It's obvious you have done no research on the PG footage. I too used to be a skeptic. In fact, I don't believe in any other evidence of Bigfoot. I actually took the time to research this incredible footage and it is mind blowing. I'm not telling you Bigfoot exists. I'm not even saying that the PG footage is proof of anything. I believe it is simply because it has yet to be duplicated - hundreds of reputable people in Hollywood and professional costume designers have tried and admitted defeat in duplicating this. It is more impressive given it was filmed in the late 60's and has been able withstand every scrutiny against it. Dismissing it is not an argument. You're just deflecting at that point. You need to show how/why this footage isn't real.
The being in the footage has been shown to be nearly 8ft tall, and the gait is NOT REPLICATE-ABLE BY ANY KNOWN HUMAN. Apes can, though.
Proof that hundreds of people replicated this unsuccessfully? That's such a bullshit statement dude. A person in a costume can easily replicate that. There's no way to dispute a video of a man in a suit when there is nothing real to compare it to. What are they supposed to dispute? It clearly looks like a man walking in a suit. There's nothing in the video that a human in a suit couldn't do. Fools like to talk about the bio-mechanics of the "creature", but it looks like a man walking in uneven terrain in a bulky money suit to me. It's also around 6ft, not 8 feet as you claimed. Faking a video isn't hard.
You're ignoring the fact that a con-man bought a camera and on the first day of trying managed to get the clearest and "best" footage of bigfoot ever found. You're basing your evidence on crap footage of a con man, when there is zero physical evidence to support any such creatures living in North America. You just can't hide things that large in the United States. We have hunters and campers in every national forest, all with cameras and guns. You never see any solid footage. You never see any hair, crap, body, teeth because it doesn't exist.
"In 2002, Philip Morris of Morris Costumes (a
North Carolina-based company offering costumes, props and stage products) claimed that he made a gorilla costume that was used in the Patterson film. Morris says he discussed his role in the hoax "at costume conventions, lectures, [and] magician conventions"
[253] in the 1980s, but first addressed the public at large on August 16, 2002, on Charlotte, North Carolina, radio station
WBT-AM.
[254] His story was also printed in
The Charlotte Observer.
[255] Morris claims he was reluctant to expose the hoax earlier for fear of harming his business: giving away a performer's secrets, he said, would be widely regarded as disreputable.
[256]
Morris said that he sold an ape suit to Patterson via mail-order in 1967, thinking it was going to be used in what Patterson described as a "prank."
[257] (Ordinarily the gorilla suits he sold were used for a popular side-show routine that depicted an attractive woman changing into a gorilla.) After the initial sale, Morris said that Patterson telephoned him asking how to make the "shoulders more massive"
[258] and the "arms longer."
[259] Morris says he suggested that whoever wore the suit should wear football shoulder pads and hold sticks in his hands within the suit.
As for the creature's walk, Morris said:
The Bigfoot researchers say that no human can walk that way in the film. Oh, yes they can! When you're wearing long clown's feet, you can't place the ball of your foot down first. You have to put your foot down flat. Otherwise, you'll stumble. Another thing, when you put on the gorilla head, you can only turn your head maybe a quarter of the way. And to look behind you, you've got to turn your head and your shoulders and your hips. Plus, the shoulder pads in the suit are in the way of the jaw. That's why the Bigfoot turns and looks the way he does in the film. He has to twist his entire upper body.
[260]
Morris' wife and business partner Amy had vouched for her husband and claims to have helped frame the suit.
[260] Morris offered no evidence apart from testimony to support his account, the most conspicuous shortcoming being the absence of a gorilla suit or documentation that would match the detail evidenced in the film and could have been produced in 1967."
Korff, Kal K.; Kocis, Michaela (July–August 2004). "Exposing Roger Patterson's 1967 Bigfoot Film Hoax".
Skeptical Inquirer (
Committee for Skeptical Inquiry)
28 (4): 35–40.
ISSN 0194-6730.
