart or bite it? or does it know enough to use sharp edges of rock or something? lets look at what kind of food sources would be needed to support say a family or multi-family units of these large creatures. are they just an ape, or are they more like us?are they top of the food chain? or is a brown bear able to kill one? etc
thats funny people have to turn to insults to get their point across, i won't stoop that low. but yes when they made the suit/costume they did indeed model it after a gorilla, and they did replicate a gorilla buttocks. lets suppose for a second that this bipedal creature is real. how fast do bipedal creatures move in the bush? not very fast as compared to four legged predator's like wolves or bears. it's unlikely one creature alone would run down a deer lets say. it would have to hunt in groups
i have issues about it's ass mechanics. it looks like it has a big ass, whatever it is. so it should have a big ass crack, clearly seperating two rather distincts buttocks. so see where the upper leg attaches to said butt cheek, it should move all together, instead the butt stays relatively still. thats my beef. and if those are big ol flabby female sasquatch titty, they would flap or bounce or something...of course maybe it's just footage of a naked italian woman in the woods =P
i think they are trying to say that the material the suit is made out of sometimes bends and buckles, resembling muscle contraction. but it has already been said it is 1967 era football padding and helmet under the suit. so clearly you can see that the whole body from shoulder to buttocks doesn't move very much as it walks... also it's reaction to seeing whoever shot the footage was all too casual. it's walking is too good as it doesn't break stride once suggesting a consumate actor underneath.
look rikk, we appreciate the fact that you have an opinion, but really you're just parroting other people cause it's something you're willing to believe in. It's not about belief and that vid Kap referenced you to clearly shows detail you can't attribute to a suit. Stay stupid if you'd like, McDonalds will always need someone to work the drive-thru. 0-)
Look up: "Patterson film, the gluts", and see the stabilized frames of the glutes. Primateer could at least get his spelling of "gluts" correct so the old myth of the "no ass crack" would be put to rest.
i was watching this on DVR and paused it to go grab a drink, and when i came back my nephew asked why Patty had no fingers on her left hand, only a thumb. It had been stopped in the perfect spot where the right hand his behind, and the left hand is forward. Clearly the fingers are missing. Maybe a bear trap or something? If not, they forgot to cut off the guy wearing the costumes fingers.Since there arent any in the still frame. i sent it to Colman and Meldrum and got no response.Its no suit!!
The toes have a look of "bending upwards" because the fake hair is tossed up as the man in the suit moves his foot up and then the air keeps the fake foot hair up as the foot comes down.
even hollywood cant produce a suit that detailed and remember its the 1960s. Bob Hironias claimed it was him in the video but He lied for a piece of fame. This video is authentic and Patterson held to it being real right to the end of his life. Signs and wonders were predicted and this is one of them
Listen skeptics; if your (US) Government can lie to you about many a thing - and many of you undoubtedly believe they do - don't you think they'd be able to lie to you about this primate? No biggie. I'm not saying they do, but if they (can) lie about anything they don't want you to know, (ie other life forms) it'd be easy to deny something like this.
The Star Trek "Gorn" suit from 1966 and various 1930s Tarzan-movie chimp suits directly refute the contention that the figure in this film has musculature of a kind not possible in a suit. I recommend visiting the JREF Forums to investigate more closely the claims to authenticity made by proponents of this film. I used to be one such proponent, but there is a wealth of information available that shows this is a person in a suit.
We were in the deep woods and we came upon some human like foot prints in the mud at the bottom of this medow pond. I could see where it walked around in the pond looking for food, we came back just before dark and brought some food to bait this creature, the smell of the food brought him in and he made a vocalization, very loud and it was clear he wanted up to leave and leave the food for him. very scary incounter for us, we were very youong at that time(1974in N.C.)
I have been fascinated with this video ever since I was a little girl...mind you I was born in 1981. It is evident that there is muscle movement and you guys couldn't have said it better....people cannot put their minds around this. Our Native Americans told stories about what we know today as Bigfoot...they also drew images in caves. This shows that there have been sightings even before this film was taken...why not believe in the possible existence of a large primate? Why discard it as a hoax?
@metalslave81 You need to grow up. I was intrigued by the Bigfoot story as a young teenager but now realize it is a silly fairytale. Stop being gullible. Review the evidence as if your a responsible adult and you will understand.
if anyone doesn't believe that there could be another unidentified species, watch their other videos, they have found hair and DNA samples that experts can not identify as any other animal.
I'm a professional costume designer and I know that it is not possible to make the muscle movements that are readily apparent in this footage. Watch it again closely...You can see the skin and muscles of the arms stretching, the muscles of the back, shoulder blades and thigh moving. This is not possible even today (I know, I do this for a living) much less back in 1967. This is a real animal, shockingly so. Bigfoot is an unknown primate seen in this video - fact.
Thank you for your professional opinion, unfortunately most of the skeptics here will brush it off as non-factual evidence. They just won't be able to wrap their little tiny brains around it.
I'm just glad that a few people here can put this footage under scientific scrutiny. Thanks for the fantastic enhanced video. I've never analyzed it this closely, and I have tell you I was shocked to realize this is a living animal because of its muscle physiology. You're right --it's just too traumatic for the average person to come to grips with. It's just a matter of time before scientists find a specimen, then Patterson will finally be vindicated, and skeptic idiocy will be silenced.
I tell u what, if this isnt real thats one hell of a costume for those days, even though thats a huge person to fit in that costume. So i think this is real, and i do beleive in bigfoot.. If there werent any bigfoot why the hell are people talking about till today and seeing sightings of it all over the world...........
Does anyone find it interesting that Bob Eronius put his autograph for sale on line at the outset of his "Coming out." Yet, when he was shown to be the lying fruit that he is, he took it off. As for Long, he skewered his credibility before the nation. So, he is headed the way of Whitly Schrieber. Good on the butt-licker, I say.
here is the story my friend told me he is not the type to lie, he says on a cold spring morn on the way to a logging site in british columbia he and a friend (a native indian) saw an ape like creature walk across a field at apprx 150 yrds , just before the creature entered the tree line (here is the part that still sends shivers up my spine)IT BENT OVER AND PICKED UP A BABY SASQUATCH THEN DISSAPPERED INTO THE TREES ,the native fellow he was with refuses to talk about the incident to this day .
The major proof (IMO) the film is real, is the tallness of the whole upper body, if that were a mask the head wouldn't turn when the torso turns. And you clearly see the head moves and turns slightly, before the torso. That would not be possible were it a guy wearing some costume, he simply wouldn't be tall enough, so how does the head turn/move...? Simple, it's a real Bigfoot, not a suit. This is really so simple, you only need to look and study Patty's body carefully, it's no 'mystery'.
Yes this footage is a hoax. For I have research this footage and found other men taken out of the footage and Mr. Gimlin was behind the tree and not on a horse. And I even made a copy of the head from this footage and yes this footage is a hoax and I have the proof to back it.
LMAO, Hilarious! Are you for real???? That face video is pathetic, the Patterson bigfoot is visible from top of head to bottom of feet, including toes, hips, shoulders, elbows, knees, wrists, ankles and fingers, it cannot be duplicated by anyone, obviously not by you, either. Thank you for doing that little comparison, though, it definitely shows how difficult it would be to try hoax a bigfoot, face, from the front, in the dark, with bad lighting.
You know the funny thing about what you said is this bigfoot has toes only on the right foot and not on the left foot. And like the still photo of the back of the bigfoot you can see the face of Mr. Gimlin in the trees and he is only about 5ft away from the bigfoot. And you can see the outline from the costume of shoulder pads. And you can see the image of a man walking off to the right in the footage. And you can see a hat come in and out of the footage. All I said can be seen in the footage.
Wait, I thought the guy who wore it in the film said that it was a football helmet with a Halloween mask on it, how come that doesn't make any sense, honey?
He's changed his mind...NOW it's Wah Chang that made the suit! His source?? "Deefoot"...a guy for whom he has no real name! It seems that Long was lied to by Morris...but he believes that Heironimus is STILL telling the truth!! Wha?? He tells me there is a story told by locals of Patterson claiming a Bigfoot lifted his truck! He says it's in his book-even with a drawing of it! I told him I had the book right in front of me, and that NO such drawing appeares at ALL
He then tells me that the photo of Patterson at Ape Canyon was taken in a neighbours back yard. The pic depicts Patterson in front of a campfire, all of his gear strewn about, and two horses behind him. This was taken, he says, in a lady's back yard! He's been pissing on about how painstakingly researched Long's book was, and in the next breath, tells me that Long was duped by Morris...Morris was lying! Wha!?
Okay, I'm convinced now. Bigfoot exists. Let's spread the word.
Now if we could only prove the existence of the Loch Ness Monster, or have a kraken rise from the deep to snatch a Norwegian fishing vessel to the bottom of the sea.
ok there is no such of a creature as bigfoot.ok by now someone would have come across some bones or a dead one by this time. untill one is captured or shot then i will bel...
Patterson goes out in search of Bigfoot for his documentary and takes camera along with him but never takes a rifle for safety. You know if he had shot that bigfoot and brought it down We would have believed him but this video is not convincing enough. The funniest part is that bigfoot turn back at them and yet there is a horse by patterson but still bigfoot walks like he doesn't care. I'm pretty sure if there was a real bigfoot lot of shit would have happend.
You're facts are a little off...Patterson and Gimlin BOTH had 30.06 rifles with them, but agreed to use them only for protection. The fact that they approached on horseback may be why they got so close. "there is a horse by patterson but still bigfoot walks like he doesn't care"...why would a horse be a threat? The animal would be familiar with horses owuldn't it? Aren't there wild stallions in the Pacific North West?
Show me Bigfoot the way you can show me a lion or a seal, or that the Dodo, while extinct, existed. Don't tell me I have to believe that some guy who happened to be trying to make a Bigfoot documentary happens to be the only person who ever encountered a Bigfoot while equipped with a working camera and the forethought to use it.
I'm not saying Bigfoot doesn't exist or never existed; I'm not omniscient. It's just that this video just isn't that compelling, and it certainly isn't evidence.
You really should look into this video and the history before you make a judgement. This was 1967 and no one can repeat it. You can see muscle movement and costumes just can't do that. I don't even think they can replicate this video today. It makes you wonder if it is a hoax, then why can't anyone do it again? They didn't even attempt something this realistic and compelling in the movie, Planet of Apes made in the same time period.
There's no good reason for me to believe anything other than a guy filmed a man in a suit pretending to be Bigfoot. The onus on proving the existence of a legendary creature rests upon those who believe in it; not those who doubt it. One grainy video from forty years ago hardly constitutes overwhelming evidence.
There's a reason why people who take scant, dubious evidence and from it extract a solid foundation for a belief are laughed at; such practices are laughable.
P.S. I have read about this history of this video.
You have to remember that instead of believing that perhaps someone skillfully fabricated what people to believe to be a credible example of Bigfoot you are choosing instead to believe that Bigfoot exists, when there is no other useful evidence.
If this is the most damning evidence of Bigfoot you must ask yourself: is this enough?
Gorillas and other animals were considered myths. They were about to put the Gorilla on the endangered species list, not realizing there were 150,000 hiding. I am NOT 100% sure this film is geniune. Based on the evidence in my opinion, it being a hoax is highly unlikely. There were also footprints at the scene so the video is not the only evidence. I just don't think those two guys are clever enough to do it. I find it odd that no one else can duplicate it. Why is that so hard?
That a creature considered to be myth or nearly extinct is found to be real or abundant in number has no applicability. Bigfoot either exists or it doesn't, and there is either evidence to support its existence or there isn't. This video just isn't that compelling to me and I find these statements that 'no one else can duplicate it' to be dubious and falsely convincing. Many hoaxes have been difficult or impossible to duplicate; but were still hoaxes.
Its up to you whether you want to think it is a hoax or not. It hasn't been proven to be a hoax. I personally think it is a real bigfoot based on the evidence. I am not 100% sure, but based on the facts, it seems unlikely that it is a hoax. And based on the evidence in general for Bigfoot. The evidence suggests there are other primates living amongst us. Perhaps there isn't. I guess it will just remain a mystery unless a body is presented.
Yah and where is the costue in that case? m sure if they knew how big there footage was, they would kee the suit. I dont think it can ever be duplicated, unless u skin an actual sasquatch and where its body but that disgusting. =p
Its not the best footage of bigfoot. There a very recent Thermal Video Capture from a BFRO field research team that make it clear that a Large, Bipedal, apelike mammal is hiding behind a bush, peering over at the camp sight. It actually eventually walks upright from a crouched position and walks quickly into the deper bush. Now u might say its a man in a monkey suit but the figure was glowing all over. a suit would not be as warm as an average person no matter how much heat ur giving off.
Yah, The sixtys didnt have the addvanced technology we have today and WE cant even create a suit that is that well detailed. Its impossible for it to be a costume. Plus, Ive seen people in monkey suits and the arms are o way as long as Patty's, also whenever ive seen people walk around in a monkey suit, there movements alway end up sort of mechanical. Patty's movements are smooth and natural.
You know nothing of this topic and should withdraw. This is a film of a man in a bad hair suit, filmed by a dishonest man who made a living ripping off everyone he dealt with.
Yes. There is documentation of Roger's shady past. There is documentation (later used in court) of the $700 that Roger borrowed from the Radford's to make his original bigfoot film, which he later refused pay. There are also pictures from reel two of Bob Heironimus with Bob Gimlin (posing as an Indian tracker) along with Roger. I could go and on....this isn't a bigfoot, sorry!
I like how people act like it's ridiculous to not being convinced that a creature whose carcass or bones seem to have never been found/identified lives amongst us and that some grainy video of what certainly could be a man in a suit is overwhelming and irrefutable proof.
0:50 - 0:52 here is the famous non existant butt crack that sceptics say doesent show in the footage, its right there glaring at us, allthough it doesent look like a Gorilla Buttcrack, it look Human, but then again Sasqs is alledgely much more Humanlike than Gorillas in all aspects so. there you have it.
It's very easy for most peaple to say it's fake or a monkey suite because monkeys and gorillas is the only thing they are familiar with. When if ever the day comes that a bigfoot is finally in captivity then they will beleive,but for the time being it's a waste of time trying to convince otherwise.
Honestly, the more this footage is color-corrected, enhanced, enlarged, speed-adjusted and stabilized, the more it just looks like a guy in an ape suit ...
There's one tantalizing piece of evidence in favor of the existence of bigfoot; the detail. I saw Monsterquest, and they discovered many new things about the movements of it, including the way the mouth moves, among numerous other minute details. Why in the heck would someone put all of that time and effort into a costume that would be shot from hundreds of yards away? This is very intriguing indeed and really makes you wonder about what is really on the Patterson/Gimlin film...
Why do the hoaxers take the risk of having the big football player in a monkey suit look at the camera, did they know 60's technology was rubbish?
njuham 1 month ago
You can clearly see flexing muscle movement in the thigh, I've made fur suits for 30 years some of them gorilla and even a Bigfoot suit which I made for a 1998 BBC documentary. We could not replicate the Patterson film after spending thousands and thousands ,If ur telling me make up artists and high tech material of today cannot copy it What a chance in hell have they got?. No amount of padding on Bob heironimus would show what we see here ,Padding does not stretch the material does not stretch
suitsyouDesign64 2 months ago
00:45 Someone send that still into RateMyRack.
HaligonianType1 3 months ago
Got any proof of that...? Other than that, I do agree they're not apes/animals per se but an unknown human species, flesh and blood and all that jazz....
komodoman 11 months ago
Bigfoot and Yeti are not animals, they are primitive beings from distant star systems.there planet died out 1000s of years ago. so they were bought to
earth for survival purposes by the celestial beings of light.they will leave earth shortly
as a new planet is now being prepared for them. they are highly intelligent can run very fast and are extremely powerful, they can survive on planets which wud kill humans.
vaj99 1 year ago
Yep! That's Bob H in the suit. Anyone who thinks it's real contact me about a bridege in NYC I have for sale LOL
ratpackvegas 1 year ago
Close examination reveals the seams in the costume.
brianbuck70 1 year ago
@brianbuck70 Close examinations have revealed NO seams in the suit...at all...National Geographic did an analysis of the BEST footage they could find...a copy of the film right from Patterson's widow...each frame was closely scrutinized, prompting Peter Burke from the Henson Creature fx Shop to say "I have NO idea how they would have made this suit in 1967." Burke observed flexing achilles tendons, calf flexing, and lat movement...
joeyvader 1 year ago
Yes. Everything on BobH's body fits Patty about as much as a hippo in a matchbox. To me it's especially his torso giving his junk status away with bells on, there's no way he or any other man could reach her head to pop it inside one of those adorable Chang masks the opposition revels in so madly. It's simply flatout not doable, and it's not doable cos Patty as far as I can tell, sports the exact anatomy description witnesses give on the BFs. Failing to be BF has never been easier knowing this.
komodoman 1 year ago
I watched this footage with the vid of Bob H in the list to the right, where I could directly compare the proportions. Bob H is so far off from the subject in the Patterson film it isn't even funny. The proportions are impossible to fit into one another. Those who think they are the same are seriously stubborn individuals who just want to have something they can claim is "proof" that there is no bigfoot. Too bad the "proof" is so lame, huh?
narfanoid 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hi there, that bozo's still around and posting as usual under a landslide of different names also, lately accusing some of us of sending threats! What a big loser. lol
komodoman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nastymonster
lol you're an idiot.
you are the type of moron who thinks they have all the answers to all things because you can look at an old piece of Bigfoot footage and discover "evidence" that is is not real. Interesting how no one else in 40 years has mentioned anything about ass tissue not jiggling around. Go kill yourself IdiotMonster
MoonmanAlpha 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
nastymonster, you're one indeed. Actually, Patty's arms and her too long Humerus bones are one of the key points in proving her real, since suit arms no matter how much padding outwards are always operated by the actor himself (due to being stuck to his own body for natural reasons), except in this case where the arms begin/swing at the ends of way too broad shoulders for a guy inside to reach over. Plus her long torso doesn't make human sense, so him reaching any part incl. the head is a no-no.
komodoman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@komodoman
Well said! It is impossible to replicate hand movement if the shoulders and arms are just padding! Where is eminidiot these days?
LORDGODSIRALEXFERGIE 1 year ago
@nastymonster
Laws of anatomy?? Where do I find those?
PostToastie 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nastymonster
That's really cool that you figured all of that out all by yourself.
What kind of glue did they use and how long did it take them to glue all of those individual hairs onto her skin? Amazing, Thanks for watching.
PostToastie 1 year ago
They most certainly exist, and they'd snap your neck before you'd ever pull the trigger - berta...that 8footer running your way would make you crap your pants...
komodoman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
They most certainly exist, and they'd snap your neck before you'd ever pull the trigger - berta...that 8footer running your way would make you crap your pants...
komodoman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
facebook.com/Tennessee.Bigfoot
guionlawes 1 year ago
but have you seen bighands
it lives near the loch ness monster in scotland
its got big hands
jackhowiedocherty 1 year ago
@jackhowiedocherty ..have u seen big runners from maawillaru?..he is resting in nandikadaal lagoon! he abandoned us all on mulathive beach & ran to save his psuusy/eelam!
deadleader1 1 year ago
jackhowiedocherty 1 year ago
@jackhowiedocherty
gotama is the ultimate deadleader
think about the consequences of that
jackhowiedocherty 1 year ago
annaa..country come first,gautama & his teaching comes second! sinhalses die 4 contry not 4 goutama!
altimate dead leader abandoded u all on mulathive beach &on run,thanks to budhist tamils are alive ( after resquing them from ltte`s dead leader velu )in this island!
deadleader1 1 year ago
@deadleader1
nobody abandoned me
i am british
jackhowiedocherty 1 year ago
seymour, you're the blindest of all the gullible pretenders here yet, ever... Well, you and your alter ego deiter... You obviously don't understand what possible oand what's not in f/x, because you clearly choose to be this ignorant. Fine, but read banthamobile's post there.
komodoman 1 year ago
I have looked at this film many times and I can't say for sure what it is, if it is a man in a costume it is not a simple pull on Halloween costume but something that you'd need to have a full body cast made for and someone with the exact physique. This does not mean that it isn't fake however, the ones who took the shot were not in a position to be paying someone for something this elaborate.
schizoidboy 1 year ago
seymour used to troll here as deiter-something...
komodoman 1 year ago
There's detail because it's not a guy in an ape suit... Check for details in all - any - Bigfoot monster movie ever made, and ever going to be made with suits...no detail, no muscle movement and all human anatomy. That's the only suit reality there is, seymour, the only. Makes no sense to debate that. Case really ought to be closed by now, except for the denying dreamers, this shows a real Bigfoot. Case closed. Next subject.
komodoman 1 year ago
A lot of detail? Where? Where's the details in filming a few seconds of some guy in an ape suit walking around? Patterson rented an ape suit and a camera to film a movie about bigfoot---that detail tells you all you need to know about this film.
seymourbbest 1 year ago
@seymourbbest
Why are you so obsessed with debunking??? All the more strange as you are losing credence daily because you cant put forward a hypothesis any more structured than "its a guy in a rented ape suit"
LORDGODSIRALEXFERGIE 1 year ago
its alot of detail for a bunch of folks to go threw with the camera they used back IN THE 60S WHILE MOVING ON A HORSE. but with todays help look what we have.
if they had all been in on it they wouldnt have had to try so hardto get the detail, I believe this is a female bigfoot I think its really is possible to fake a big foot now but this just isent one I would ever call a FAKE. IT REALLY LOOKS TO BE THE REAL THING. IM A BELIEVER.
letsbeefriendsok 1 year ago
Meldrum's not keeping anything alive, he speaks when he's asked on a subject he knows more about than anyone around here, primate locomotion... Nor is this an Indian legend, all races have encountered them. The only one keeping anything alive is you seymour, a myth about an elusive ape beast that's actually human reality... You'll see.
komodoman 1 year ago
Well I'm not taking any money to say bigfoot isn't real. Meldrum makes money by keeping the myth alive. I'd say that does give ME a bit more credibility.
seymourbbest 1 year ago
Jeez, you're full of it seymour... lol Saying it's all a hoax like you've studied it like Meldrum has...
komodoman 1 year ago
How were they wrong, all 'these men'...seymour? Gimlin was there, sole man on the scene still alive. In other words, it's probably all about some sort of local jealousy thing, six-pack guys like DeAtley or whoever don't give a toss about Bigfoot or the subject, they're as indifferent to it as you or most other skeptics... More so, I guess, which means they're rolling with laughter at the suckers believing them of all people...
komodoman 1 year ago
@seymourbrest
Why single out Biscardi? Geez, don't you know about his involvement with the Georgia hoax? How about those other silly pictures he was connected to?
Biscardi is not one of the classic figures of 'bigfootry'. I've been interested in bigfoot for over 30 years and I'd never even heard of Biscardi until a few years ago.
Green, Dahinden, Byrne, Krantz, Titmus, Patterson etc etc are all far more reknowned than nutjob Biscardi.
FredFoswell 1 year ago
Plenty of people have been at it longer than Biscardi, there's Green or Byrne for two. Comparing Meldrum to showmen like Biscardi is an insult, quite frankly. lol
komodoman 1 year ago
lol, seymour...if PGF's the first where are the follow-ups...? What's your answer there, if a 'bad' suit, why aren't we flooded with similar films? You know very well, that having neither a POTA ape or HarryH - in total body view - stroll along a forest path in broad daylight, wouldn't convince anyone... I find it strange that serious people want to delude themselves so much, and only have the line 'there is no proof of Bigfoot' to say. We have tons of good reasons why not.
komodoman 1 year ago
@seymourbrest
""Besides with 3500 bigfoot in the USA ,according to Biscardi,why don't we have other film?""
Biscardi is a nutjob and a hoaxer. Serious bigfoot enthusiast don't listen to him so why should you as a bigfoot scoftic?
FredFoswell 1 year ago
@seymourbrest
""We discuss it because it was the first Bigfoot film anybody faked""
I see you didn't watch the recent NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC special on the Patterson footage? The scientific analysers didn't come to that conclusion. They supported the probablity of it's authenticity.
But hey, why listen to scientific analysis when folks can listen to ignorant armchair amateurs like you, seymourbrest??
FredFoswell 1 year ago
Seymour, good point - why is this the only film we discuss...? If it's a bad suit, or even a good one, why aren't we talking about any other...? Where are they if this is a suit, shouldn't we be knee deep in clever hoaxes...? All Hollywood Bigfoots look like what they are, men in suits with tall human bodies and none of them would pass as real under similar conditions as PGF. Just try it, HarryH or whoever, all obvious fakes. BH couldn't be Patty for dozens of reasons.
komodoman 1 year ago
Yes Seymour, except it's never done as Patty appears...basically, she's outside human reach with those massive shoulders and probably 7ft. tall. Padding or sticks for arms won't do it, not when you can't even reach over to fill them...Humerus arm bone's longer too. All movie ape monsters are well within human anatomy, otherwise you couldn't operate the arms. They're all legs too unlike Bigfoots, the only thing making an actor tall; legs.
komodoman 1 year ago
Damn, you really have no clue do you, nasty... lol Patty's torso's her tall part and BlopH is not built that way, in order for him to function inside a suit like that they'd need to cut him in half... Shoulder to shoulder width is also massive, making it impossible for one's own shoulders to reach over...not only that, but the arms begin where the shoulders end. They're clearly swinging but a human couldn't fill, or reach as said, upper arm bones too long too. No fake.
komodoman 1 year ago
It certainly supports its reality, and not only that but her figure is not typical of human-made movie Bigfoot monsters, they all have that typical lanky human shape - she does not. She's all muscle and bone, different anatomy with too wide shoulders for a human faker to reach across with his own arms. Patty's arms begin where shoulders end, no padding. Upper arm bone is longer than our own making it even more not doable, head also positioned too far outwards, all impossible factors for fakery.
komodoman 1 year ago
Call me crazy, but I always maintained the one single best piece of evidence for this being credible is the fact that this creature has breasts. Think about this for a moment. If this indeed were suit, why on earth would you add breasts? It just does not seem logical to me as a thought process for a couple of guys constructing a costume of a bigfoot. It seems like a detail that would be such an afterthought, such an unneccessary thing that it kind of makes me scratch my head, always has.
jasonjmj 1 year ago
@jasonjmj Just a thought; Maybe they wanted to throw in that detail to add to the believability: to create the kind of question that you just raised.
splatterviz 1 year ago
Quite a bit of foresight there. The only problem with that is that I have never really seen many other bring up the point. I guess you can present opinions in any way that would support your beliefs. I love the sophistication these 2 men had back in 1963. They should have been working in Hollywood if this is indeed a hoax, because it is some of the best executed, well thought out, detailed and proffessional con job maybe of all time. I still think its real though.
jasonjmj 1 year ago
jasonjmj: I agree.
kapacon 1 year ago
@jasonjmj I don't think there was alot of sophistication, just a well made (yes, Hollywood quality) padded suit. Whoever made the suit probably did supply them to hollywood. I think it was definitley well thought out.
splatterviz 1 year ago
@jasonjmj Just another thought on sophistication. I've seen stuff on Youtube where they'll take a track, or Patty's hands, and try to say that it couldn't of been done without high tech animitronics. Then they jump from there to "lets consider if this was possible in '63." Well, it probably wasn't possible (or practical) but the notion that animitronics HAD to have been used is flawed, IMO. Don't know if that's where you were going, just my .02.
splatterviz 1 year ago
ki andar sexy...kkkkkkkkkkk
SargentoBombarda 2 years ago
What do U guys think of Bigfoot hunter Chester Moore? The weirdo wants to bag one, & serve the scientists with a body, the very same scientists who think he's a freakin' goofball. Why do them a favor, be no hero anyway, just a footnote in history as the unlikeable guy who killed a Bigfoot. Even if a hunter gets a Bigfoot in his crosshairs, imagine it charges you, I don't think any person would stand his ground. You'd not know whether you'd die or it dies, way too risky. Survival juices set in...
komodoman 2 years ago
Yes, if a fingerprint expert like Jimmy Chilcutt (one of the best in that biz) says something's not fake then it damn well is real. :) Now, whether the skeptics still choose to be skeptical that's their problem, not ours.
komodoman 2 years ago
Hmm, it's good because it's no suit actually... Those feet are quite obviously not shoes or fake feet, but definitely the real thing. It's no full body suit or in parts, it's a real hairy body of a at least 7ft tall Bigfoot, spotty as life in the wilderness would be. Skin showing through all the hair, as the sun beams hit and the muscles flex.
komodoman 2 years ago
Not saying that I believe in this shit but I have great computer software that I run, can do all kinds of shade, fade, shadow and color stuff. At 0:39 freeze the image in 1/2 stride and you will see the underside of the foot. The software I am using clearly shows defined toes and heel. Again, not saying I believe but Damn good job on the suit....
dikinallholes 2 years ago
Good detective work! And it's a suit alright---a birthday suit courtesy of Mother Nature!
kapacon 2 years ago
@dikinallholes anyway you could send me a freeze of the you mentioned?
jshroom32 2 years ago
@dikinallholes "one" sorry
jshroom32 2 years ago
No, it's not strange at all, they're probably rarer than bears. There's tracks with dermal ridges on them that can't be faked, it's next to impossible. And any faker couldn't be certain it'd be found before the elements got to it, which pretty much also conclusively destroys the claim that all tracks are fakes. Sightings may not be the scientific proof most want, but unless the witnesses are lying or 'seeing things', then skeptics must start acting reasonably and accepting the possibility.
komodoman 2 years ago
Thank you for very fair response and not going straight to name calling like the majority of people do on YouTube. I would never say that it is impossible that Bigfoot exists, but I will say that it is extremely unlikely that to this day no strong evidence exists. Funny you bring up tracks. I have a friend who's Grandpa faked some Bigfoot tracks in Willow Creek, Ca. He never admitted that it was fake until much later out of fear of getting in trouble from the large reaction. True story!
sgberta 2 years ago
I think things like this video could have easily been the same as the story about my friend's grandfather. Patterson could have likely been in the same situation.
sgberta 2 years ago
no patterson was dying in the early 70s and maintaned on his death bed that the creature was real. by that point there was no reason to lie. some will say he wanted money for his widow but thats a pretty harsh aligation. alot of tracks are fake but many are real according to certain scientists that study these things.
tonyagrestic 2 years ago
Oh yes everyone will believe tha story , ladies and gentleman i present to you sgberta THE NEXT BOB . H lol ... idiot
Masa5628 2 years ago
I find it hilarious that people really believe that there is a "Bigfoot". You don't find it suspicious that after all of this time, there has been no proof that has arisen stronger than this film? I was born and raised near the area where this footage was shot. There are a ton of hunters and a ton of pot growers in this area. If there really was a Bigfoot, someone would have shot one and there would be a body by now.
sgberta 2 years ago
Like a pot grower is going to go to the authorities about seeing or shooting one, ain't gonna happen, pot growers don't go to the authorities for ANYTHING, and hunters don't shoot anything they don't have a license for. NEXT
PostToastie 2 years ago
There are many hunters who have had sightings, and even had them in their scopes...they all say the same thing..."It was too human to shoot...."
joeyvader 2 years ago
@PostToastie
'You cant prove a negative!' as the saying goes! Hopefully somebody will shoot a pot grower and show the corpse to the authorities and ask - "is this a druggie, or is it a bigfoot?"
LORDGODSIRALEXFERGIE 1 year ago
there are also tons of people who have seen them and shot at them
tonyagrestic 2 years ago
@sgberta i don't think its so funny after two close encounters. they know you are there WAY before you know they are there...........
sarabuffalo1 1 year ago
@sgberta people have leveled rifles at them but paused because of how man-like they looked. Until you have one in the sight of a rifle STFU!
guionlawes 1 year ago
@guionlawes I never will have a Bigfoot in the sight of a rifle because they do not exist...
sgberta 1 year ago
@sgberta I find it hilarious that someone who is'nt even remotely interesting, would even stop by, let alone post about what they don't believe...I know you posted over a year ago.. ....here's the deal for me......this footage is the most interesting thing to ever come about this idea of a creature, but the Native Americans of the great North spoke about and painted about the idea of this creature, yet how could they even imagine an animal that does'nt resemble anything they've seen?
revskull 1 year ago
@revskull The ancient Egyptians drew pictures of people with bird and dog heads, it doesn't mean they are real. Let me put it this way: What is more likely? People have found clever ways to fake the existence of a "Bigfoot" for financial gain or that a species of giant bipedal apes has existed in the American Northwest for the thousands of years that people have also inhibited that area and no physical evidence has ever been found?
sgberta 1 year ago
@sgberta That makes a lot of sense, now if you could just inhibit your head from inhabiting your anal cavity.
PostToastie 1 year ago
@PostToastie By going to name calling, you make yourself look bad. I'm not going to digress to a pissing match like the majority of people do on Youtube. I welcome a rebuttal to my comment if you have one.
sgberta 1 year ago
@PostToastie ~Original comment that is
sgberta 1 year ago
@sgberta 1. Of course some people have used the existence of bigfoot for their own profit, Boob Herroneous is a perfect example of that kind of lying for greed. You kind of seem to omit the fact that there are thousands and thousands of people that have filed sighting reports around the world for no financial gain at all.
2. No physical evidence? /user/4jaimeavalos#p/u watch for yourself. That's just one individual, unfunded, unofficial bigfoot researcher. Find some others, there are many.
PostToastie 1 year ago
@PostToastie Thank you for that very fair response. I am looking more into the subject. My opinion hasn't changed but I will admit that there are some very interesting perspectives/ideas. My natural reaction to your first point would be that in a world of several billion, it would be expected to have hoaxes and misidentifiations in large amounts as well ( 1 hoax or misidentification per million people equates to several thousand worldwide). That is how I see it. Best wishes and take care.
sgberta 1 year ago
@sgberta From what I can tell, having watched many youtube bigfoot researchers' videos, I must say that Jaime Avalos seems too be the one that has the stuff. His scientific approach combined with his uncanny ability to understand the patterns that the groups he is studying adhere to as they wander around the Sierras and his survival skills used during his frequent overnight field research trips have made him the foremost field researcher in the nation. 1000s of reports and not one is true? hmmm.
PostToastie 1 year ago
@sgberta I believe that it is fairly bold to say that 100% of all official bigfoot reports filed by policemen are hoaxes or mis-identifications. In order to say that, you would have to have researched all bigfoot reports, I have at least read thousands of them including this one, not by a policeman. /watch?v=GAKhvk6L6-w If you can suffer through watching 4.5 minutes of another video of mine I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts about that story and many of the others that you have read.
PostToastie 1 year ago
@PostToastie If you are going to say that a large amount of claims implies that some are true, then wouldn't you also have to believe in ghosts, alien abductions, etc... I'm sure you would agree that many more people have claimed to have seen ghosts than have claimed to have seen Bigfoot. Does that mean that some claims are true and ghosts exist? If not ghosts, what about mermaids. There is a long documented history of mariners reporting to have seen mermaids. Does that imply mermaids exist?
sgberta 1 year ago
@sgberta
I have not researched the existence of ghosts, but they may indeed exist, I try to keep an open mind about such things and I have not been to the mermaid sighting website, but would love to read some of the recent reports, if you could please send me the link I would not mind researching those reports a bit. Thanks for watching.
PostToastie 1 year ago
@PostToastie Any time I mention sightings from law enforcement, the reply I invariably get is "Well...one of the guys in Georgia was a cop.' as an anawer... The implication is, that, ipso facto, ALL cops who file Bigfoot reports are liars, because of the Georgia hoax...
joeyvader 1 year ago
@revskull inhabited*
sgberta 1 year ago
By rating it down, emina, you know I'm right. The truth hurts, so the child in you demands you react, we all know that.
'Science, what's that', you can almost hear emina quietly asking herself this bugging question...
komodoman 2 years ago
BobH is simply not tall enough to have been Patty, not only is she taller she's also wider. And what does this mean, it means he could not reach the insides he'd have to reach (arms/head), in order to work the costume. Hence, no suit, thus, real creature.
komodoman 2 years ago
zat art blakey?? i want that song
bobos01 2 years ago
No, it's in color film originally.
komodoman 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Was the original black and white and the color added later? Anyone know where you can get the original in digital form?
jigglesnap 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
if it was real, what religious implications would it have? they'll just say it's another one of god's creatures, end of story...so what the bible doesn't mention them, it doesn't mention gorillas either. and what scientific implications? most of science is going on theories that change all the time anyways. did the world turn upside down when they discovered gorillas were real? no, they just added them to the books and moved on. evolution asks you to take as many leaps of faith as any religion
rikk06 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Immense implications----we thought we were the only example of our species. If this is a primitive version of us, and can produce viable offspring through artificial insemination, then we have the potential to create a subspecies of ourselves. What are the moral and ethical standards we will set for the treatment of these "lesser" beings? Will we enslave them, or maybe breed them just for donor body parts? Will some seek to murder them out of fear? The implications are huge.
kapacon 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
I fail to see how this animal would be any closer in relation to us then other great apes.
The idea that man is separated from the animal world by some great gap is arrogant. Lions and tigers are less closely related then we are to chimpanzees, yet nobody looks at them as drastically different species.
djacobox372 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'd have to disagree with you on the bible not mentioning them, read the story of esau and jacob. Esau was born as a red shaggy sheep covered head to toe and made the leader of the land of Edom. In the david and goliath story, Goliath was a slave child from the land of Edom and grew to be 9 feet tall. There's plenty of other references as well from that badly rehashed and rewritten book, the bible. 0-)
Smiter151 2 years ago 3
I'm curious rikk if you've watche the vid
Patterson film, The Gluts
yet.
It's not like you have anything to fear by seeing the original still from the film instead of copies. Unless of course by analyzing something correctly you fear you would be proven wrong. 0-)
Smiter151 2 years ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
....corraling it's prey like i've seen other primates do. that or it's vegetarian. a 400 bi-pedal creature in the bush = slow. what would it do? grab the deer and rip it apart or bite it? or does it know enough to use sharp edges of rock or something? lets look at what kind of food sources would be needed to support say a family or multi-family units of these large creatures. are they just an ape, or are they more like us?are they top of the food chain? or is a brown bear able to kill one? etc
rikk06 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thats funny people have to turn to insults to get their point across, i won't stoop that low. but yes when they made the suit/costume they did indeed model it after a gorilla, and they did replicate a gorilla buttocks. lets suppose for a second that this bipedal creature is real. how fast do bipedal creatures move in the bush? not very fast as compared to four legged predator's like wolves or bears. it's unlikely one creature alone would run down a deer lets say. it would have to hunt in groups
rikk06 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i have issues about it's ass mechanics. it looks like it has a big ass, whatever it is. so it should have a big ass crack, clearly seperating two rather distincts buttocks. so see where the upper leg attaches to said butt cheek, it should move all together, instead the butt stays relatively still. thats my beef. and if those are big ol flabby female sasquatch titty, they would flap or bounce or something...of course maybe it's just footage of a naked italian woman in the woods =P
rikk06 2 years ago
search tube for a video titled.......Patterson film, The Gluts...........and you can see the seperation in the gluteus muscles rather easily.
Smiter151 2 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
i think they are trying to say that the material the suit is made out of sometimes bends and buckles, resembling muscle contraction. but it has already been said it is 1967 era football padding and helmet under the suit. so clearly you can see that the whole body from shoulder to buttocks doesn't move very much as it walks... also it's reaction to seeing whoever shot the footage was all too casual. it's walking is too good as it doesn't break stride once suggesting a consumate actor underneath.
rikk06 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
look rikk, we appreciate the fact that you have an opinion, but really you're just parroting other people cause it's something you're willing to believe in. It's not about belief and that vid Kap referenced you to clearly shows detail you can't attribute to a suit. Stay stupid if you'd like, McDonalds will always need someone to work the drive-thru. 0-)
dragonsidheblade 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Look up: "Patterson film, the gluts", and see the stabilized frames of the glutes. Primateer could at least get his spelling of "gluts" correct so the old myth of the "no ass crack" would be put to rest.
kapacon 2 years ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm also curious if you've watched that vid we referenced you to several times now....
Patterson film, The Gluts
Cause I'm thinking that might help you see things you can't in the copies of the film plastered all over youtube.
Smiter151 2 years ago 9
This has been flagged as spam show
i was watching this on DVR and paused it to go grab a drink, and when i came back my nephew asked why Patty had no fingers on her left hand, only a thumb. It had been stopped in the perfect spot where the right hand his behind, and the left hand is forward. Clearly the fingers are missing. Maybe a bear trap or something? If not, they forgot to cut off the guy wearing the costumes fingers.Since there arent any in the still frame. i sent it to Colman and Meldrum and got no response.Its no suit!!
Delo9762 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I can why u would asume that. But at 0.53sec the left hand goes behind the back, just before the scene ends, and i see a perfect hand right there.
I think its because of the angel, that u get that missing finger look.
But u can see its not a fake by looking at its toes.
The are bending upwards when it walks.
U can not fake that unless u have the biggest feet in the world.
And only bigfoot has that ;)
luffebassen 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The toes have a look of "bending upwards" because the fake hair is tossed up as the man in the suit moves his foot up and then the air keeps the fake foot hair up as the foot comes down.
XXXFirebird76XXX 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
even hollywood cant produce a suit that detailed and remember its the 1960s. Bob Hironias claimed it was him in the video but He lied for a piece of fame. This video is authentic and Patterson held to it being real right to the end of his life. Signs and wonders were predicted and this is one of them
cammybammy 2 years ago 10
This has been flagged as spam show
Listen skeptics; if your (US) Government can lie to you about many a thing - and many of you undoubtedly believe they do - don't you think they'd be able to lie to you about this primate? No biggie. I'm not saying they do, but if they (can) lie about anything they don't want you to know, (ie other life forms) it'd be easy to deny something like this.
komodoman 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CHeck out the debate further at w w w. pattersonfilm . com
it shed a lot of light on the subject.
knuckledragger001 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
The Star Trek "Gorn" suit from 1966 and various 1930s Tarzan-movie chimp suits directly refute the contention that the figure in this film has musculature of a kind not possible in a suit. I recommend visiting the JREF Forums to investigate more closely the claims to authenticity made by proponents of this film. I used to be one such proponent, but there is a wealth of information available that shows this is a person in a suit.
Vortigern99 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We were in the deep woods and we came upon some human like foot prints in the mud at the bottom of this medow pond. I could see where it walked around in the pond looking for food, we came back just before dark and brought some food to bait this creature, the smell of the food brought him in and he made a vocalization, very loud and it was clear he wanted up to leave and leave the food for him. very scary incounter for us, we were very youong at that time(1974in N.C.)
myrio5 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Also 20sec. into this video, u can see the feet is real on how the toe`s is bending upwards on each step.
If he had some big fake feet put on, there would be no real movement.
Just a stiff foot like shoe.
luffebassen 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
the gov spent bilions and still no match of they say suit trying to cover up the fact that its real and dosent want people scared and parinored
alloutamoney 2 years ago 4
one of the vids have bigfoots hand and perfetionals said its not person nor animal
alloutamoney 2 years ago 3
I have been fascinated with this video ever since I was a little girl...mind you I was born in 1981. It is evident that there is muscle movement and you guys couldn't have said it better....people cannot put their minds around this. Our Native Americans told stories about what we know today as Bigfoot...they also drew images in caves. This shows that there have been sightings even before this film was taken...why not believe in the possible existence of a large primate? Why discard it as a hoax?
metalslave81 2 years ago 9
@metalslave81 You need to grow up. I was intrigued by the Bigfoot story as a young teenager but now realize it is a silly fairytale. Stop being gullible. Review the evidence as if your a responsible adult and you will understand.
GOODY61 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@0:25 seconds you can see BigFootina's BigFoot Boobies.
Also, you don't see the Gluteal Muscles flex
-at all.
Zapppo 3 years ago
if anyone doesn't believe that there could be another unidentified species, watch their other videos, they have found hair and DNA samples that experts can not identify as any other animal.
kirstaundead 3 years ago 7
I'm a professional costume designer and I know that it is not possible to make the muscle movements that are readily apparent in this footage. Watch it again closely...You can see the skin and muscles of the arms stretching, the muscles of the back, shoulder blades and thigh moving. This is not possible even today (I know, I do this for a living) much less back in 1967. This is a real animal, shockingly so. Bigfoot is an unknown primate seen in this video - fact.
banthamobile 3 years ago 11
Thank you for your professional opinion, unfortunately most of the skeptics here will brush it off as non-factual evidence. They just won't be able to wrap their little tiny brains around it.
PostToastie 3 years ago
I'm just glad that a few people here can put this footage under scientific scrutiny. Thanks for the fantastic enhanced video. I've never analyzed it this closely, and I have tell you I was shocked to realize this is a living animal because of its muscle physiology. You're right --it's just too traumatic for the average person to come to grips with. It's just a matter of time before scientists find a specimen, then Patterson will finally be vindicated, and skeptic idiocy will be silenced.
banthamobile 3 years ago 5
Well put.
Thanks for watching
PostToastie 3 years ago
Well I'll say this. I like the Jazz score much better then the usual Metal or Hip-Hop soundtracks that go along with these video clips.
msawbe 3 years ago
I tell u what, if this isnt real thats one hell of a costume for those days, even though thats a huge person to fit in that costume. So i think this is real, and i do beleive in bigfoot.. If there werent any bigfoot why the hell are people talking about till today and seeing sightings of it all over the world...........
wuckit 3 years ago 4
this is like a cool experimental film
joet88 3 years ago
Does anyone find it interesting that Bob Eronius put his autograph for sale on line at the outset of his "Coming out." Yet, when he was shown to be the lying fruit that he is, he took it off. As for Long, he skewered his credibility before the nation. So, he is headed the way of Whitly Schrieber. Good on the butt-licker, I say.
TheKahliff 3 years ago 6
here is the story my friend told me he is not the type to lie, he says on a cold spring morn on the way to a logging site in british columbia he and a friend (a native indian) saw an ape like creature walk across a field at apprx 150 yrds , just before the creature entered the tree line (here is the part that still sends shivers up my spine)IT BENT OVER AND PICKED UP A BABY SASQUATCH THEN DISSAPPERED INTO THE TREES ,the native fellow he was with refuses to talk about the incident to this day .
rawdog42 3 years ago 4
The major proof (IMO) the film is real, is the tallness of the whole upper body, if that were a mask the head wouldn't turn when the torso turns. And you clearly see the head moves and turns slightly, before the torso. That would not be possible were it a guy wearing some costume, he simply wouldn't be tall enough, so how does the head turn/move...? Simple, it's a real Bigfoot, not a suit. This is really so simple, you only need to look and study Patty's body carefully, it's no 'mystery'.
komodoman 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Yes this footage is a hoax. For I have research this footage and found other men taken out of the footage and Mr. Gimlin was behind the tree and not on a horse. And I even made a copy of the head from this footage and yes this footage is a hoax and I have the proof to back it.
BlevinsBI 3 years ago
LMAO, Hilarious! Are you for real???? That face video is pathetic, the Patterson bigfoot is visible from top of head to bottom of feet, including toes, hips, shoulders, elbows, knees, wrists, ankles and fingers, it cannot be duplicated by anyone, obviously not by you, either. Thank you for doing that little comparison, though, it definitely shows how difficult it would be to try hoax a bigfoot, face, from the front, in the dark, with bad lighting.
PostToastie 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You know the funny thing about what you said is this bigfoot has toes only on the right foot and not on the left foot. And like the still photo of the back of the bigfoot you can see the face of Mr. Gimlin in the trees and he is only about 5ft away from the bigfoot. And you can see the outline from the costume of shoulder pads. And you can see the image of a man walking off to the right in the footage. And you can see a hat come in and out of the footage. All I said can be seen in the footage.
BlevinsBI 3 years ago
This has been missed by all those that have analized the original strip frame by painstaking frame??
joeyvader 3 years ago 5
This is real folks!
Jackinape 3 years ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
The costume is real, yes. Credit Wah Chang. He was good with headpieces.
RIP
heatherssss 3 years ago
Wait, I thought the guy who wore it in the film said that it was a football helmet with a Halloween mask on it, how come that doesn't make any sense, honey?
PostToastie 3 years ago
He's changed his mind...NOW it's Wah Chang that made the suit! His source?? "Deefoot"...a guy for whom he has no real name! It seems that Long was lied to by Morris...but he believes that Heironimus is STILL telling the truth!! Wha?? He tells me there is a story told by locals of Patterson claiming a Bigfoot lifted his truck! He says it's in his book-even with a drawing of it! I told him I had the book right in front of me, and that NO such drawing appeares at ALL
joeyvader 3 years ago
He then tells me that the photo of Patterson at Ape Canyon was taken in a neighbours back yard. The pic depicts Patterson in front of a campfire, all of his gear strewn about, and two horses behind him. This was taken, he says, in a lady's back yard! He's been pissing on about how painstakingly researched Long's book was, and in the next breath, tells me that Long was duped by Morris...Morris was lying! Wha!?
joeyvader 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Okay, I'm convinced now. Bigfoot exists. Let's spread the word.
Now if we could only prove the existence of the Loch Ness Monster, or have a kraken rise from the deep to snatch a Norwegian fishing vessel to the bottom of the sea.
animalcookie 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
damn, Patty's got a phat ass
citystar2318 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ok there is no such of a creature as bigfoot.ok by now someone would have come across some bones or a dead one by this time. untill one is captured or shot then i will bel...
BUBBAZINEDDY 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Patterson goes out in search of Bigfoot for his documentary and takes camera along with him but never takes a rifle for safety. You know if he had shot that bigfoot and brought it down We would have believed him but this video is not convincing enough. The funniest part is that bigfoot turn back at them and yet there is a horse by patterson but still bigfoot walks like he doesn't care. I'm pretty sure if there was a real bigfoot lot of shit would have happend.
sutnam 3 years ago
You're facts are a little off...Patterson and Gimlin BOTH had 30.06 rifles with them, but agreed to use them only for protection. The fact that they approached on horseback may be why they got so close. "there is a horse by patterson but still bigfoot walks like he doesn't care"...why would a horse be a threat? The animal would be familiar with horses owuldn't it? Aren't there wild stallions in the Pacific North West?
joeyvader 3 years ago
It looks impossible to tell from the video if it's a fake or not, but you have to admit: if it's fake, then it's extremely well done.
MrMeter 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Show me Bigfoot the way you can show me a lion or a seal, or that the Dodo, while extinct, existed. Don't tell me I have to believe that some guy who happened to be trying to make a Bigfoot documentary happens to be the only person who ever encountered a Bigfoot while equipped with a working camera and the forethought to use it.
I'm not saying Bigfoot doesn't exist or never existed; I'm not omniscient. It's just that this video just isn't that compelling, and it certainly isn't evidence.
animalcookie 3 years ago
You really should look into this video and the history before you make a judgement. This was 1967 and no one can repeat it. You can see muscle movement and costumes just can't do that. I don't even think they can replicate this video today. It makes you wonder if it is a hoax, then why can't anyone do it again? They didn't even attempt something this realistic and compelling in the movie, Planet of Apes made in the same time period.
Fishqueen1972 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There's no good reason for me to believe anything other than a guy filmed a man in a suit pretending to be Bigfoot. The onus on proving the existence of a legendary creature rests upon those who believe in it; not those who doubt it. One grainy video from forty years ago hardly constitutes overwhelming evidence.
There's a reason why people who take scant, dubious evidence and from it extract a solid foundation for a belief are laughed at; such practices are laughable.
animalcookie 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
P.S. I have read about this history of this video.
You have to remember that instead of believing that perhaps someone skillfully fabricated what people to believe to be a credible example of Bigfoot you are choosing instead to believe that Bigfoot exists, when there is no other useful evidence.
If this is the most damning evidence of Bigfoot you must ask yourself: is this enough?
(hint: the answer is 'no'.)
animalcookie 3 years ago
Gorillas and other animals were considered myths. They were about to put the Gorilla on the endangered species list, not realizing there were 150,000 hiding. I am NOT 100% sure this film is geniune. Based on the evidence in my opinion, it being a hoax is highly unlikely. There were also footprints at the scene so the video is not the only evidence. I just don't think those two guys are clever enough to do it. I find it odd that no one else can duplicate it. Why is that so hard?
PatrioticEagle50 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
That a creature considered to be myth or nearly extinct is found to be real or abundant in number has no applicability. Bigfoot either exists or it doesn't, and there is either evidence to support its existence or there isn't. This video just isn't that compelling to me and I find these statements that 'no one else can duplicate it' to be dubious and falsely convincing. Many hoaxes have been difficult or impossible to duplicate; but were still hoaxes.
animalcookie 3 years ago
Its up to you whether you want to think it is a hoax or not. It hasn't been proven to be a hoax. I personally think it is a real bigfoot based on the evidence. I am not 100% sure, but based on the facts, it seems unlikely that it is a hoax. And based on the evidence in general for Bigfoot. The evidence suggests there are other primates living amongst us. Perhaps there isn't. I guess it will just remain a mystery unless a body is presented.
Fishqueen1972 3 years ago
Yah and where is the costue in that case? m sure if they knew how big there footage was, they would kee the suit. I dont think it can ever be duplicated, unless u skin an actual sasquatch and where its body but that disgusting. =p
SasquatchInformer 3 years ago
Its not the best footage of bigfoot. There a very recent Thermal Video Capture from a BFRO field research team that make it clear that a Large, Bipedal, apelike mammal is hiding behind a bush, peering over at the camp sight. It actually eventually walks upright from a crouched position and walks quickly into the deper bush. Now u might say its a man in a monkey suit but the figure was glowing all over. a suit would not be as warm as an average person no matter how much heat ur giving off.
SasquatchInformer 3 years ago
Yah, The sixtys didnt have the addvanced technology we have today and WE cant even create a suit that is that well detailed. Its impossible for it to be a costume. Plus, Ive seen people in monkey suits and the arms are o way as long as Patty's, also whenever ive seen people walk around in a monkey suit, there movements alway end up sort of mechanical. Patty's movements are smooth and natural.
SasquatchInformer 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You know nothing of this topic and should withdraw. This is a film of a man in a bad hair suit, filmed by a dishonest man who made a living ripping off everyone he dealt with.
heatherssss 3 years ago
Those are some very slanderous remarks you are making, honey, I'm sure you have plenty of proof, though, right?
PostToastie 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Yes. There is documentation of Roger's shady past. There is documentation (later used in court) of the $700 that Roger borrowed from the Radford's to make his original bigfoot film, which he later refused pay. There are also pictures from reel two of Bob Heironimus with Bob Gimlin (posing as an Indian tracker) along with Roger. I could go and on....this isn't a bigfoot, sorry!
heatherssss 3 years ago
And Iraq has many weapons of mass destruction, you may want to verify your sources a little better next time, honey. Research, research, research.
PostToastie 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I like how people act like it's ridiculous to not being convinced that a creature whose carcass or bones seem to have never been found/identified lives amongst us and that some grainy video of what certainly could be a man in a suit is overwhelming and irrefutable proof.
animalcookie 3 years ago
thats a big foot i my eyes plane a simple
theres no way thats suit no way!
450hp202turbo 3 years ago
0:50 - 0:52 here is the famous non existant butt crack that sceptics say doesent show in the footage, its right there glaring at us, allthough it doesent look like a Gorilla Buttcrack, it look Human, but then again Sasqs is alledgely much more Humanlike than Gorillas in all aspects so. there you have it.
everquestsux 3 years ago
why isnt the enhanced version ever shown in color?
mrlopez2681 3 years ago
It's very easy for most peaple to say it's fake or a monkey suite because monkeys and gorillas is the only thing they are familiar with. When if ever the day comes that a bigfoot is finally in captivity then they will beleive,but for the time being it's a waste of time trying to convince otherwise.
sicuro75 3 years ago
the only time you could have considered this a suit is in 1967 when they should this on evening news.
in 2008 this is proven to be a real humanoid
allenst 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Honestly, the more this footage is color-corrected, enhanced, enlarged, speed-adjusted and stabilized, the more it just looks like a guy in an ape suit ...
frignats 3 years ago
There's one tantalizing piece of evidence in favor of the existence of bigfoot; the detail. I saw Monsterquest, and they discovered many new things about the movements of it, including the way the mouth moves, among numerous other minute details. Why in the heck would someone put all of that time and effort into a costume that would be shot from hundreds of yards away? This is very intriguing indeed and really makes you wonder about what is really on the Patterson/Gimlin film...
retinchet 3 years ago
anyone who is saying fake is one of the following;
1-stopping by to be plain stupid.
2- an idiot in bio-mechanics.
3- a person who says NO just for sake of getting attention.
4- affraid of truth
allenst 3 years ago 2