Added: 4 years ago
From: darkwinglh
Views: 334,633
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (3,245)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Comment removed

  • if those that doubt look closely yes its an odd muscle shape....however, it flexes when the weight goes to that leg. Foam doesn't flex like muscle. Besides when this wad done costuming was not this detailed. If it where a costume it would look like a rubber godzilla suit with fur glued on it.

  • No, a suit's been proven out of the question by now, it's really only the unaware that persist with all that pads stuff. There can't be any padding or football shoulders and what have you, because her height and build's already proven her real. It's all about anatomy, both human and BF anatomy help estimate it. Human anatomy because the legs are nonhuman and in full view, and the upper body's too long to have a man inside. So that leaves no way for reaching a mask or wide shoulders and arms.

  • The so-called muscle seems strangley sharp-edged and trapazoidal in shape-not like a natural body part- more like a pad worn under a bulky costume......and which can slip as you move?

  • Another fact I heard was the BF babe ;) turned and looked w/shoulders in tow. Their necks are similar to apes and the chin would hit the shoulder, turned by itself. If you see 'people' in suits on show/movies, their heads turn solo, because we're different than those creatures. Now who is going know to do that?????? Besides the boobs and the muscles -- flexing like a horses would, the "head turn" amazed me. "Bigfoot Lives" is a good movie on Netflix, chk it out.

  • Makes great sense actually, provided you know the story. They were out therefor theree weeks, only late in their trip did they stumble across her by pure accident as they came around a bend by a creek. They had decided not to shoot, except if in danger. Luckily for all, she retreated peacefully as these human-like beings usually do when encountered. This film is visual proof of a Sasquatch, there's really no question about that, but it won't satisfy those still preferring skepticism.

  • ok, I need some sleep, but if this was real, they could have tracked it until they caught it, or I guess they were late for tea or something....so they just took the pictures....dont think that makes sense

  • @okbye1

    The weather got really nasty by the morning oft he next day. A deluge came down, their truck was nearly caught in a landslide and they had to get out of there before they got stuck.

    They did actually plan to stay there and follow it up but unfortunately the weather drove them out.

  • You know the old lady still has the original film and it is ten times sharper then all these copy of copy of copy stuff you see now. this look nothing like the original film. when you watch the true print it becomes harder to say FAKE.

  • thats my mom dude, she didnt shave that morning. 

  • very good work!

  • The sightings are always at the correct time by a lone creature in this case a healthy female who walked along even with rearing horses and commotion including the horses coming. then patterson chases her and she casually walks along and without family members or protective males living in a group. Conveniently--patterson made sure to warn gremlin not to shoot when they set out and he still makes money doing appearances and cant confess justifying it so that their kids will cash in also.

  • 2nd spell fix lol has**

  • case*

  • That's a crease in the monkey suit. LOL.

  • @sirtinycreep if it is why hase this tape never been classified as a hoax and not by retards like you no one have ever been able to make an identical costume why cuz its real

  • @NarutoJigglePoP Because they couldn't get confirmation of who had actually done the hoax. Doesn't mean it's not a hoax. Just that you need to present valid evidence. Something cryptozoologists don't seem to understand. ;)

  • this is so freaking sweet! finally the proof we need!

  • Nice try. Thats a Photoshop lens brush effect on a small sample of frames. You can tell by watching the funny circular bulge around the thigh. It produces a ring of slightly darker pixels. FAKE.

  • @macnadoodle look at the actual footage jerky, and you will see muscle movement. There is no doubt about that fact. Also the hernia in the leg. I guess they decided to add that for effect, huh? John Chambers stated there was no way he could have duplicated that so called 'costume' in those years. I doubt it could be done now. I just don't believe it's a man in a costume.

  • @Colstonewall Watch 'AP Bigfoot" on Youtube...fx techs from Jim Henson's Creature shop take THE closest look at the subject in the film, putting it under the microscope like never before.....their HEAD fx tech explains how they could produce the film with TODAY'S materials...but he states "I have NO IDEA how they would have made this suit in 1967."...

  • I just had to beast one out to this

  • squatch got some big ol' titties!!!

  • @Alzee74

    hahahahaha

    

  • @retrobloke78

    The PGF isn't a man in a suit and doesn't look like one. We've seen how silly Bob Heironimus looks in a suit when he put on a Phil Morris suit during the Cow Camp 'recreation'. It was ridiculous and so terrible that they wouldn't release the actual moving footage.

    The Freeman footage doesn't look anywhere near as real as the PGF. That's why it hardly raises any debate. It's far more obscure and fleeting as well and we see next to nothing of it.

  • @LaughingGravy31: Bob H was a fat old man when he donned a suit for that documentary report? He was a much younger, muscular and athletically built man at the time of PGF. The comparison is not really valid given the passage of time. The same peson 40 years apart might just as well be two totally different people?

  • @digglyda

    Bon Heironimus was actually quite a slim man in 1967. He wasn't exactly a body builder. He's not the right height and he's not the right bulk.

    That's not Bob Heironimus in the PGF.

  • @LaughingGravy31: Bob H stood about 6ft 2ins in his "prime". Check out the photo of the 6 guys on horseback and you'll see Bob H is neither skinny nor musclebound but appears "muscular & athletic" as I described (clearly bigger than Bob G who is next to him). The "thing" in PGF is about 6ft 4ins ...exactly right for a six foot+ man wearing a padded costume.

  • @digglyda

    Patty is taller than Jim Mclarin (6ft 6 in boots) even though she has bent legs, bent over waist and her head is somewhat lowered.

    The PGF creature would be getting onto 7ft tall.

    Bob H wasn't an inch over 6ft and way too slim to be Patty. If he was padded up to such and extent he would never be able to move so freely and fluidly.

    It's IMPOSSIBLE for it to be Bob H in a suit.

    You need to get yourself another suit man.

    Bob H's descriptions about the film site are also DISPROVEN.

  • @LaughingGravy31: Jim McLarin? yes, I've seen that faked image where Jim appears to be an anorexic dwarf next to a towering PGF subject. Simple crude fakery and manipulation of the subjects? Take a good copy of frame 352 and one of McLarin doing his comparison walk and examine the two directly with any picture program and you see that McLarin is clearly taller than PGF. There are too many reliable fixed reference points in 352 to try and fool anyone. PGF is clearly a bit over 6 fot tall.

  • @digglyda: ...and NOT the 7 1/2 foot tall monster that some people claim it to be. Don't take my word for any of it. If I'm lying then my lies will be clear to all. But go and examine the evidence yourself and then tell us what YOU see? Don't take other peoples word for it. Hoax & bullshit surrounds PGF so all you can do is examine the available facts ...such as to be found in visual datums in comparison photos. PGF is a man in a suit.

  • @digglyda

    ""PGF is a man in a suit""

    Explain how the arms are so long yet the elbow position is very low and the forearm is short? Arm extensions should have the opposite effect. The forearms should be longer with arm extension.

    Please explain how Patty can have very long arms but a low elbow position and comparatively short forearms?Don't forget the arms actually bend at the elbow and the fingers curl.It's IMPOSSIBLE to make a suit with a fake elbow lower than a real elbow and bend the arm.

  • @LaughingGravy31: My opinion is that a shoulder harness like that worn Football players would change the dimensions enough to skew the apparent ratios? The trouble with analysing the creature in the film is that it's NOT a man but is a man in a suit. Padding adds the extra size upwards but the arms are just human arms. There is nothing special or "odd" about PGF ...and it's why the thing has no visible neck, just a head on shoulders.

  • @digglyda

    A shoulder harness will not change the short forearm and low elbow joint.

    Patty's elbows are way too low and her forearms are way too short for that to be a man in a suit, especially Bob Heironimus.

    Patty's arms are longer than a humans but arm extensions would make the forearm longer, not shorter.

    Patty's elbows are low and her forearms short. How can a suit do that?

  • @digglyda

    "" NOT the 7 1/2 foot tall monster that some people claim it to be. ""

    The consensus is that Patty is between 6 1/2 foot and 7 foot. The 'walking' height might be less than 6 1/2 foot but full standing height fully erect would be towards 7 foot.

  • @digglyda

    LOL, the Green footage is not 'faked'. John Green went to the actual spot where this footage was made and filmed his 6ft 6inch (in boots) friend Jim McClarin walking the same route. Patty is slightly taller than Jim and much broader/bulkier.

    Patty is also significantly bent over and is not standing straight. Her legs are bent, her torso is slouched over and her head is dipped.

    Patty would be near on 7ft if she was standing fully upright.

  • @LaughingGravy31: the Green footage pic I saw has McLarin & Patty cropped together in one image next to each other. Patty is impossibly massive in that pic. As you say, leaning over & bent knees but still towering over 6ft 5in McLarin? The bigger they talk patty up the harder it becomes to swallow. Female too making males even bigger, heavier & taller! At least I've tried to examine and compare the pics I can find? I wish more people would. Even that NASI report must be working to a bias?

  • @digglyda

    "" Patty is impossibly massive in that pic.""

    For a man in a suit yes, but Patty isn't a man in a suit. She is not "impossibly massive" for a bigfoot. She is definitely impossibly massive to be Bob Heironmus. It's IMPOSSIBLE for that to be Bob heironimus.

    And I didn't say Patty towers over McClarin. I said she looks slightly taller than McClarin. Put her straight fully erect and she would be towards 7 ft tall.

    Patty's walking height would be between 6ft and 6 1/2 foot.

  • @digglyda

    Bob Heironimus has been PROVEN to be making stuff up by the footage itself. Bob H claims the creek was dry, that Roger was off the road a ways when filming.

    In fact we can see the WET AND FLOWING creek in the first few frames of the PGF and we can also see the road right by Roger's feet.

    Bill Munns has also proven that Roger wasn't on a horse shaking the camera but rather he was on foot and clambering up and down the banks of Bluff Creek. That's why the camera jiggles.

    Bob H=LIAR.

  • @retrobloke78

    The PGF isn't a man in a suit and doesn't look like one. We've seen how shit Bob Heironimus looks in a suit when he put on a Phil Morris suit during the Cow Camp 'recreation'. It was ridiculous and so terrible that they wouldn't release the actual moving footage.

    The Freeman footage doesn't look anywhere near as real as the PGF. That's why it hardly raises any debate. It's far more obscure and fleeting as well and we see next to nothing.

  • @retrobloke78

    ""I'd take a convincing video that doesn't look like a man in a suit.""

    Which man in a suit does the PGF look like? Can you give me a direct example? If it's like a man in a suit then which man in a suit is it like? It certainly isn't like Bob Heironimus in the fat Ewok suit from the Cow Camp "recreation" LOL.

    So come on, please provide an example exactly which suit the PGF is like. Can you do that?

  • Quite the contrary, digglyda. She reacts exactly like they most often do, she's calm & retreating the scene. If she thought herself in any kind of danger, like shots fired at her or had Roger kept approaching, U can bet she'd most likely run. Or attacked. I don't know which is most likely, probably the fleeing, but had she attacked we'd never seen this footage. We obviously don't know precisely why she didn't hear them, a combination of hooves, windy weather, a running creek. Encounters happen.

  • @reclaimerReclaimer: 20 feet. That's the initial distance described by RP and BG of this "encounter". BF is described as smart, intelligent, stealthy and a master at staying hidden. This "encounter" shows that BF must be anything but those things. And hearing is just one of the senses that should have triggered reaction. This thing neither saw, smelled or felt them approaching. 2 men & 3 horses. BF must be easy prey to get that close to in the open ...unless it's just a guy in a suit?

  • Nope. It must be pretty smart to have stayed hidden for so long, lucky too, and we humans were just too few and too spooked. That about explains it. PGF's still as good as it gets, this and Marble Mountain visually prove the existence of this species best. Physical evidence is what's lacking.

  • @reclaimerReclaimer: Smart? RP & BG just walked right up to one in the creek bed: 2 men, 3 horses and it didn't see, hear, smell or feel them coming? Then it just walks away. Any animal that stupid would be pretty easy to track, hunt & kill. The PGF film directly contradicts everything that BF believers claim about BF and then they still insist it is "proof" of BF's existence?

  • @digglyda

    The creek was flowing, there was a large downfall tree pile in the way and Patterson and Gimlin were on horses. They were blocked from the creature's vision, the flowing creek probably muffled their sounds and the wind may have blowing towards P and G rather than towards the creature.

    It's not really rocket science why Patterson and Gimlin surprised the creature. For all we know, they do not associate the sound of hoofed animals with danger and P and G were not loud mouthed men.

  • @retrobloke78 Ok, at face value I agree with your first point about the lack of close footage.I`m not an expert but I did get the impression from what I`ve read that most alleged sightings are at night.If theres any basis to these nocturnal sightings couldn`t that at least in part account for the lack of "close" footage?Also if bigfoot is real it is likely to be a lot more intelligent than your average mammel and presumably all the more difficult to detect as a result than other mammles

  • @MrWudewasa: "Intelligent & difficult to detect"? The 2 cowboys leading 3 horses managed to surprise one here at a distance of 20 feet? There are hundreds of claimed close encounters with people getting lovely blurred footage of "something" up close. If Bigfoot was real it would have to be the stupidest creature ever evolved. Yet nobody can manage to find, catch or kill one? Convenient isn't it?

  • @retrobloke78 Ok, at face value I agree with your first point about the lack of close footage.I`m not an expert but I did get the impression from what I`ve read that most alleged sightings are at night.If theres any basis to these nocturnal sightings couldn`t that at least in part account for the lack of "close" footage?Also if bigfoot is real it is likely to be a lot more intelligent than your average mammel and presumably all the more difficult to detect as a result than other big mammles.

  • @retrobloke78 Can anything change your mind?like say evidance.

  • Soooo does anyone care to explain what this proves lol

  • Woah!Friends tell me this looks like a man in a suit.....what?I`d like to hand them an unlimited budget and see if they could obtain results even as half as convincing.when it comes to bigfoot people are pretty f***in dumb and arrogant too i think.Well done for spotting this,separates the loons from those with common sense.

  • It's real proof they exist, yes. Visual proof only, though. It'll take DNA to convince most people, buy you're right, this is definitely no hoax. For decades geeks have tried to prove it fake, they can't, making it useless for them to carry on. In the end we'll prove the species real, that'll end all the babble.

  • ladies and gentalmen this video your watching is the best poof of big foot that is a real big foot you can tell by the arms wrist neck line and mussles buldging out and the movement of the arms and how the arms are down to the knees, this video is the real thing nothing fake, and i might add i have nothing to do with this video it's just ive saw a real big foor before ill never forget it, thay are about 15 feet tall wight is around 550 pounds, there color can range from black to brown to red

  • what makes me think its not a hoax is that if you pause just when he turns back, he or maybe she..has one set of large mammary glands!!!

  • oh ya he,s real, i partyed with him the other night, prick drank all my beer, hit on my girl friend then left one hell of a mess in my bathroom....

  • OH WOW!! that makes it look more realistic.

  • im sick of people who rekon its a fucken fake you people just dont want to belive that there are myths in the world it is a real fucken bigfoot oright

  • @NgPPsP2Official23 well said!People enjoy being arrogantly dismissive but i believe they`ll get caught out in the end.

  • It's shadow cast from the movement of the right arm giving the appearance of muscle movement. There's foam padding under the costume and that's it. The legs are covered in thick fur ...you wouldn't even see clear musculature under thick fur and this is shadow giving the appearance of defintion. Look how blurred this frame is generally: It's just shape and colour with no actual detail visible. That's shadow not muscle.

  • @digglyda you give the clear impression that the concept of a real bigfoot is one which you feel threatened by.so what`s your evidance for the foam padding anyway?Or do you like to make emotional assertions which you can`t back up?

  • @MrWudewasa: Because Patterson was hoaxing all of us and I don't like being conned. My evidence for foam padding is right in front of us: You see muscle and I see padding. As I've said it appears to be crossing shadow giving the effect of movement on the surface. Incredible musculature in the thighs ...yet it has winnie the poohs ass? Heavily padded thick fur suit. I'm not upset by people believing in BF ...just that they believe in Patterson.

  • @digglyda

    ""Because Patterson was hoaxing all of us and I don't like being conned.""

    If you aren't fooled by the PGF then you aren't "being conned", are you?

    Do you understand that simple concept? You only get "conned" if you actually fall for something. You can't get "conned" if you don't fall for something.

    Geesh!

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

  • Youre right i am sick and i can be an evil cunt

  • @liameppes , because if you look you can see the breasts on patty..

  • @retrobloke78 , i am alot of things.. great lover obviously , clever as fuck , humble , the list goes on... out of you and your little tiny gang , is it you that does the tea bagging ?

  • @retrobloke78 , i deleated it ? you pathetic twat , no i didnt deleate fuck all and You know it, what a pathetic excuse that was for getting me mixed up with someone else tut tut now run along and play naked twister with gilbert and seymour ha ha one day you might ask some females to join in

  • @retrobloke78 , ive looked and never said that , i called you a sad little prick , i think youve been on too many youtube sites you must have me confused for some other handsome fucker

  • i cant remember writing that you hate bigfoot , if i did it was a mistake

  • @retrobloke78 , why do you hate bigfoot ? fuck knows , you tell me... see your refering to it as a living creature , thought you didnt believe ? i hope you do celebrate xmas , dont go getting pissed though , you talk enough shit whilst sober

  • @retrobloke78 , what am i on about ? you being a sad case , you dont like it when someone insults you but ive read many of your insults , anyway....my proof.... you havent got the hang of this tit for tat game we are all playin have you ? click on patterson video , theres your proof , you cant prove its a hoax

  • Comment removed

  • @retrobloke78 halfwit

  • @retrobloke78  moron

  • @retrobloke78  idiot

  • @joeyvader ignore retro , he cant help being such a prick , its just the person he is ..the cunt still has a bath with his old man

  • @retrobloke78 , i came on here to escape from you but looks like i was wrong , see your sprouting the same shit , wonder if most people on this page realises what a faggot you are ha ha i wouldnt warm to you even f we were cremated together.. so you think thats a bunch of keys moving about ?

  • Facial movement (not mask)- see bigfoot gait analysis video at both 2:56 and 2:57. The so called "mask" is amazingly flexible and must be very very thin or it would show itself better at these instances.

  • @retrobloke78 , you sad little prick

  • My GOD you are dim aren't you.???..I will type this slowly for you, as we can all see that there isn't a high wattage bulb in there..you see...oh never mind...I grow weary of debating with a half-witt.."You have wit,you have no clue." Thanks for sayiing I have wit...are you SO empty headed that you dont' realize that this is a compliment?? Never mind...I already know the answer to that..

  • @retrobloke78 Funny that there's NO awards mentioned for their 'kiddie suits' as you call them...I thought you were just ignorant...as it turns  out you're mentally challenged...

  • Scientific and Engineering Award to Faz Fazakas, Brian Henson, Dave Housman, Peter Miller and John Stephenson for the Henson Performance Control System. Emmy Awards Emmy Award, Best Special Visual Effects for a Miniseries or Movie, to Jamie Courtier and Jim Henson's Creature Shop for "Alice in Wonderland". (1999) Emmy Nomination, Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, Special Effects, to Jim Henson's Creature Shop for "Jason and the Argonauts".

  • @retrobloke78 That's a RIOT!!! The Head of Henson's Shop isn't a "Hollywood costume maker'...his suits have appeared in major motion pictures for years...but he ISN'T qualified to commment based on his zip code..if you don't want to be perceived as an assclown, THINK before you post such an inane argument...

  • @retrobloke78 So the HEAD of Jim Hensons' Creature Shop DOESN'T have an office in Hollywood, but the studio is elsewhere...so it's ONLY fx people who actually have offices in HOLLYWOOD that count?? ...a costume maker and sculptor from Shepperton Studios in England wouldn't count? So it HAS to be an fx expert whose shop is in Hollywood..?? I think our battle of wits is almost over...you are unarmed...

  • So the HEAD of Jim Henson's Creature shop ISN'T a 'real costume maker'..?? How so?? How did YOU come to the conclusion that HE isn't a 'real costume maker'? How did you reach this conclusion? If you can direct us to a 'real costume maker' that has done detailed analysis on the film subject, as has Munns and Burke, I will surely open my eyes and read their findings...

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • Great movement from foam padding muscles in the thigh. Not the slightest trace of movement from the gluteals which on a creature this size would be huge and powerful. Go check any version of PGF: This thing has winnie the poohs ass. This clip shows the hard edge of the bottom section of the costume separate from the thighs below and beneath it.

  • ....or you can listen to what the head of Jim Henson's Creature Shop, and see what he has to say about his analysis of the FILM, and not a grainy 5th gen youtube copy...watch "AP bigfoot" to hear him put the film through THE closest scrutiny ever...I think a man who has made creature suits for over 20 years is more qualified to comment than you or I...

  • its a human u can see his white face in the eye area

  • @MrSuperDuperAnthony You have found a detail that NOBODY ever has!! After all these years of analysis, debate and film analysis...and all we had to do was find YOU!! Good show old chap!!

  • I will say this though, his coat sure is shiny...hmmm

    Me: Bigfoot, you're hair always seems so full and rich...

    Bigfoot: Try this...(hands me a bottle of Head and Shoulders)...

    Me: Head and Shoulders, but you don't have dandruff?

    Bigfoot: Exactly.

  • @mastershake2879 you robbed that off family guy

  • @Josh10193 i don't believe so....the shampoo commercial jokes (dandruff/"tingling means it's working" bits) has been around since at least the early nineties, that I know of.....nice try though

  • Tasco came out with zoom 7-15 binoculars in 1979.I watched a male bigfoot in douglas county, missouri for all of 15 mins.The patterson tape is the only thing ive ever watched that resembled what I saw.I really dont think it is a fake

  • They do have smaller family groups and I simply think they don't need fire, realizing probably it'd risk setting the whole place ablaze by accident. I don't think you necessarily need to invent or wear clothes to be regarded a human species, especially when they don't require it naturally by excessive hairiness. Language they may actually possess, witnesses have heard chatter with spoken words aped, so to speak. Linguist expert Scott Nelson rates the Sierra Sounds language. All sounds too smart.

  • @komodoman bull shit.......intelligence leads to curiosity ..this bitch however has been hiding and cant even seem to get a decent pic or video.lmao

  • Don't buy the nocturnal stuff, they simply move about whenever there's fewer folks around and often that's at night, they're just as active during the day though. Just like we are, same thing. Our two species are only so far apart, most Indians see them as another tribe or race that just happens to very hairy and very tall. Thus, well equipped to life in the rugged wilderness. The rest of us humans are as duped on this as it's possible to be, that's why many Natives won't talk out of BF respect.

  • @komodoman The Indians would perceive them as human, as there were NO other animal bipeds around them..therefore, a large animal with a bipedal gait MUST be a type of human...to me, though, they possess none of the hallmarks of humanity...fire, tools, clothes, language, social groups....

  • in 1964 barely any one had camera and the guy was one of the rare people using the camera in the woods

  • @retrobloke78 agreed.

  • If sasquatch actually does exist, they are survivng members of a group of great apes believed to have become extinct millions of years ago named gigantopithecus blackii.

  • its a shadow

  • TV SHOW '''SURVIVOR MAN''-LES STROUD TALK'S ABOUT HIS BIGFOOT ENCOUNTER LINK HERE----> kzoz.com/jeff-and-jeremy/2011/­­02/our-interview-with-survivo­r­man-les-stroud/ GO TO 8:50 WHEN LES STROUD SPEAK'S ABOUT BIGFOOT AND HIS 2 ENCOUNTERS

    

  • oh my god ... i totally think this is real now, i never thought about the muscle movement. costumes dont have muscle movement

  • @Ineedthat06  Watch 'ap Bigfoot' to hear some findings from some fx people...

  • we all have to admit that if this film was faked then its the best fake of all times now. and it would be different if it was a legend in one state of america but these things have been seen world wide. where fame and publicity isnt a factor to the people who live there. so why would they lie about what they have seen?????? unlike most of us we would jump on camera and say anything if the money was right. lol so there has to be something out there. godbless.

  • Lol, the whole time i was saying "Bigfoot dance, Bigfoot dance, Bigfoot dance" :P

  • has anyone notice that bigfoot is a female big foot notice the breast movment..

  • @lu770 its not like theres 1 bigfoot and its a female its a species and this one caught on film happens to be female......

  • Agreed. Her leg bones are a lot longer than human leg bones as well, that fact alone has her down as a genuine unknown being in any serious scientists' book. Only a few, like Meldrum, have the guts to actually say it. Same with her arm bones, too long for a human, especially when considering they're swinging naturally from up there placed so high on a torso too long for human proportion, and shoulders this broad. A fake mask couldn't even be reached either. Her anatomy's in line with BF reports.

  • Well said moose

  • Try some Coast to Coast, Listen to what actual experts have to say in stead of relying on history channel an monster hunters

  • i love how people think this is a monkey suit when this was clearly made in 1967 and no person had CGI then to make muscke movements in a ape costume this cant possiby be a hoax its impossible to make a monkey suit to do that and you can estimate how tall it is by measuring how far patty takes a step and experts estimated that patty was around 7 to 8ft tall

  • ITS A FUCKING NIGGER WHY CANT Y'ALL UNDERSTAND?!

  • I always see these primate anatomy experts poring over this footage, giving expert testimony that it's real.

    As an artist, I look at this and say, that doesn't look like any primate I've ever seen. It's anatomy doesn't look right for any animal. What it looks like, is Bob Heironimus in a gorilla suit.

  • Ha, while every one is focused on the muscle movement of the right leg, everyone quickly forgets the left leg which appears to grow and shrink during the motion of the step. WHY IS THIS? Its likely the more obvious explanation is to do with the quality of the footage. Oh and in case everyone missed it, the patterson film has been admitted to as a hoax.

  • @TheSlothHead and the proof to patterson attimitting this to be a hoax is where?

  • They call me sasquatch at school because im hairy..

  • @retrobloke78 Everyone?? nope..wrong..Bill Munns hasn't...neither has Peter Burke...those are two fx men who did a very detailed analysis of the film...Stan Winston did NO film analysis at all, but gave us the 3 second sound byte 'bad hair suit."...the footage they worked with was from the best copy of the FILM itself...if it is such a bad suit, why did Rick Baker make an INFERIOR suit TEN years later for King Kong?? He had studio backing, tons of money, and Carlo Rambaldi in his corner...

  • Instead of spending billions of dollars to fight fucking wars, we should invest in serious and well funded expeditions to find these creatures, it would be the species discovery of all time, not to mention that if these guys are a missing link in our evolution, maybe they hold secrets in their DNA that could lead to better understanding how we work, maybe even hold secrets that could help us medically, who knows. But we should make an effort to find them before they really do become extinct.

  • @1:33 on bigfoot sasquatch evidence video

  • BF has learned to hide well as a SURVIVAL MECHANISM.We DO have some fossil teeth if he is related to Gigantapithecus.We DO have video-this video is real-you can see the mass @1:33 and the herniated muscle.A large animal will be designed to not lock the knees as seen in the walk.Scientific evidence of bigfoot includes flexible footprints with dermal ridges, footprint size natural distribution, hair, scat, vocalizations, behavior signatures(broken trees, etc)& video.They're living under our noses!

  • @retrobloke78 If you listen to Peter Burke, the Head of Jim Henson's Creature Shop, you will find that there is plenty of movement that can't be seen in a youtube 10th gen clip...Burke's team had a 1st gen copy of the film, and mention achilles tendon movement, trap and lat movement.. "AP Bigfoot" on YT to watch it...fascinating..Burke comments "I have NO IDEA how they would have made a suit like this in 1967."..

  • if there is a sasquatch or bigfoot, chinese people would've caught it and eaten it already. fake.

  • @retrobloke78 The materials for the suit (long arms). They couldn't make arm extensions in '67. They are hard to make because each finger has to move individually.

  • @TheGamerFromBelgium No...arm extensions have been around in gorilla suits from the 40's and 50's..the REAL problem is that they extend the arms from elbow to wrist, making the lower arms too long in proportion to the rest of the arm...

  • stop pausing and circling and pointing and just let me see the muscle move

  • if you're saying bigfoots don't exsist, it's obvious you're wrong. There have been way too many sightings for a hoax (what is everyone in the whole damn world in on this hoax except for me?) and the reports have been far too consistent, there's been somthing that matches up with all of em (that are legitimate). Another thing, have we discovered every single specie in the whole world? There are animals we don't even know about, so why can't bigfoot be one of them?

  • I don't think he would no, because I don't see how he could. Look at her upper leg, that's clearly a muscle right there as she steps down and not just a fold in a pair of jeans. Anatomy experts agree, f/x guys just look in amazement scratching their heads. Don't buy the Chang mask bull story, Chang always made flat big nosed faces like that, the Morlocks in The Time Machine (1960) have similar faces as that Star Trek mask. Just a typical Chang head, no resemblance to Patty.

  • @komodoman how do you know its a she

  • In this case the obvious is a lie, yes. No suit sorry, but BobH's full of it yeah...

  • @komodoman How the hell could someone take that large of a stride in a damn monkey suit? And seriously...did people just take random strolls in monkey suits at that time period?

  • No it wasn't kittfan, you can the geek BobH in a Morris suit elsewhere on darkwinglh's channel, or to the right here... There you'll see him wandering around making a real fool of himself, the subject in the Patterson film was no suit but a real BF. They've never at any time in Hollywood made suits looking like this, for the simple fact they can't, anatomy-wise it's a no-no due to the species' much longer torso. Patty's leg bones are even longer than BobH's, she's wider as well and arms longer.

  • There was a documentary on mystery360 (Nat geographic hd i saw it and they proved that it was probably real. Creating the costume in 2011 is very hard and the materials to create it didn't even exist !!

  • It was a costume made by Phillip Morris you can read more if you type in Google Search Gimlin-Patterson Bigfoot Costume

  • The horizontal area just above the "muscle" you are showing is the best proof this beast is a fake. If you see this film segment looped, it is obvious the movement on the leg is loose costume material flapping like a flag in the wind.

  • what if someone was filming a fake bigfoot video and when they were supposed to walk up to the guy in the suit, they actually went up to a real one.

  • i think that even if bigfoot turned out to be real and it was caught on video, people would still question it! lol

  • due to the size and obvious muscle movement thiscant be a suit. it has the wrong shading and texture for fake fur.its great forward stance and gait clearly shows a real bipedal creature of some type crossing a creek bed. It might not be a wild animal but a primitive race of humans living in the wild. We dont capture and put humans in zoos or experiment on them either so its best to let this thing surface on its own and not try to pursue it.

  • All I can say is that at 0:10, when you see the leg hit the ground, you can almost feel the mass of the creature as the knee bends and a "shockwave" shoots up the leg. I kind of wish somebody attempted to recreate just this little detail with a suit. I have no idea if it's possible or not, but it looks damn good. If it's fake, Bob Gimlin is probably reading this comment and laughing because it turned out way more realistic than they planned lol!

  • wow there's even a clear face? lt's so amazing

  • The footage is way too old and blurry to see muscle movement. The only way to capture is with a digital or HD camera, not a 10 mm camera like the one Patterson used.

  • @retrobloke78 Yes that rly wakes up some wondering. I recently saw a document on National geographic channel. Scientists studied the original film which they got from Pattersons widow. They photographed every frames + they laser scanned the area where the film was shot. Then they notized that odd part of the film that the creature cant be that short. I didnt quite understood how they came to that conclusion, but I think scientists today have some knowledgment and technology to discover things

  • The guy under the suit has been measured to be 8.2 ft. tall. Omg It's Shaq O'neal with extended legs. Funny that the creatures leg is relatively shorter than a humans leg. Patterson & Co had perfect knowledgement to build a suit with perfect imitatation of a muscle movement and gorilla anatomy. When comparing this to Planet of Apes style suits they had technology far ahead what Hollywood had. I dunno is this real or hoax, just nice job at least:)

  • "HOLLY SHIT ITS A BIGFOOT!!!" -BUTCHYKID624 lol =D

  • No comment, just interesting.

  • I like how all i see is idiots, bitching back and forth whether or not big foot is real.

  • Well it's called adding up, and because I haven't seen a Bigfoot myself unlike 1000s of people.

  • I don't ignore anything, you do. I've pointed out what all those points you preconceivingly still cling to are, & why they're real & no suit. How can you say there's no evidence over 1000s of years, there's plenty of evidence, I'm sure there may be the odd bone too but it may not be recent discoveries & so gone or destroyed now. Maybe some bones actually are in museums somewhere marked unknown, maybe not, afterall this is probably a rare human species that doesn't just drop dead on the savanna.

  • Since this is clearly no suit the more it gets studied, that means any suit philosophy won't apply here, so again show us a BF movie with a BF looking like this then we'll all gladly shut up. -You wanna talk '44 years'...the odds in your favor aren't very good there. lol These beings have 100s of 1000s of years on us no doubt, and you think 44 years is long... Recreate it, be our guest. In the meantime, I'll take experts like locomotion and primatologists' words for it being real over yours. ;)

  • So you keep saying retro, but it's the only thing skeptics say...that it's fake...yet you/they can't prove it positively so. Ain't never gonna happen either, nothing conclusive, or it probably would've. Would be a little foolish too of the scientists that have already said it's real, if it isn't - but still they gladly proclaim that it's real. We all know there'll never be any suit found, or any successful recreation, or any serious admitting of fakery. Instead only BobH and his fans babble...

  • Wrong, Bernard's just one guy and I believe even he was a little shaky on the film as well...

  • I guess you don't know any experts then, retro...

  • nice chi chi's!

  • Where are they then? You know why we probably don't hear from them; they're not sure. Actually it's because we see her closer now, that every silly idea of a hoax sinks like a stone... She's been examinded left and right up and down and nowhere does it indicate it's fake, except to the stuck in Glitterland, simply because she's so humanlike and much more in fact than most previously thought. The romantic drooped ape theory is yesterday's playground, the human species angle is tomorrow's field.

  • Find and ask them then, retro. The reason you're not hearing them, is because even they're in doubt and don't want to say the wrong thing that'll haunt them later...

  • Clearly it's not muscles to you because it's how you'd like it to be, but as said, both f/x artists at the time and primatologists since then have said it's muscle movement alright.

  • Well, you're clearly seeing wrong then or want to see what you want to see. All I can say is that most people, not our self-deceiving skeptics, actually trust their eyes and see muscles here. You say you're not but I'm afraid I don't believe it, even f/x experts at the time that didn't know Roger said they saw muscles there it would not have been possible for them to make. So either Roger invented a whole new technique never seen since, or it's real. It's also hair, not fur.

  • Funny you can't see muscle movements all over but luckily that's something most experts do, guess you just don't want to. So tell me, suit believer, why did they make the soles white then and everything right but not the palms? Don't you think there just might be a natural anatomical explanation why she looks the way she does, no one here's ever been close enough to really check out a Bigfoot up close. Except perhaps good old Albert Ostman. Check out a chimp for instance; thick padded soles.

  • 69 there's way wrong. retro, palms aren't black more like dirty I'd imagine. Who the hell knows, hard to tell tiny details from footage this old so be honest, eh. lol Her face is not black either, in fact her whole body clearly is not completely dark as seen through the hair. The feet thing's been explained and answered so many times and yet people keep babbling about it. Could be a number of different things combined; old faded color footage, wet soil, light skin tone. Now quit asking. lol