Yup. And the proof that video or film format/stock when recording matters nothing, is in the details of both PGF and Marble Mountain, one is film the other video. Yet both subjects, evidently both real Sasquatches, walk quite the same way and appear built anatomically very similar. Fakes, no matter if video or film, all look yup fake.
The title of this clip should be "A Montage of Stills of Some Fat Retard in a bad Gorilla Suit, Cuz if you Saw an Actual Film of Him Walking You'd Laugh Your Head Off at How Sad He Looks"...
that looks nothing like pattersons bigfoot,but of course if i was making and selling bigfoot suits i to would say that i made the suit in patterson film and link my name to something so big,that was no fkn suit that is a real creature that cant be replicated
Dr. Melba Ketchum update: I thought we would be finished in a few weeks, but instead, Sasquatch threw us curve balls even with their DNA which can be as elusive as they are.We are past that! As a result, we have assembled a renowned team, each of us with our own specialties to make this project "extraordinary".If everyone will hang in there, I promise it will be worth the wait. We have the proof, now just give us the opportunity to present it in a form that will even convince skeptics.
There is a lot more definition of the Bigfoot in the Patterson footage. The Hieronimus costume looks nothing like the anatomical movement of muscles and ligaments in the subject in the Patterson film.
There is a look of fear in the creatue in the bigfoot gait analysis video at 2:56 and 2:57 where she makes two primate-like facial gestures. She walked gracefully because the flexible feet and nonlocking knees allow for this by design. Reportedly, the pace quickened as she got further away based on prints according to Meldrum's book.
They're not mere night creatures, sigthings are daytime too. They're like us, a primate wide awake 24/7 if need be, we also move about all day 'round. These fellas aren't like bears hibernating either, so no more animal thinking please. Get over that idea. BFs obviously can move when they have to, Patty decided rightly by casually strolling away, knowing there'd be real danger had she run from people with guns. Anyway, only real monsters would fire at a biped, ape or not, only in selfdefense.
Rock their attempt was laughable at best. They even refer to Gimlin as the "Michael Jordan" of Bigfooting. Their recreation only made me think it's even more obvious it's fake. Gimlin unknowingly brings up some interesting facts the scream hoax! That we wouldn't have known if they didn't go there with him. He just added a ton of more holes to his story.
@ffmcmav40 I still believe in Bob Gimlin, and especially the film. Another point that was brought up was the gracefulness of the creature versus a typical human. The muscle movement throughout the body and the breast movement, among other things is enough for me because it speaks volumes. The chatter speaks confusion, falsities, rumors, and inaccuracies that are often rooted in fear or greed.
@rockstarzep Well think of this. Bob G said remember all of this area was washed out a flood. Isn't that strange? I mean you need to film a squatch and the only place you could do it, is in a wide open space and sure enough that just where Patty "happen" to be. Also did you see how close to Bobo they were when they were filming it? Yet Patty looks so far away? And if you came into this clearing on horses and Patty was that close wouldn't she have heard, seen, smelled them from a mile away?
@rockstarzep I mean aren't we talking about the most elusive NIGHT creature of all time? Yet here they come horses jumping the creek into the only opening in the dense unpopulated forest in BROAD daylight? And according to Bob G they were only 25 ft away yet it walks? On their show every single Bigfoot hauls ass but Patty causally strolls when they are that close? See how Bobo struggles walking across the ROCKS. Wasn't patty walking across wet sand and left all these footprints? So inconsistent
The Animal Planet crew is going to analyze the hell out of the PG film on Sunday, October 30th. I challenge Bob Hearsayimanass to join them and offer his side of the story. He can even provide any costume and reinact it in any way he wants. He can have all the technology that he desires. Lets offer him or anyone the opportunity. He can have all the time he wants to prove his case.
When I see the Bigfoot Sasquatch Evidence video at 1:31 showing the muscle herniation, muscle movement, and muscle shock, and muscle density, the video discussion (which sums up everything if you believe) & the Bigfoot Gait Analysis video at 2:56 & 2:57 quick facial expressions, aspect ratios of the arms and legs to body and the long distance to the elbow bend, movement dynamics with bent knees and full turn, graceful arm movements, and even the footprints & dynamics interaction, it adds up.
Why wonder yet, retro. HD video, night vision in the search and so forth, that's all pretty recent equipment. But because it's so good now, it may not even be a researcher getting that crucial new HD bigfootage, it could be anybody from now on. So just patience okay, something tells me it's not another 40 years before the next Patty-like encounter.
@reclaimerReclaimer can you answer my question? Patterson's background is ridiculously flawed, Freeman? A known hoaxer, that prince edward island video? Shot by college FILM students. The Manitoba one? The first the guy does is refuse to release it to the public because he wanted to get paid! Those guys in Georgia fooled the "expert" who came out and said "I've seen it! It's real!" only to look like a total fool. Are we seeing a pattern here?
@ffmcmav40 There's no pattern at all. Those others you mention are fakes, yes, although Minotoba who knows as it's so poor I'd personally never published it myself. But Freeman's and Patterson's evidently not. At least PGF's been deemed either no hoax or inconclusive, by countless of experts after their detailed study. Something the naysayers have never done. Biscardi's not necessarily an expert, he's a private researcher and businessman, but it's that kind of enthusiasm the search needs.
@reclaimerReclaimer again your not denying the background and I appreciate that. I've stated before anyone can make things appear to be scientifically correct, people have been doing that for 100's of years but even after a few people claim to have real footage, why aren't their motives for producing a fake be questioned? Why is it that people turn a blind eye to a rather large significant, highly relevant piece of the puzzle? I mean if chicken little came out and said "The Sky is falling" ?????
Just show me 1 video where the film maker has nothing to gain, has no hoaxing back ground, or film back ground, etc. Just one time, just name me one instance.
They probably will be HD one day, by some local researcher out there with good gear... A big city weekend hunter with his cell phone won't catch shit, except that blurry stuff skeptics love to trash, so that's no good. Better cameras will eventually, hopefully, have a run in with a 'squatch...and voila... Just imagine a Marble Mountain video situation, only much closer and better camera...
@reclaimerReclaimer You could film one's tonsils and there will still be cries of hoax...a dead one on a table for dissection...that, and that alone, will end the debate...
@joeyvader LOL that would end the debate for you because then you would finally have some real evidence. I am just amazed how people can make such a huge leap from myth to reality with nothing but conjecture. I mean the recurring arguments are "this puppeteer said", "the suit is too high tech" etc. etc. I mean that's your argument? Nothing but peoples opinions and of those "experts" are they unbiased or Bigfoot believers? It sure seems like you guys have the fox watching the hen house.
@ffmcmav40 If you believe that the famous PhD researchers are not frauds that all happen to work together with a preconceived plan, there are consistent dynamics studies- walking, pace, gait, footprint-soil interaction, anatomy studies- aspect ratios of limbs and toes, behavioral studies, audio studies, and others that indicate apelike and humanlike traits- yet consistent enough to scientifically classify and distinguish them from humans.
@rockstarzep Are you living in a cave somwhere? Monsterquest (I believe) did an episode where they proved in an hour or so the gait and walk can easily be imitated by a human. They followed his actions with a computer as he walked and he could do it no problem. There isn't a single piece of evidence from the PGF film they can't be debunked. Maybe BF is out there but the PGF is not proof. Find some real indisputable proof and post it but you can't because there isn't. :(
Nah, retro... How can it be sheepy to go against what most people don't know the first thing about...surely they're the sheep doing the thing inside the box...
Yep, thee Bigfoot deniers are the laughing stock of YT. We're dealing with very jealous people, it's their 24/7 job to talk stupidity about the PGF because like us and everyone else they know it's too real for 1967 to be fake. This fact scares them, and so they must babble the truth away daily.
pfffft! not anywhere near Patty. in the PG film you can clearly see muscle structure in the arms and legs even in stills. every time i look at the PG film something inside my brain says it's alive, and it's the real thing. this one? pfffft! :/
@retrobloke78 Anyway, this is too easy, you have exposed yourself as the troll you are from the very beginning. Gonna go get some work done (that would be my duty, yours is pointing out flaws in Bigfoot suits. Your words, not mine), and believe in Bigfoot. Hell, I'll believe in it even more, just to piss you off. So long, worst troll ever. Try harder next time :)
@retrobloke78 Quick reply.. shocking. "Everyone is allowed an opinion". See the irony? Should I explain that too?
Why did I mention you? I watched 3 random videos, and they were filled with your comments, which was odd at first, then funny, then sad. I pointed it out. You saw it *SOMEHOW* (telepathy? it's not like you keep checking to stir shit up, right?), and I got back to you 'cause you replied and I got a notification. You didn't get one (with my 1st comment), but here you are."Get a life"??
@retrobloke78 and 1) Never seen Bigfoot. Never said I have, either. "Hahaha".
2) Never done drugs. I have a job. I'm a programmer and a college student. Leaves me no time to check on YT comments to see if anyone mentioned me. You, on the other hand...
3) "as a level headed skeptic it's my duty to". Aww man xD Thanks, Captain Truth! And Godspeed!
And I like how you hide your info so no one can see you favorited all these vids for easier access and more efficient trolling. Classic YouTube troll.
@retrobloke78 What on earth does your comment have to do with anything I said? Not that I'm surprised you did that, I just expected such a smart guy to be more subtle about his trolling every once in while. My mistake. Again: no one watching a BIGFOOT VIDEO cares about you NOT BELIEVING IN BIGFOOT. Do you walk into a church and start yelling LOL U GUYS GOD DOESN'T EXIST LOLOL? The point: you're kinda preaching to the wrong crowd, you're not converting anyone. Kudos on missing it.
I liked the part where retrobloke78 went on every single P/G video on YouTube and made it clear that Bigfoot stole his bike when he was a kid. Why are you so obsessed? If you don't believe in it, fine. Keep it to yourself, obviously no one here thinks you're smart, or funny. Go to some forum for skeptics where you can peacefuly laugh at people for thinking the footage is real, while we laugh at the fact that you're clearly unemployed and spend your entire day trolling YouTube videos. Deal?
Yes, I already understand your position, the thing is, you don't understand mine. You see? Your comment is a non-sequitur, it's not relevant to what I was saying.
Most scientists know just about zero of this subject, that's the only reason they laugh, not too many have studied it thoroughly but a handful of brave ones. matter of fact, I have it from authors of Bigfoot books, that scientists they've contacted refuse to comment fearing of ridicule - but letting it be known they're actually closet bigfooters privately... We have a long way to go yet, with a general old flat world mentality abound...
@komodoman Grover Krantz talked about his fellow anthropologists in the field of academia literally pushing footprint casts across the table back to him, and looking the other way..how frustrating would that be??
just look up the stuff on here it is a hoax whether bigfoot exists is not proven but believing patty is real is making people look stupid patterson must be up there laughing his head off !!!!
@ZaZaZarno It's a montage of pictures so nobody can do a side by side comparison with him and the Patterson subject...if you saw the actual film, you would see what a fat stumbling fool he is...and his camp knows it..
When I first saw this I laughed...hard. It's not even a film - which is an editing trick. To put it simply, it looks like a man in suit. The Patterson film made over 40 years ago, looks way more authentic.
Okay, fair enough. You have your opinion that there's not enough convincing evidence, that's cool. I'm giving this Bigfoot thing another 20 years or so, somewhere within there somebody will get lucky with a new PGF type video. If these hairy folks are really there they can't hide forever, if something exists it must be found eventually, and I'm putting high hopes in these new HD video cams out now... A close encounter out in the open like PGF and it's all over. Just one good, all it takes.
@komodoman, sincerely, I DO hope you ARE right, as that would be VERY cool! However, don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. Truly, I'd just as soon believe Israel and Iran will become close allies.
Do you really believe a film will provide proof?? You could film one of these animals right down to it's tonsils, and it would still be called a fake..Bob H. would release a montage of stills, claiming that they were HIS tonsils!! It will take a body on an autopsy table to end the debate...
Waddayoo talking about? Even if they get a good clear film of bigfoot, people will be calling it fake. And if they ever find a body, I'm sure it will disappear, and the lab results will be inconclusive.
It's bigfoot, "mysterious monster". These guys are the pan-dimensional love-children of ninjas and marines.
@komodoman Yea except all the sightings these days that are on film somehow are never done with an HD camera or the footage is blurry/shaky/too dark etc. I could have sworn that those $800 cameras had an auto focus...
I'm amazed more Patterson and Gimlin lies are being allowed here... Who knows how or why Patty did what she did 43 years ago, nobody cares either... -I swear closet bigfooters and two-faced pretend deniers are the most obsessed Bigfoot interested folk I've come across, not even real bigfooters are this active...holy s... and 'skeptics' always claim there's no burden on them to prove it fake, isn't that one big contradiction... lol We have photo proof phil, it's called the PGF or Freeman or MM...
@komodoman, "nobody cares?" If you are interested in being a critical thinker, you SHOULD care, as there are so many problems with and surrounding the back story of this Patty flick that it's hard to believe. But, Komo, I tell you one thing, IF someone produces what I would consider good photographic/video/film proof of a BF, I'd be the first to tell you I agree, and I'd readily admit I've been wrong. AND I would be THRILLED, I love new discoveries. But so far there is NO CREDIBLE case for BF!
Roger Patterson said Patty was standing still BEHIND the log jam ( 8 feet high) at the creek which is 35 feet from the woods behind her. When Boths horses reared and threw Roger from the saddle why would Patty expose herself directly infront of them and stroll 300 feet in open cover?....why wouldn't she step back and walk towards immediate cover behind the log jam?..this makes no sense. For pictures of this log jam( "JREF" Patterson film 3 )
"many say that it watched them for a time": begs the question, how so MANY could see a bigfoot "linger," yet with so many equipped with a camera, cameraphone or videocam, we've got NO photographic proof. Also, any such animal lingering at a considerable DISTANCE would long ago been mistaken for a bear, and thus shot. Yet nothing! You just can't have it BOTH ways - no fur-covered animal can FREQUENTLY be seen lingering in the open and escape be CLEARLY photoed or killed (for CENTURIES)!
Get on the JREF and search under "Bob Heironomus" . There is countless diagrams and film overlays, joint comparisons and height data. No one refutes this information or proves otherwise that Bob.H fit's patty.
Even deer, that don't immediately run far, turn around to see where you are. They look nervous. Primates being followed get both nervous and agitated. ANY animal that comes out enough to be occasionally seen, that doesn't necessarily run away or try to hide, potentially exposes itself to being shot, hit by cars, and certainly being photographed or videoed. NO species can have such behavior and NEVER leave even one bone or carcass - not for HUNDREDS OF YEARS! Is BF metaphysical? Is that it?
@philipatoz You are forgetting that the footage does not begin at the very first sighting of the subject. He/she/it was described as having stood there looking at them for a moment before walking off. And you are also apparently forgetting the FAMOUS look back at the camera. If that wasn't watching them then I don't know what was. And please don't try to attempt to make me look like a flake by assuming I would say BF is metaphysical. IF!!! If BF is a real thing it would be flesh and bone.
@narfanoid, NOT at all trying to make you look like a flake - my metaphysical comment was rhetorical sarcasm. So Patty looks back ONCE - that still doesn't explain her overall, extremely relaxed gait, turning her back completely for a so long, lack of urgency seeking cover - all this for the world's most renowned reclusive creature. And you're relying on ROGER and Bob G's account of what happened before filming began, even so, they said "WALKING" off - this is a creature unconcerned it's seen!
@philipatoz 6) Bob.H is the ONLY one who was willing to take a poly test (TWICE)..Gimlin refuses.
7) Roger and Gimlin were caught in many lies. Bob.H has YET to have said one lie about this or his past.
8) Roger and Gimlin has changed their story countless times. Now Gimlin is using the first week in October as the film date while Bob.H has said this all along.
NOW you claim Bob.H hasn't provided any proof?....Do you want me to add to this list?...how much proof do you need?
@philipatoz I wouldn't call striding off at a fairly rapid rate a "relaxed gait". The stride appears quite purposeful to me. And, in order for a biped to walk away from someone they MUST have their back to them. Do you expect the thing to walk backwards? Do you expect it isn't going to look at where it's walking? What exactly do you expect it to do? Keep in mind that the reaction here in this footage does not conflict with descriptions of many other sightings that were not filmed.
@philipatoz In almost every report I have read from people who claimed to have seen a BF, they say basically say that the creature kept a distance but did not rush off. In fact, many say that it watched them for a time. In fact, the reaction of Patty is in some ways more rushed and urgent than many of the verbal reports I've encountered.
Oh, and just to add, behavior like Patty's not only would have produced many dead bigfoots from hunters, but DEFINITELY, any animal willing to expose itself out in the open so nonchalantly, is going to produce countless photos and videos that are unmistakable. Well, maybe Patty was just senile, easy to sneak up on with horses, didn't give a damn she'd been seen - her behavior must embarrass Bigfoots everywhere. Once word got around, other Bigfoots must have chastised her for being so careless!
@philipatoz You make a halfway decent point with regard to being caught off guard and only strolling off. However, you can't predict the circumstances that might have taken place that could conceivably have caused such a thing to happen. Many animals have been caught off guard - I've been known to surprise deer and other animals, when I wasn't trying in the least to be quiet. Some have speculated that momma BF was leading them away from her baby. Not saying I think this is true, but...
Well, there you have it folks. We have "proof" that the footage is fake and "proof" that the footage is legitimate. We're still left with people making their own decisions, just as they always have, and probably always will.
@narfanoid So what, Morris claimed he made the suit...what's your point?
If you do some research on proportion matchings you'll see many examples that they DO line up. (Im not talking this video) Do some real data comparison and photo over lays. Get on a real web site and not youtube for this information where factual studies have been done. The height and joints are an exact match to Bob.H
@ALLENMUSKY said "The height and joints are an exact match to Bob.H". No. They are not. You only think they are. And what makes you think I spend all my time on youtube? I can only imagine what a pathetic person one would have to be to spend all his time here.
@narfanoid hahah, this goes to show you that YOU are clueless on all the comparisons done on Bob.H and patty. I refuse to educate you on this fact.
Bob.H has said in EVERY interview that he DOES NOT KNOW who made the suit. But you can act stupid and think just because he's ' teamed up' with Morris that it's his creation. Do you even know where this 'cow camp' film is from?..do you know who put this entire thing together?..Do you know what the Cow Camp thing is all about and why???
@ALLENMUSKY I am not clueless about the comparisons at all. I just happen to be able to see past the end of my nose, and can see quite clearly that Bob H does NOT fit the proportions. Once again, why don't you take a good look for yourself instead of parroting what others have said? And, are you referring to the Cow Camp footage that was supposed to have recreated the Patterson footage? The film that gave us an image that is not at all similar to the PG film?
@ALLENMUSKY And, once again, I never said Morris made the suit. Will you at least try to follow my line of thought? My point is that if I can't trust Morris to be telling the truth, why should I choose to trust Bob H? He hasn't provided any proof, or even good evidence of his claim, and he is teamed up with someone who claims he made the suit when he didn't.
@narfanoid, Why would Bob H., a man known to be trustworthy by his community, consistently employed and married a very long time, suddenly come out of the woodwork decades later and decide to take a poly? Oh, and he passed it. Lucky? Made his point? Validated his claim? Yes, he could have left it at that. But why in the world would he risk taking a SECOND poly, knowing full well he MIGHT fail it (if he were lying)? That makes NO sense at all. Yes, PSYCHOPATHS can pass a poly, but guys like Bob?
@ALLENMUSKY The fact that Morris claims he made the suit, and the fact that Bob H. has teamed up with someone who is known to have not made the suit when he claims he did, and the fact that Bob H has produced such a pathetic reproduction of the original footage, leaves me less than impressed with the integrity of the team. That's my point.
The joints are not an exact match. Take another look.
The PGF has, unfortunately for 'skeptics', nothing but features undoable in suits then & I bet even today with better materials. If it's so easy we should be seing Pattylike videos everywhere, I'm not seing any, U ally? Patty's arms are pretty long, and given the obvious fact they're swinging on very wide shoulders so high up in the air, sitting on a much longer torso, they'd be even longer on a normal sized one. Chance of fakery's extremely slim, nil in fact. Stick arms is a cliche, never done.
Allen, the more U say BobH matches Patty the further U drift from reality... :-/ Maybe you have 'experts' that will support the suit theory, but in my opinion their views seem pretty surface shallow. There are experts after careful studying, both f/x guys, computer specialists & primatologists saying they find no signs of fakery. Instead they find proportions that in no way match a known human, Patty goes against all logic of 60s f/x with her longer torso, old suits didn't feature extended arms.
@komodoman Problem is komo, There is no fact's or calculations to support that patty's arms are longer than any human. That is what the believers convince themselves as fact's. The fact is the PGF doesn't have any feature that cant be achived by wearing a suit including the gait and proportions. For years the footers said Patty beyond human range, unfortunately it's just not the case.
This is directed at the individuals who keep trying to raz me about my position on the Patterson footage and this attempt to "prove" Bob H was in the costume. Please wake up and stop assuming that I am trying to say the original footage was legitimate. I AM NOT. I do, however, have the opinion that Bob H was NOT in the original Patty costume. He is entirely wrong for it, and the costume attempt is entirely wrong. This does not mean I believe the original film was real. Wake up, doofs!!!!
@narfanoid So you take no stand on the issue?....Credibility, integrity legitimate science means nothing as well. Costume attempts i'll agree prove nothing. Basically you have no position Pro or negetive so there is no point to carry any further.
Last thing, Morris didn't make the 1967 patty costume so why would this video make any comparison. The ONLY person who claims the patty suit was made by Morris... IS MORRIS.
@ALLENMUSKY So... what you're saying is... you are siding with the team of Bob H and Morris, despite the fact that Morris claims he made the original costume even when he didn't? Yeah. That adds credibility... NOT.
And you clearly don't see the importance of taking no sides in the argument until the facts are all in. As much as you would like this vid to be convincing, it isn't.
@narfanoid Any skeptic who has done their research will tell you Morris didn't make the suit and Heironomus who wore the suit NEVER claimed he made it.
You claim all the facts arn't in?....lol, the facts have been in along time ago. Best do a little rersearch on the subject.
@ALLENMUSKY "Facts"? What facts are you talking about. Hearsay? A bunch of stories that can't be proved? The only facts that will put an end to this whole thing is the original costume, and some hard proof that what Bob H says happened actually did happen. The fact that he knew so and so means nothing. The fact that he got Morris involved means nothing. The fact that he can wear a suit and walk on film means nothing. So, what "facts" are you talking about?
@ALLENMUSKY I don't think I ever said that Morris made the original suit. Can you not even follow what I'm saying? Apparently you don't see the importance of keeping one's mind open to different possibilities... particularly when there are no fully convincing arguments on EITHER side. Bob should have stopped before he ever tried to prove his point with this vid. He might have actually had me convinced if he hadn't ruined with such a pathetic attempt.
Not only does Bob .H match Patty's proportions It's also Human.
Its erect attitude in locomotion, the gait, stride and manner of that locomotion, as well as the relative proportions of pelvic to pectoral limb, are all manifestly human, commented Dr. Osman Hill, Director of Yerkes Regional Primate Research Center, and Emory University. He also stated that he was satisfied that the walk of the creature shown in the Patterson-Gimlin film was consistent with the bi-pedal striding gait of man.
@ALLENMUSKY Are you completely blind? You think Bob H matches the proportions? Holy crow, man. I can't believe I'm even wasting my time arguing with you. Would you at least take more than two seconds to actually compare Bob with the original footage? Would you at least do that much? If you do and still come back saying he matches the original then I know you're messed up.
Komodo, until we've seen a closeup, focused, STABLE video or film of '67 era Patty, you cannot say the suit was more sophisticated than others of the same era, a hybrid of some of the era, or of ones created in subsequent years. An out-of-focus, extremely jumpy, blurry film, shot at a questionable camera speed, at a significant distance from the camera, as was apechick Patty, will cover a multitude of flaws and very conspicuous suit details. Even so, qualified costumers swear it's a suit!
@philipatoz Yes, well qualified costumers have also said it wasn't a suit. What's your point? Unless you were actually there and saw the costuming take place you can't say. In fact, you're contradicting yourself, because you just stated that the footage is too shaky and blurry to tell.
@narfanoid, I'm no costume expert, but I can tell you that Patty has a huge butt pad that doesn't move. I can say her feet have no definition. What I mean about the blurry aspects is that it covered up much of what would be very obvious if it were a close, crisp and stable film. I merely stated what top costumers have said - that, even so, they see telling trademarks of a suit. But the suit is only the beginning of the problem. Patty's behavior is completely wrong, as is her being "surprised."
@philipatoz I see. And do these "top costumers" address what appears to be muscle movement? Despite the "butt pad"? And, who is to say what Patty's behavior should be? Do you personally know any bigfoots? Do you know how they should react? What behavior are you talking about? Walking away? Looking at the people who are filming him/her/it? Those are only the real two behaviors to speak of.
BF, so successful and RENOWNED FOR its unsurpassed stealthiness and ability to have NEVER left ANY remains, not even ONE bone, despite at least 150 years of European saturation of the NW woods. Yet TWO men, high in saddles on horses and with a pack horse (think of the significant noise), manage to "surprise" such a creature. THEN, upon discovery, Patty, doesn't run for cover, WALKS away, shows NO fear, even TURNS HER BACK upon being pursued. Such behavior would have produced a dead BF LONG ago!
@philipatoz Again, a halfway decent point, but in order for an illusive creature to be known by humans they have to be occasionally seen. Remember that there are MANY reports of BF sightings all over the place. You can't decide that film footage or photographs are to be the only standard by which this mystery can be addressed. How many plane crashes have been photographed while taking place?
@narfanoid, I'm encouraged to see that you at least realize Patty's behavior is at least suspect. Even if she was leading Roger away from supposed young, there is no way she would TOTALLY turn her back. And see the relaxed mannerisms - not a hint she's stressed about being seen. Remember, this would HAVE to be an animal FAR more reclusive and stealthy than deer, as reports are not nearly as common. And as they are occasionally seen by humans, remember many of those Bubbas carry GUNS!
@philipatoz How would you know if Patty looked stressed? What does a stressed mamma BF look like? I don't think the subject looks relaxed at all. I think the subject looks quite concerned about the individuals filming her. Yes, the Bubbas carry GUNS. In which case there should be some deceased bigfoot impersonators out there.
@philipatoz I've been making costumes for about 30 years. I have also seen a lot of costumes made by other people. Not a single one of them has the ability to relocate things like elbows.
Nah, phil. Allen knows a lot, some skeptics do, I also talk to him but skeptics aren't always right just cos that's what they call themselves. ;) Patty's as untypical/illogical a 'suit' as U could probably dream up then or now, have U seen the current state of suits? It's not moved anywhere since HarryH, if anywhere it's moved back, where Harry featured electronic gadgetry inside his head recent suits do not cos it's too costly. Now we're back at the tall fluffy masked stunt man, far from Patty.
@narfanoid, I strongly suggest you give it up now before you get schooled. Allen knows his stuff, he's done the research, and he can cite a virtual avalanche of PROVEN facts that overwhelmingly show this film is a complete fake. If you continue, it's gonna be like watching someone (Allen) shooting SLOW-moving, LOW-flying clay pigeons: "Pull" ....."pseudo fact"..... BLAM! BLAM!
@philipatoz Yeah, right. After all this time the film has not been proven to be fake and you think I'm worried about getting "schooled"? Before you take your silliness any further maybe you should consider the fact that I'm not saying the film is or is not fake. I'm talking about how lame Bob H is in his attempt to "prove" he was in the Patty costume. Have you actually looked at his video? Have you actually compared it with the original?
@philipatoz Yeah, right. After all this time the film has not been proven to be fake and you think I'm worried about getting "schooled"? Before you take your silliness any further maybe you should consider the fact that I'm not saying the film is or is not fake. I'm talking about how lame Bob H is in his attempt to "prove" he was in the Patty costume. Have you actually looked at his video? Shouldn't Morris and Bob H have come up with something more convincing that that? That's my problem.
It's easy to pass a polygraph. That doesn't add any credibility to Bob's story. He's got nothing but a story, and the worst attempt I've ever seen to reproduce Patty on film. If he was in the original Patty costume then one should expect a much more convincing reproduction, even if the costume was inferior to the original.
@narfanoidl, what is a question Patty believers should ask is that IF Bob H. passed one polygraph, after so many years had passed, why of WHY would he ever have risked taking a second one? If lying, why would he ever take the risk of failing a second one? That makes no sense at all!
@philipatoz Polygraph or not, he still has only a lame story. And since a polygraph is not solid proof of telling the truth, it still amounts only to a lame story. You're gonna side with Bob based on this stupid attempt to reproduce bigfoot, and the fact that he passed a couple of polygraphs? Looks like when you've made up your mind you become quite simple to convince of anything you want to believe.
@narfanoid, you just totally ignored the question as to why Bob H. would take a second poly? Also, I hope you realize that Bob H. and Roger P were long-time documented acquaintances - he's not just some guy who stepped out of the woodwork. And why won't Bob Gimlin take a poly?
@philipatoz What do you mean I didn't address the question? Of course I did. I said a polygraph is easy to pass. Who cares if he took it twice? He could take it ten times and probably still pass. It doesn't add any credibility to his seriously lacking story. Also, it doesn't matter if he knew Patterson. A lot of people knew him; big deal. Gimlin probably doesn't think he needs to sink to the level of taking a polygraph when the "evidence" Bob H provides is so seriously flawed.
@narfanoid, a poly is only easy to pass for psychopaths and people without a conscience, those in which a yes or no is irrelevant. But no matter, when your own brother-in-law finances and also calls the film a hoax, as did Roger's, and as countless people have also said he was a con-man, liar and cheat, and the only people calling Bob H a liar are bigfooters, which person looks tremendously more credible? Seriously, who that personally knows Bob H. has said he's a liar. Name 'em!
@philipatoz You're missing my point. My point is that if you look at the attempt to recreate Patty in the film above you see something that has no resemblance to the original. Stories are just stories. Bob H has his story, Patterson had his story, Gimlin had his, etc. Doesn't matter. The only way to make any conclusion is to look at the obvious. And the obvious is that Bob H does NOT AT ALL resemble Patty. Everything is wrong. So, now what's your story?
@narfanoid, several top costumers have said beyond a doubt this is a suit, even pointing out the obvious signs that indicate so. EVERYTHING about this film, especially Patty's behavior, is wrong and the Roger's story of how Patty was surprised is laughable. Not to mention, Roger could not possibly have developed the film in the time period he said he did, so why would he lie? His life's mission was to film a BF. And afterward, he manages to lose ALL of the original negatives. Yeah, right, LOL!
@narfanoid Why does Bob Heironomus's Time line fit the accounts of the film where Patterson's and Gimlin's don't?
Why has Bob.H full confession of the film never changed, yet Patterson changed his story 4 times in the first month and Gimlin cant remember if Rogers horse fell on him or Not?
Why did Gimlin lie about Having Heironomus's horse at Bluff Creek?. He only recently confessed after not telling the truth all these years.
You make alot of excusses for Gimlin...so why does he lie?
@ALLENMUSKY I think if I was witness to a huge hairy bipedal primate walking past me I might be a little hazy on some of the details of what went on as well. I'm not saying I believe the footage to be legitimate, but if it was, then we have a situation where anyone should be forgiven for not recalling silly details. If it was me, I'd be spending more time looking at the beast than at a horse. I'd be surprised if MY recollection of incidental events was accurate after such a thing.
@ALLENMUSKY Why do you keep asking the same questions over and over again? Do you not have a memory span, or do you just have too much time on your hands?
@narfanoid Why Did Gimlin Lie about never being arrested before?..his own family put their home up to Bail him out of jail...Gimlin refuses to comment about that today when asked the question...
Question I have, WHY do you believe a Con-Man and a Proven liar over Bob.H ?...So let me get this right. The PGF is real because this video looks nothing like the film?..Is that your logic here?..I want to understand your reasoning why this film convinces you Bigfoot exists?
@ALLENMUSKY You are completely missing my point. That shouldn't surprise me though... try to understand this; it's really very simple. I don't care about who's story seems more credible than who's story. In fact, Bob H's story IS more credible in some ways. That's not the point. The point is if you watch this vid you see what appears to be evidence that Bob H was NOT in the original Patty costume. There is NO similarity. Why would that be? Shouldn't Morris and Bob have created something better?
@ALLENMUSKY Typical. You assume that because I don't believe Bob H's story that I think the film is legitimate. How typical. You think there are only two possibilities to any situation, don't you? Wow, you could stand to widen your scope of comprehension a bit, don't you think?
that suit looks nothing like the original and even though bob H and phillip morris claim to be involved with the hoax they cant prove it. They havent even shown the costume or a copy of it
@theceng You are correct. For all the talk that these two men were responsible for the image we see as "Patty", they have been very unconvincing in their attempts to convince the world that they were. Here we have the supposed costumer, and the supposed wearer of the costume, and all we get is idiotic crap like the vid here. If they actually did what they claim then they should be able to produce something much more like the original. I'd love to see it done convincingly.
Yep, that BobHop for us...limbs much too short to ever hope to be a believable Bigfoot...but all our critic friends don't want to know as their denial has completely taken over control of their lives... I guess it isn't easy for them either, not to believe these beings exist in the first place - how could Patty be anything but a suit then...? Problem is of course, one of their many unanswered problems, why no Bigfoot in movies before or since - even in high budget stuff - come close then... lol
I think his so-called 'confessions' must've come at a time after he had a falling out with Gimlin or something, and it's all about revenge and a grudge. Because you're right he can't prove anything he says, all his babble of 'driving to the site, putting it on, just walking and giving the old Patty look' is total bull. Morris' suit here is typical ancient ape costume nonsense, and more in line with what Chambers did in the 60s on POTA, whereas Patty has no resemblance to any of it whatsoever.
Haha bob h is pathetic.He was wearing suit but of course he dont know what happend to suit and he still aint able to make a copy of the suit after almost 50 years!!!.But obviously 90% of ppl have no problem to belive in his words(even if he has no proves) than believe in actual movie(proven by foot prints,and creature characteristic).Its poor how this dude is trying to earn some cash on his death friend.
You must be nuts, gotts...if you think this looks like Patty. BobH unfortunately doesn't fit anything, a straitjacket maybe... He couldn't even reach her head with his own head since she's much longer than him from the waist up...that obviously also makes shoulders reaching over impossible. Sorry, done deal.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@komodoman you must be insane...You probably believe in witches/warlocks too. The most obvious example of this patterson hoax is the face area (mask) that looks really stupid and amateurish, not to mention the wide angle uncut original film that shows Patterson`s footsteps that were really close to the so called bigfoot.
@komodoman What I want to know is why didn't Patterson run right up the Bigfoot or shoot it or anything? He just kind of stopped and let it slowly walk into the forest and didn't even follow it. Also why have no droppings or bones ever been recovered, but footprints have? Simple. Footprints are fakeable, droppings and bones aren't. Most scientists just laugh at the idea of bigfoot being real. Sorry to break it to you but now at least you can put your mind at ease.
The big mistake here is that you can clearly see that his neck is turned when he looks back. But in the patterson movie you see the Ape moves it's whole body from the shoulders when looking back.
Ape's can't move their head and look to their side like human's because of their neckbones and shoulder's palced like our's. Ape's have to move a large part of their body to look behind.
@Ursusdk The problem with the argument that apes can't move their head like humans is that it is talking about non-bipedal apes. If there is such a thing as a bigfoot, it is also a bipedal ape... like humans are. Therefore the argument is moot.
@Ursusdk The other thing about that argument is that it isn't really correct. You can see Patty turn her head before rotating the shoulders around. This does not change my opinion about whether it could or could not have been a human, however, for the reason I gave earlier... we don't know if another bipedal ape (like humans) would be able to turn its head that way, because we don't know of any others.
Yep, narfanoid. The deniers know they can never prove it fake, so they've had to dig up old Wah Chang masks & worship those as Patty, & other lameness for the occasion & throw con man dirt on Roger. It's being seen through, especially in light of BobH's own body build impossible to be Patty neither sideways or upwards. Her torsos too long which is crucial, so there's no way he could reach her head let alone reach over wide shoulders & too long upper arm bones. He may be Santa but Patty he ain't.
@komodoman Yes, I have a real problem with people who look at footage like this and assume it actually looks like the patterson footage. There is no resemblance whatsoever. Even if you don't believe in bigfoot, even if you think the patterson was fake, this lame attempt is just about the worst thing to be convinced by. The proportions are all wrong, and the movement is wrong, and it's all just wrong.
People. Please be reasonable. Even if you don't believe the Patterson footage is legitimate, please don't be suckered in by Bob. He has a lame story, with nothing to support it, and his attempts to "prove" he wore the suit are so bad as to be laughable. Do you really think Morris would have passed up a chance to make a suit just like Patty if it was possible to do so?
he wouldnt hed make 2 much money. Even though he claimed he made the suit (and his wife backs his story) he still hasnt produced any proof no costume no nothing just words
BobH's story is a holed as as Swiss cheese, he could probably sell you the Moon from the sound of it he must be the world's most trustworthy man. The guy has U suckered, & I suspect & even know this too but go aLong with his little game. lol The proof he's not Patty's in the film itself obviously, because her ratio is out of human reach... She's too wide and she's too tall, take a look at BobH himself...he's built like everyone else and simply too short upwards leaving no room for Patty's top.
@seymourbbest How does Bob's story check out? He says he wore a suit... a suit that nobody has been able to prove ever existed. His recent attempts to "prove" he wore said suit are seriously flawed in terms of over all look, body proportions, etc. So... how again does his story check out?
Yup. And the proof that video or film format/stock when recording matters nothing, is in the details of both PGF and Marble Mountain, one is film the other video. Yet both subjects, evidently both real Sasquatches, walk quite the same way and appear built anatomically very similar. Fakes, no matter if video or film, all look yup fake.
reclaimerReclaimer 1 day ago
That's a pretty accurate description if I ever read one. lol
reclaimerReclaimer 2 weeks ago
@reclaimerReclaimer The Bob H thing is just not the way to go for skeptics, simple as that.
rockstarzep 2 weeks ago
The title of this clip should be "A Montage of Stills of Some Fat Retard in a bad Gorilla Suit, Cuz if you Saw an Actual Film of Him Walking You'd Laugh Your Head Off at How Sad He Looks"...
joeyvader 2 weeks ago
not even close, imo
yec1JF 1 month ago
that looks nothing like pattersons bigfoot,but of course if i was making and selling bigfoot suits i to would say that i made the suit in patterson film and link my name to something so big,that was no fkn suit that is a real creature that cant be replicated
straightme1 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Dr. Melba Ketchum update: I thought we would be finished in a few weeks, but instead, Sasquatch threw us curve balls even with their DNA which can be as elusive as they are.We are past that! As a result, we have assembled a renowned team, each of us with our own specialties to make this project "extraordinary".If everyone will hang in there, I promise it will be worth the wait. We have the proof, now just give us the opportunity to present it in a form that will even convince skeptics.
rockstarzep 3 months ago
There is a lot more definition of the Bigfoot in the Patterson footage. The Hieronimus costume looks nothing like the anatomical movement of muscles and ligaments in the subject in the Patterson film.
bigskip2121 3 months ago
There is a look of fear in the creatue in the bigfoot gait analysis video at 2:56 and 2:57 where she makes two primate-like facial gestures. She walked gracefully because the flexible feet and nonlocking knees allow for this by design. Reportedly, the pace quickened as she got further away based on prints according to Meldrum's book.
rockstarzep 3 months ago
They're not mere night creatures, sigthings are daytime too. They're like us, a primate wide awake 24/7 if need be, we also move about all day 'round. These fellas aren't like bears hibernating either, so no more animal thinking please. Get over that idea. BFs obviously can move when they have to, Patty decided rightly by casually strolling away, knowing there'd be real danger had she run from people with guns. Anyway, only real monsters would fire at a biped, ape or not, only in selfdefense.
reclaimerReclaimer 3 months ago
Rock their attempt was laughable at best. They even refer to Gimlin as the "Michael Jordan" of Bigfooting. Their recreation only made me think it's even more obvious it's fake. Gimlin unknowingly brings up some interesting facts the scream hoax! That we wouldn't have known if they didn't go there with him. He just added a ton of more holes to his story.
ffmcmav40 3 months ago
@ffmcmav40 I still believe in Bob Gimlin, and especially the film. Another point that was brought up was the gracefulness of the creature versus a typical human. The muscle movement throughout the body and the breast movement, among other things is enough for me because it speaks volumes. The chatter speaks confusion, falsities, rumors, and inaccuracies that are often rooted in fear or greed.
rockstarzep 3 months ago
@rockstarzep Well think of this. Bob G said remember all of this area was washed out a flood. Isn't that strange? I mean you need to film a squatch and the only place you could do it, is in a wide open space and sure enough that just where Patty "happen" to be. Also did you see how close to Bobo they were when they were filming it? Yet Patty looks so far away? And if you came into this clearing on horses and Patty was that close wouldn't she have heard, seen, smelled them from a mile away?
ffmcmav40 3 months ago
@rockstarzep I mean aren't we talking about the most elusive NIGHT creature of all time? Yet here they come horses jumping the creek into the only opening in the dense unpopulated forest in BROAD daylight? And according to Bob G they were only 25 ft away yet it walks? On their show every single Bigfoot hauls ass but Patty causally strolls when they are that close? See how Bobo struggles walking across the ROCKS. Wasn't patty walking across wet sand and left all these footprints? So inconsistent
ffmcmav40 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Animal Planet crew is going to analyze the hell out of the PG film on Sunday, October 30th. I challenge Bob Hearsayimanass to join them and offer his side of the story. He can even provide any costume and reinact it in any way he wants. He can have all the technology that he desires. Lets offer him or anyone the opportunity. He can have all the time he wants to prove his case.
rockstarzep 4 months ago
this bum is a fat liar who talks crap about people who have been dead for 39 years,bob h and greg long are the hoax
SuperTestfreak 4 months ago
When I see the Bigfoot Sasquatch Evidence video at 1:31 showing the muscle herniation, muscle movement, and muscle shock, and muscle density, the video discussion (which sums up everything if you believe) & the Bigfoot Gait Analysis video at 2:56 & 2:57 quick facial expressions, aspect ratios of the arms and legs to body and the long distance to the elbow bend, movement dynamics with bent knees and full turn, graceful arm movements, and even the footprints & dynamics interaction, it adds up.
rockstarzep 4 months ago
Why wonder yet, retro. HD video, night vision in the search and so forth, that's all pretty recent equipment. But because it's so good now, it may not even be a researcher getting that crucial new HD bigfootage, it could be anybody from now on. So just patience okay, something tells me it's not another 40 years before the next Patty-like encounter.
reclaimerReclaimer 5 months ago
@reclaimerReclaimer can you answer my question? Patterson's background is ridiculously flawed, Freeman? A known hoaxer, that prince edward island video? Shot by college FILM students. The Manitoba one? The first the guy does is refuse to release it to the public because he wanted to get paid! Those guys in Georgia fooled the "expert" who came out and said "I've seen it! It's real!" only to look like a total fool. Are we seeing a pattern here?
ffmcmav40 5 months ago
@ffmcmav40 There's no pattern at all. Those others you mention are fakes, yes, although Minotoba who knows as it's so poor I'd personally never published it myself. But Freeman's and Patterson's evidently not. At least PGF's been deemed either no hoax or inconclusive, by countless of experts after their detailed study. Something the naysayers have never done. Biscardi's not necessarily an expert, he's a private researcher and businessman, but it's that kind of enthusiasm the search needs.
reclaimerReclaimer 5 months ago
@reclaimerReclaimer again your not denying the background and I appreciate that. I've stated before anyone can make things appear to be scientifically correct, people have been doing that for 100's of years but even after a few people claim to have real footage, why aren't their motives for producing a fake be questioned? Why is it that people turn a blind eye to a rather large significant, highly relevant piece of the puzzle? I mean if chicken little came out and said "The Sky is falling" ?????
ffmcmav40 5 months ago
Just show me 1 video where the film maker has nothing to gain, has no hoaxing back ground, or film back ground, etc. Just one time, just name me one instance.
ffmcmav40 5 months ago
No retro, HD's already there...
reclaimerReclaimer 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Check out my new video "Patterson / Gimlin: The Final Word
ffmcmav40 6 months ago
They probably will be HD one day, by some local researcher out there with good gear... A big city weekend hunter with his cell phone won't catch shit, except that blurry stuff skeptics love to trash, so that's no good. Better cameras will eventually, hopefully, have a run in with a 'squatch...and voila... Just imagine a Marble Mountain video situation, only much closer and better camera...
reclaimerReclaimer 6 months ago
@reclaimerReclaimer You could film one's tonsils and there will still be cries of hoax...a dead one on a table for dissection...that, and that alone, will end the debate...
joeyvader 5 months ago
@joeyvader LOL that would end the debate for you because then you would finally have some real evidence. I am just amazed how people can make such a huge leap from myth to reality with nothing but conjecture. I mean the recurring arguments are "this puppeteer said", "the suit is too high tech" etc. etc. I mean that's your argument? Nothing but peoples opinions and of those "experts" are they unbiased or Bigfoot believers? It sure seems like you guys have the fox watching the hen house.
ffmcmav40 5 months ago
@ffmcmav40 If you believe that the famous PhD researchers are not frauds that all happen to work together with a preconceived plan, there are consistent dynamics studies- walking, pace, gait, footprint-soil interaction, anatomy studies- aspect ratios of limbs and toes, behavioral studies, audio studies, and others that indicate apelike and humanlike traits- yet consistent enough to scientifically classify and distinguish them from humans.
rockstarzep 5 months ago
@rockstarzep Are you living in a cave somwhere? Monsterquest (I believe) did an episode where they proved in an hour or so the gait and walk can easily be imitated by a human. They followed his actions with a computer as he walked and he could do it no problem. There isn't a single piece of evidence from the PGF film they can't be debunked. Maybe BF is out there but the PGF is not proof. Find some real indisputable proof and post it but you can't because there isn't. :(
ffmcmav40 4 months ago
@ffmcmav40
Monsterquest did not do what you claim.
I saw the same show. The guy in the bigfoot suit locked his knees and walked with straight legs as soon as he started walking.
FAIL.
LaughingGravy31 4 months ago
@ffmcmav40
""There isn't a single piece of evidence from the PGF film they can't be debunked. ""
It has never been debunked and nobody has been able to duplicate it.
Please, stop spreading falsities.
LaughingGravy31 4 months ago
Nah, retro... How can it be sheepy to go against what most people don't know the first thing about...surely they're the sheep doing the thing inside the box...
komodoman 6 months ago
@retrobloke78
Or the body will be declared a fake and the whole thing covered up.
Jcolinsol 6 months ago
Yep, thee Bigfoot deniers are the laughing stock of YT. We're dealing with very jealous people, it's their 24/7 job to talk stupidity about the PGF because like us and everyone else they know it's too real for 1967 to be fake. This fact scares them, and so they must babble the truth away daily.
komodoman 6 months ago
pfffft! not anywhere near Patty. in the PG film you can clearly see muscle structure in the arms and legs even in stills. every time i look at the PG film something inside my brain says it's alive, and it's the real thing. this one? pfffft! :/
iellawessiri 6 months ago
I'm not sure why he's lying now but why didn't he present this alleged suit when the video first became public?
Answer: he didn't have one then! The BBC, with a million dollars, couldn't come close to replicating the Patterson film.
morjek 6 months ago
I don't see anyone walking! Only stills of each pose because if you saw him walking in the suit it would reveal how FAKE it looked!
morjek 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BIGFOOT DOESN'T EXIST YOU FUCKING IDIOTS.
jim19526 6 months ago
@retrobloke78 Anyway, this is too easy, you have exposed yourself as the troll you are from the very beginning. Gonna go get some work done (that would be my duty, yours is pointing out flaws in Bigfoot suits. Your words, not mine), and believe in Bigfoot. Hell, I'll believe in it even more, just to piss you off. So long, worst troll ever. Try harder next time :)
dugerstein 6 months ago 2
@retrobloke78 Quick reply.. shocking. "Everyone is allowed an opinion". See the irony? Should I explain that too?
Why did I mention you? I watched 3 random videos, and they were filled with your comments, which was odd at first, then funny, then sad. I pointed it out. You saw it *SOMEHOW* (telepathy? it's not like you keep checking to stir shit up, right?), and I got back to you 'cause you replied and I got a notification. You didn't get one (with my 1st comment), but here you are."Get a life"??
dugerstein 6 months ago 2
@retrobloke78 and 1) Never seen Bigfoot. Never said I have, either. "Hahaha".
2) Never done drugs. I have a job. I'm a programmer and a college student. Leaves me no time to check on YT comments to see if anyone mentioned me. You, on the other hand...
3) "as a level headed skeptic it's my duty to". Aww man xD Thanks, Captain Truth! And Godspeed!
And I like how you hide your info so no one can see you favorited all these vids for easier access and more efficient trolling. Classic YouTube troll.
dugerstein 6 months ago
@retrobloke78 What on earth does your comment have to do with anything I said? Not that I'm surprised you did that, I just expected such a smart guy to be more subtle about his trolling every once in while. My mistake. Again: no one watching a BIGFOOT VIDEO cares about you NOT BELIEVING IN BIGFOOT. Do you walk into a church and start yelling LOL U GUYS GOD DOESN'T EXIST LOLOL? The point: you're kinda preaching to the wrong crowd, you're not converting anyone. Kudos on missing it.
dugerstein 6 months ago
I liked the part where retrobloke78 went on every single P/G video on YouTube and made it clear that Bigfoot stole his bike when he was a kid. Why are you so obsessed? If you don't believe in it, fine. Keep it to yourself, obviously no one here thinks you're smart, or funny. Go to some forum for skeptics where you can peacefuly laugh at people for thinking the footage is real, while we laugh at the fact that you're clearly unemployed and spend your entire day trolling YouTube videos. Deal?
dugerstein 6 months ago
That's the problem Jcolinsol, they don't see or want to, locked in a fixed position y'know...
komodoman 6 months ago
@retrobloke78
Yes, I already understand your position, the thing is, you don't understand mine. You see? Your comment is a non-sequitur, it's not relevant to what I was saying.
Jcolinsol 7 months ago
@retrobloke78
I don't think you parsed my comment correctly, and so I think that you have incorrectly deduced my position on the subject.
Jcolinsol 7 months ago
This is best prove that PGF is real.
Swiati 7 months ago
fat ass
TheGhostface979 8 months ago
Most scientists know just about zero of this subject, that's the only reason they laugh, not too many have studied it thoroughly but a handful of brave ones. matter of fact, I have it from authors of Bigfoot books, that scientists they've contacted refuse to comment fearing of ridicule - but letting it be known they're actually closet bigfooters privately... We have a long way to go yet, with a general old flat world mentality abound...
komodoman 8 months ago 4
@komodoman Grover Krantz talked about his fellow anthropologists in the field of academia literally pushing footprint casts across the table back to him, and looking the other way..how frustrating would that be??
joeyvader 8 months ago
just look up the stuff on here it is a hoax whether bigfoot exists is not proven but believing patty is real is making people look stupid patterson must be up there laughing his head off !!!!
Mr75littlebay 8 months ago
Not even close!
Tralman1965 10 months ago
Thats as phony as a $3 bill. Way too fat. Too bulky. And you can see the folds in the suit.
SpreadingtheMuse 10 months ago 3
why is it fcking pictures i want the real thing iwant to know the truth! BOB JUST SAY THE REAL THING AND STOP TRYING TO GET MONEY!
ZaZaZarno 10 months ago 2
@ZaZaZarno It's a montage of pictures so nobody can do a side by side comparison with him and the Patterson subject...if you saw the actual film, you would see what a fat stumbling fool he is...and his camp knows it..
joeyvader 10 months ago 2
When I first saw this I laughed...hard. It's not even a film - which is an editing trick. To put it simply, it looks like a man in suit. The Patterson film made over 40 years ago, looks way more authentic.
lulupaloozatv 10 months ago 3
Cryptozoology novel see video book trailer
dltanner99 10 months ago
Folds in the suit where there should be none, and thats not the right color is it?
Stuckey57 1 year ago
How can you prove he is Bob Heir?
Righter99 1 year ago
Okay, fair enough. You have your opinion that there's not enough convincing evidence, that's cool. I'm giving this Bigfoot thing another 20 years or so, somewhere within there somebody will get lucky with a new PGF type video. If these hairy folks are really there they can't hide forever, if something exists it must be found eventually, and I'm putting high hopes in these new HD video cams out now... A close encounter out in the open like PGF and it's all over. Just one good, all it takes.
komodoman 1 year ago 8
@komodoman, sincerely, I DO hope you ARE right, as that would be VERY cool! However, don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. Truly, I'd just as soon believe Israel and Iran will become close allies.
philipatoz 1 year ago
@komodoman i've seen some pretty good ones lately. i'm convinced
CherryBooooomb 1 year ago
Comment removed
joeyvader 6 months ago
Do you really believe a film will provide proof?? You could film one of these animals right down to it's tonsils, and it would still be called a fake..Bob H. would release a montage of stills, claiming that they were HIS tonsils!! It will take a body on an autopsy table to end the debate...
joeyvader 6 months ago
@komodoman
Waddayoo talking about? Even if they get a good clear film of bigfoot, people will be calling it fake. And if they ever find a body, I'm sure it will disappear, and the lab results will be inconclusive.
It's bigfoot, "mysterious monster". These guys are the pan-dimensional love-children of ninjas and marines.
Jcolinsol 6 months ago
@komodoman Yea except all the sightings these days that are on film somehow are never done with an HD camera or the footage is blurry/shaky/too dark etc. I could have sworn that those $800 cameras had an auto focus...
nrdsgtbck101 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@komodoman Yeah its fake, but a good one! People like Matt moneymaker are just after that MONEY and Ratings!
5tonyvvvv 3 months ago
I'm amazed more Patterson and Gimlin lies are being allowed here... Who knows how or why Patty did what she did 43 years ago, nobody cares either... -I swear closet bigfooters and two-faced pretend deniers are the most obsessed Bigfoot interested folk I've come across, not even real bigfooters are this active...holy s... and 'skeptics' always claim there's no burden on them to prove it fake, isn't that one big contradiction... lol We have photo proof phil, it's called the PGF or Freeman or MM...
komodoman 1 year ago 12
@komodoman, "nobody cares?" If you are interested in being a critical thinker, you SHOULD care, as there are so many problems with and surrounding the back story of this Patty flick that it's hard to believe. But, Komo, I tell you one thing, IF someone produces what I would consider good photographic/video/film proof of a BF, I'd be the first to tell you I agree, and I'd readily admit I've been wrong. AND I would be THRILLED, I love new discoveries. But so far there is NO CREDIBLE case for BF!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@komodoman
Yeah, the fundie falsificationists enjoy their "benefit of assumption". Well you know what they say about assumptions.
Jcolinsol 7 months ago
Roger Patterson said Patty was standing still BEHIND the log jam ( 8 feet high) at the creek which is 35 feet from the woods behind her. When Boths horses reared and threw Roger from the saddle why would Patty expose herself directly infront of them and stroll 300 feet in open cover?....why wouldn't she step back and walk towards immediate cover behind the log jam?..this makes no sense. For pictures of this log jam( "JREF" Patterson film 3 )
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY, EXACTLY!
philipatoz 1 year ago
"many say that it watched them for a time": begs the question, how so MANY could see a bigfoot "linger," yet with so many equipped with a camera, cameraphone or videocam, we've got NO photographic proof. Also, any such animal lingering at a considerable DISTANCE would long ago been mistaken for a bear, and thus shot. Yet nothing! You just can't have it BOTH ways - no fur-covered animal can FREQUENTLY be seen lingering in the open and escape be CLEARLY photoed or killed (for CENTURIES)!
philipatoz 1 year ago
Get on the JREF and search under "Bob Heironomus" . There is countless diagrams and film overlays, joint comparisons and height data. No one refutes this information or proves otherwise that Bob.H fit's patty.
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
Even deer, that don't immediately run far, turn around to see where you are. They look nervous. Primates being followed get both nervous and agitated. ANY animal that comes out enough to be occasionally seen, that doesn't necessarily run away or try to hide, potentially exposes itself to being shot, hit by cars, and certainly being photographed or videoed. NO species can have such behavior and NEVER leave even one bone or carcass - not for HUNDREDS OF YEARS! Is BF metaphysical? Is that it?
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz You are forgetting that the footage does not begin at the very first sighting of the subject. He/she/it was described as having stood there looking at them for a moment before walking off. And you are also apparently forgetting the FAMOUS look back at the camera. If that wasn't watching them then I don't know what was. And please don't try to attempt to make me look like a flake by assuming I would say BF is metaphysical. IF!!! If BF is a real thing it would be flesh and bone.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid, NOT at all trying to make you look like a flake - my metaphysical comment was rhetorical sarcasm. So Patty looks back ONCE - that still doesn't explain her overall, extremely relaxed gait, turning her back completely for a so long, lack of urgency seeking cover - all this for the world's most renowned reclusive creature. And you're relying on ROGER and Bob G's account of what happened before filming began, even so, they said "WALKING" off - this is a creature unconcerned it's seen!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz 6) Bob.H is the ONLY one who was willing to take a poly test (TWICE)..Gimlin refuses.
7) Roger and Gimlin were caught in many lies. Bob.H has YET to have said one lie about this or his past.
8) Roger and Gimlin has changed their story countless times. Now Gimlin is using the first week in October as the film date while Bob.H has said this all along.
NOW you claim Bob.H hasn't provided any proof?....Do you want me to add to this list?...how much proof do you need?
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY You have provided no proof. Are you aware of what the word "proof" means?
narfanoid 1 year ago
@philipatoz I wouldn't call striding off at a fairly rapid rate a "relaxed gait". The stride appears quite purposeful to me. And, in order for a biped to walk away from someone they MUST have their back to them. Do you expect the thing to walk backwards? Do you expect it isn't going to look at where it's walking? What exactly do you expect it to do? Keep in mind that the reaction here in this footage does not conflict with descriptions of many other sightings that were not filmed.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@philipatoz In almost every report I have read from people who claimed to have seen a BF, they say basically say that the creature kept a distance but did not rush off. In fact, many say that it watched them for a time. In fact, the reaction of Patty is in some ways more rushed and urgent than many of the verbal reports I've encountered.
narfanoid 1 year ago
Oh, and just to add, behavior like Patty's not only would have produced many dead bigfoots from hunters, but DEFINITELY, any animal willing to expose itself out in the open so nonchalantly, is going to produce countless photos and videos that are unmistakable. Well, maybe Patty was just senile, easy to sneak up on with horses, didn't give a damn she'd been seen - her behavior must embarrass Bigfoots everywhere. Once word got around, other Bigfoots must have chastised her for being so careless!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz You make a halfway decent point with regard to being caught off guard and only strolling off. However, you can't predict the circumstances that might have taken place that could conceivably have caused such a thing to happen. Many animals have been caught off guard - I've been known to surprise deer and other animals, when I wasn't trying in the least to be quiet. Some have speculated that momma BF was leading them away from her baby. Not saying I think this is true, but...
narfanoid 1 year ago
Well, there you have it folks. We have "proof" that the footage is fake and "proof" that the footage is legitimate. We're still left with people making their own decisions, just as they always have, and probably always will.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid So what, Morris claimed he made the suit...what's your point?
If you do some research on proportion matchings you'll see many examples that they DO line up. (Im not talking this video) Do some real data comparison and photo over lays. Get on a real web site and not youtube for this information where factual studies have been done. The height and joints are an exact match to Bob.H
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY said "The height and joints are an exact match to Bob.H". No. They are not. You only think they are. And what makes you think I spend all my time on youtube? I can only imagine what a pathetic person one would have to be to spend all his time here.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid hahah, this goes to show you that YOU are clueless on all the comparisons done on Bob.H and patty. I refuse to educate you on this fact.
Bob.H has said in EVERY interview that he DOES NOT KNOW who made the suit. But you can act stupid and think just because he's ' teamed up' with Morris that it's his creation. Do you even know where this 'cow camp' film is from?..do you know who put this entire thing together?..Do you know what the Cow Camp thing is all about and why???
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY I am not clueless about the comparisons at all. I just happen to be able to see past the end of my nose, and can see quite clearly that Bob H does NOT fit the proportions. Once again, why don't you take a good look for yourself instead of parroting what others have said? And, are you referring to the Cow Camp footage that was supposed to have recreated the Patterson footage? The film that gave us an image that is not at all similar to the PG film?
narfanoid 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY And, once again, I never said Morris made the suit. Will you at least try to follow my line of thought? My point is that if I can't trust Morris to be telling the truth, why should I choose to trust Bob H? He hasn't provided any proof, or even good evidence of his claim, and he is teamed up with someone who claims he made the suit when he didn't.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid, Why would Bob H., a man known to be trustworthy by his community, consistently employed and married a very long time, suddenly come out of the woodwork decades later and decide to take a poly? Oh, and he passed it. Lucky? Made his point? Validated his claim? Yes, he could have left it at that. But why in the world would he risk taking a SECOND poly, knowing full well he MIGHT fail it (if he were lying)? That makes NO sense at all. Yes, PSYCHOPATHS can pass a poly, but guys like Bob?
philipatoz 1 year ago
@narfanoid What do you mean No evidence from Bob .H.
1) His story is the ONLY one that fits the impossible time line Roger and Gimlin told.
2) He proved Gimlin was lying that he had Heironomus horse (Gimlin has no confessed)
3) Bob .H is on reel 2 of the PGF which put's him in the picture of events.
4) Bob.H has publically said he's willing to sit down with Gimlin to debate the actual events.
5) Bob. H is the ONLY one who is willing to answeres the tuff questions (Gimlin refuses)
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY The fact that Morris claims he made the suit, and the fact that Bob H. has teamed up with someone who is known to have not made the suit when he claims he did, and the fact that Bob H has produced such a pathetic reproduction of the original footage, leaves me less than impressed with the integrity of the team. That's my point.
The joints are not an exact match. Take another look.
narfanoid 1 year ago
The PGF has, unfortunately for 'skeptics', nothing but features undoable in suits then & I bet even today with better materials. If it's so easy we should be seing Pattylike videos everywhere, I'm not seing any, U ally? Patty's arms are pretty long, and given the obvious fact they're swinging on very wide shoulders so high up in the air, sitting on a much longer torso, they'd be even longer on a normal sized one. Chance of fakery's extremely slim, nil in fact. Stick arms is a cliche, never done.
komodoman 1 year ago
Allen, the more U say BobH matches Patty the further U drift from reality... :-/ Maybe you have 'experts' that will support the suit theory, but in my opinion their views seem pretty surface shallow. There are experts after careful studying, both f/x guys, computer specialists & primatologists saying they find no signs of fakery. Instead they find proportions that in no way match a known human, Patty goes against all logic of 60s f/x with her longer torso, old suits didn't feature extended arms.
komodoman 1 year ago
@komodoman Problem is komo, There is no fact's or calculations to support that patty's arms are longer than any human. That is what the believers convince themselves as fact's. The fact is the PGF doesn't have any feature that cant be achived by wearing a suit including the gait and proportions. For years the footers said Patty beyond human range, unfortunately it's just not the case.
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
This is directed at the individuals who keep trying to raz me about my position on the Patterson footage and this attempt to "prove" Bob H was in the costume. Please wake up and stop assuming that I am trying to say the original footage was legitimate. I AM NOT. I do, however, have the opinion that Bob H was NOT in the original Patty costume. He is entirely wrong for it, and the costume attempt is entirely wrong. This does not mean I believe the original film was real. Wake up, doofs!!!!
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid So you take no stand on the issue?....Credibility, integrity legitimate science means nothing as well. Costume attempts i'll agree prove nothing. Basically you have no position Pro or negetive so there is no point to carry any further.
Last thing, Morris didn't make the 1967 patty costume so why would this video make any comparison. The ONLY person who claims the patty suit was made by Morris... IS MORRIS.
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY So... what you're saying is... you are siding with the team of Bob H and Morris, despite the fact that Morris claims he made the original costume even when he didn't? Yeah. That adds credibility... NOT.
And you clearly don't see the importance of taking no sides in the argument until the facts are all in. As much as you would like this vid to be convincing, it isn't.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid Any skeptic who has done their research will tell you Morris didn't make the suit and Heironomus who wore the suit NEVER claimed he made it.
You claim all the facts arn't in?....lol, the facts have been in along time ago. Best do a little rersearch on the subject.
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY "Facts"? What facts are you talking about. Hearsay? A bunch of stories that can't be proved? The only facts that will put an end to this whole thing is the original costume, and some hard proof that what Bob H says happened actually did happen. The fact that he knew so and so means nothing. The fact that he got Morris involved means nothing. The fact that he can wear a suit and walk on film means nothing. So, what "facts" are you talking about?
narfanoid 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY Did you not just say in an earlier post that Morris claimed he made the costume when he didn't?
narfanoid 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY I don't think I ever said that Morris made the original suit. Can you not even follow what I'm saying? Apparently you don't see the importance of keeping one's mind open to different possibilities... particularly when there are no fully convincing arguments on EITHER side. Bob should have stopped before he ever tried to prove his point with this vid. He might have actually had me convinced if he hadn't ruined with such a pathetic attempt.
narfanoid 1 year ago
Not only does Bob .H match Patty's proportions It's also Human.
Its erect attitude in locomotion, the gait, stride and manner of that locomotion, as well as the relative proportions of pelvic to pectoral limb, are all manifestly human, commented Dr. Osman Hill, Director of Yerkes Regional Primate Research Center, and Emory University. He also stated that he was satisfied that the walk of the creature shown in the Patterson-Gimlin film was consistent with the bi-pedal striding gait of man.
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY Are you completely blind? You think Bob H matches the proportions? Holy crow, man. I can't believe I'm even wasting my time arguing with you. Would you at least take more than two seconds to actually compare Bob with the original footage? Would you at least do that much? If you do and still come back saying he matches the original then I know you're messed up.
narfanoid 1 year ago
Famous Bob Heironimus quote: "Back in 1967 was as close as this old cowboy ever wants to get to breasts that hairy!" No doubt, Bob, no doubt!
philipatoz 1 year ago
Komodo, until we've seen a closeup, focused, STABLE video or film of '67 era Patty, you cannot say the suit was more sophisticated than others of the same era, a hybrid of some of the era, or of ones created in subsequent years. An out-of-focus, extremely jumpy, blurry film, shot at a questionable camera speed, at a significant distance from the camera, as was apechick Patty, will cover a multitude of flaws and very conspicuous suit details. Even so, qualified costumers swear it's a suit!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz Yes, well qualified costumers have also said it wasn't a suit. What's your point? Unless you were actually there and saw the costuming take place you can't say. In fact, you're contradicting yourself, because you just stated that the footage is too shaky and blurry to tell.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid, I'm no costume expert, but I can tell you that Patty has a huge butt pad that doesn't move. I can say her feet have no definition. What I mean about the blurry aspects is that it covered up much of what would be very obvious if it were a close, crisp and stable film. I merely stated what top costumers have said - that, even so, they see telling trademarks of a suit. But the suit is only the beginning of the problem. Patty's behavior is completely wrong, as is her being "surprised."
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz I see. And do these "top costumers" address what appears to be muscle movement? Despite the "butt pad"? And, who is to say what Patty's behavior should be? Do you personally know any bigfoots? Do you know how they should react? What behavior are you talking about? Walking away? Looking at the people who are filming him/her/it? Those are only the real two behaviors to speak of.
narfanoid 1 year ago
BF, so successful and RENOWNED FOR its unsurpassed stealthiness and ability to have NEVER left ANY remains, not even ONE bone, despite at least 150 years of European saturation of the NW woods. Yet TWO men, high in saddles on horses and with a pack horse (think of the significant noise), manage to "surprise" such a creature. THEN, upon discovery, Patty, doesn't run for cover, WALKS away, shows NO fear, even TURNS HER BACK upon being pursued. Such behavior would have produced a dead BF LONG ago!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz Again, a halfway decent point, but in order for an illusive creature to be known by humans they have to be occasionally seen. Remember that there are MANY reports of BF sightings all over the place. You can't decide that film footage or photographs are to be the only standard by which this mystery can be addressed. How many plane crashes have been photographed while taking place?
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid, I'm encouraged to see that you at least realize Patty's behavior is at least suspect. Even if she was leading Roger away from supposed young, there is no way she would TOTALLY turn her back. And see the relaxed mannerisms - not a hint she's stressed about being seen. Remember, this would HAVE to be an animal FAR more reclusive and stealthy than deer, as reports are not nearly as common. And as they are occasionally seen by humans, remember many of those Bubbas carry GUNS!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz How would you know if Patty looked stressed? What does a stressed mamma BF look like? I don't think the subject looks relaxed at all. I think the subject looks quite concerned about the individuals filming her. Yes, the Bubbas carry GUNS. In which case there should be some deceased bigfoot impersonators out there.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@philipatoz I've been making costumes for about 30 years. I have also seen a lot of costumes made by other people. Not a single one of them has the ability to relocate things like elbows.
narfanoid 1 year ago
Nah, phil. Allen knows a lot, some skeptics do, I also talk to him but skeptics aren't always right just cos that's what they call themselves. ;) Patty's as untypical/illogical a 'suit' as U could probably dream up then or now, have U seen the current state of suits? It's not moved anywhere since HarryH, if anywhere it's moved back, where Harry featured electronic gadgetry inside his head recent suits do not cos it's too costly. Now we're back at the tall fluffy masked stunt man, far from Patty.
komodoman 1 year ago
@narfanoid, I strongly suggest you give it up now before you get schooled. Allen knows his stuff, he's done the research, and he can cite a virtual avalanche of PROVEN facts that overwhelmingly show this film is a complete fake. If you continue, it's gonna be like watching someone (Allen) shooting SLOW-moving, LOW-flying clay pigeons: "Pull" ....."pseudo fact"..... BLAM! BLAM!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz Yeah, right. After all this time the film has not been proven to be fake and you think I'm worried about getting "schooled"? Before you take your silliness any further maybe you should consider the fact that I'm not saying the film is or is not fake. I'm talking about how lame Bob H is in his attempt to "prove" he was in the Patty costume. Have you actually looked at his video? Have you actually compared it with the original?
narfanoid 1 year ago
@philipatoz Yeah, right. After all this time the film has not been proven to be fake and you think I'm worried about getting "schooled"? Before you take your silliness any further maybe you should consider the fact that I'm not saying the film is or is not fake. I'm talking about how lame Bob H is in his attempt to "prove" he was in the Patty costume. Have you actually looked at his video? Shouldn't Morris and Bob H have come up with something more convincing that that? That's my problem.
narfanoid 1 year ago
It's easy to pass a polygraph. That doesn't add any credibility to Bob's story. He's got nothing but a story, and the worst attempt I've ever seen to reproduce Patty on film. If he was in the original Patty costume then one should expect a much more convincing reproduction, even if the costume was inferior to the original.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoidl, what is a question Patty believers should ask is that IF Bob H. passed one polygraph, after so many years had passed, why of WHY would he ever have risked taking a second one? If lying, why would he ever take the risk of failing a second one? That makes no sense at all!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz Polygraph or not, he still has only a lame story. And since a polygraph is not solid proof of telling the truth, it still amounts only to a lame story. You're gonna side with Bob based on this stupid attempt to reproduce bigfoot, and the fact that he passed a couple of polygraphs? Looks like when you've made up your mind you become quite simple to convince of anything you want to believe.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid, you just totally ignored the question as to why Bob H. would take a second poly? Also, I hope you realize that Bob H. and Roger P were long-time documented acquaintances - he's not just some guy who stepped out of the woodwork. And why won't Bob Gimlin take a poly?
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz What do you mean I didn't address the question? Of course I did. I said a polygraph is easy to pass. Who cares if he took it twice? He could take it ten times and probably still pass. It doesn't add any credibility to his seriously lacking story. Also, it doesn't matter if he knew Patterson. A lot of people knew him; big deal. Gimlin probably doesn't think he needs to sink to the level of taking a polygraph when the "evidence" Bob H provides is so seriously flawed.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid, a poly is only easy to pass for psychopaths and people without a conscience, those in which a yes or no is irrelevant. But no matter, when your own brother-in-law finances and also calls the film a hoax, as did Roger's, and as countless people have also said he was a con-man, liar and cheat, and the only people calling Bob H a liar are bigfooters, which person looks tremendously more credible? Seriously, who that personally knows Bob H. has said he's a liar. Name 'em!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@philipatoz You're missing my point. My point is that if you look at the attempt to recreate Patty in the film above you see something that has no resemblance to the original. Stories are just stories. Bob H has his story, Patterson had his story, Gimlin had his, etc. Doesn't matter. The only way to make any conclusion is to look at the obvious. And the obvious is that Bob H does NOT AT ALL resemble Patty. Everything is wrong. So, now what's your story?
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid, several top costumers have said beyond a doubt this is a suit, even pointing out the obvious signs that indicate so. EVERYTHING about this film, especially Patty's behavior, is wrong and the Roger's story of how Patty was surprised is laughable. Not to mention, Roger could not possibly have developed the film in the time period he said he did, so why would he lie? His life's mission was to film a BF. And afterward, he manages to lose ALL of the original negatives. Yeah, right, LOL!
philipatoz 1 year ago
@narfanoid Why does Bob Heironomus's Time line fit the accounts of the film where Patterson's and Gimlin's don't?
Why has Bob.H full confession of the film never changed, yet Patterson changed his story 4 times in the first month and Gimlin cant remember if Rogers horse fell on him or Not?
Why did Gimlin lie about Having Heironomus's horse at Bluff Creek?. He only recently confessed after not telling the truth all these years.
You make alot of excusses for Gimlin...so why does he lie?
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY I think if I was witness to a huge hairy bipedal primate walking past me I might be a little hazy on some of the details of what went on as well. I'm not saying I believe the footage to be legitimate, but if it was, then we have a situation where anyone should be forgiven for not recalling silly details. If it was me, I'd be spending more time looking at the beast than at a horse. I'd be surprised if MY recollection of incidental events was accurate after such a thing.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY Why do you keep asking the same questions over and over again? Do you not have a memory span, or do you just have too much time on your hands?
narfanoid 1 year ago
@narfanoid Why Did Gimlin Lie about never being arrested before?..his own family put their home up to Bail him out of jail...Gimlin refuses to comment about that today when asked the question...
Question I have, WHY do you believe a Con-Man and a Proven liar over Bob.H ?...So let me get this right. The PGF is real because this video looks nothing like the film?..Is that your logic here?..I want to understand your reasoning why this film convinces you Bigfoot exists?
ALLENMUSKY 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY You are completely missing my point. That shouldn't surprise me though... try to understand this; it's really very simple. I don't care about who's story seems more credible than who's story. In fact, Bob H's story IS more credible in some ways. That's not the point. The point is if you watch this vid you see what appears to be evidence that Bob H was NOT in the original Patty costume. There is NO similarity. Why would that be? Shouldn't Morris and Bob have created something better?
narfanoid 1 year ago
@ALLENMUSKY Typical. You assume that because I don't believe Bob H's story that I think the film is legitimate. How typical. You think there are only two possibilities to any situation, don't you? Wow, you could stand to widen your scope of comprehension a bit, don't you think?
narfanoid 1 year ago
that suit looks nothing like the original and even though bob H and phillip morris claim to be involved with the hoax they cant prove it. They havent even shown the costume or a copy of it
theceng 1 year ago
@theceng You are correct. For all the talk that these two men were responsible for the image we see as "Patty", they have been very unconvincing in their attempts to convince the world that they were. Here we have the supposed costumer, and the supposed wearer of the costume, and all we get is idiotic crap like the vid here. If they actually did what they claim then they should be able to produce something much more like the original. I'd love to see it done convincingly.
narfanoid 1 year ago
Yep, that BobHop for us...limbs much too short to ever hope to be a believable Bigfoot...but all our critic friends don't want to know as their denial has completely taken over control of their lives... I guess it isn't easy for them either, not to believe these beings exist in the first place - how could Patty be anything but a suit then...? Problem is of course, one of their many unanswered problems, why no Bigfoot in movies before or since - even in high budget stuff - come close then... lol
komodoman 1 year ago
to short... to short.. to short..
masterod1 1 year ago
I think his so-called 'confessions' must've come at a time after he had a falling out with Gimlin or something, and it's all about revenge and a grudge. Because you're right he can't prove anything he says, all his babble of 'driving to the site, putting it on, just walking and giving the old Patty look' is total bull. Morris' suit here is typical ancient ape costume nonsense, and more in line with what Chambers did in the 60s on POTA, whereas Patty has no resemblance to any of it whatsoever.
komodoman 1 year ago 2
Haha bob h is pathetic.He was wearing suit but of course he dont know what happend to suit and he still aint able to make a copy of the suit after almost 50 years!!!.But obviously 90% of ppl have no problem to belive in his words(even if he has no proves) than believe in actual movie(proven by foot prints,and creature characteristic).Its poor how this dude is trying to earn some cash on his death friend.
Swiati 1 year ago
That guy needs medical treatment.
ImpromptuinC 1 year ago 3
Fuck off it's real.
CBALLZ666 1 year ago 4
You must be nuts, gotts...if you think this looks like Patty. BobH unfortunately doesn't fit anything, a straitjacket maybe... He couldn't even reach her head with his own head since she's much longer than him from the waist up...that obviously also makes shoulders reaching over impossible. Sorry, done deal.
komodoman 1 year ago 21
Yes, he turns his head. This is the video that puts the deniers to shame, it embarrasses them so much they never mention it... lol
komodoman 1 year ago 14
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@komodoman you must be insane...You probably believe in witches/warlocks too. The most obvious example of this patterson hoax is the face area (mask) that looks really stupid and amateurish, not to mention the wide angle uncut original film that shows Patterson`s footsteps that were really close to the so called bigfoot.
gottselig2004 1 year ago
@komodoman What I want to know is why didn't Patterson run right up the Bigfoot or shoot it or anything? He just kind of stopped and let it slowly walk into the forest and didn't even follow it. Also why have no droppings or bones ever been recovered, but footprints have? Simple. Footprints are fakeable, droppings and bones aren't. Most scientists just laugh at the idea of bigfoot being real. Sorry to break it to you but now at least you can put your mind at ease.
FamousMovieScenes 8 months ago
The big mistake here is that you can clearly see that his neck is turned when he looks back. But in the patterson movie you see the Ape moves it's whole body from the shoulders when looking back.
Ape's can't move their head and look to their side like human's because of their neckbones and shoulder's palced like our's. Ape's have to move a large part of their body to look behind.
Ursusdk 1 year ago
@Ursusdk The problem with the argument that apes can't move their head like humans is that it is talking about non-bipedal apes. If there is such a thing as a bigfoot, it is also a bipedal ape... like humans are. Therefore the argument is moot.
narfanoid 1 year ago
@Ursusdk The other thing about that argument is that it isn't really correct. You can see Patty turn her head before rotating the shoulders around. This does not change my opinion about whether it could or could not have been a human, however, for the reason I gave earlier... we don't know if another bipedal ape (like humans) would be able to turn its head that way, because we don't know of any others.
narfanoid 1 year ago
Nope, Snow Walker has not proven to be fake, I sure never saw that, but I love how Bigfoot deniers portray everything as fake...
komodoman 1 year ago 3
Yeah, it looks more like Barney than Patty...aren't these anti-PGF noobs just a funny gang...
komodoman 1 year ago
that's a bigfoot suit? That looks nothing like any bigfoot i've seen.
guionlawes 1 year ago
if i was trying to protek bigfoot .i would try to blowhole in all real bigfoot pic,vide,ect.......
reelthing4u 1 year ago
Yep, narfanoid. The deniers know they can never prove it fake, so they've had to dig up old Wah Chang masks & worship those as Patty, & other lameness for the occasion & throw con man dirt on Roger. It's being seen through, especially in light of BobH's own body build impossible to be Patty neither sideways or upwards. Her torsos too long which is crucial, so there's no way he could reach her head let alone reach over wide shoulders & too long upper arm bones. He may be Santa but Patty he ain't.
komodoman 1 year ago
@komodoman Yes, I have a real problem with people who look at footage like this and assume it actually looks like the patterson footage. There is no resemblance whatsoever. Even if you don't believe in bigfoot, even if you think the patterson was fake, this lame attempt is just about the worst thing to be convinced by. The proportions are all wrong, and the movement is wrong, and it's all just wrong.
narfanoid 1 year ago
People. Please be reasonable. Even if you don't believe the Patterson footage is legitimate, please don't be suckered in by Bob. He has a lame story, with nothing to support it, and his attempts to "prove" he wore the suit are so bad as to be laughable. Do you really think Morris would have passed up a chance to make a suit just like Patty if it was possible to do so?
narfanoid 1 year ago 3
he wouldnt hed make 2 much money. Even though he claimed he made the suit (and his wife backs his story) he still hasnt produced any proof no costume no nothing just words
theceng 1 year ago
BobH's story is a holed as as Swiss cheese, he could probably sell you the Moon from the sound of it he must be the world's most trustworthy man. The guy has U suckered, & I suspect & even know this too but go aLong with his little game. lol The proof he's not Patty's in the film itself obviously, because her ratio is out of human reach... She's too wide and she's too tall, take a look at BobH himself...he's built like everyone else and simply too short upwards leaving no room for Patty's top.
komodoman 1 year ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Bob H story checks out. Pattersons did not. Obvious conclusions.
seymourbbest 1 year ago
Bob H story checks out. Pattersons did not. Obvious conclusions.
seymourbbest 1 year ago
@seymourbbest How does Bob's story check out? He says he wore a suit... a suit that nobody has been able to prove ever existed. His recent attempts to "prove" he wore said suit are seriously flawed in terms of over all look, body proportions, etc. So... how again does his story check out?
narfanoid 1 year ago
how does his story check out? this clips isnt the same as the original film
theceng 1 year ago