Patterson Gimlin Bigfoot Video

[Mike]

There's no such thing as bigfoot. Just a lot of fake videos and people that want to believe REALLY badly.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Bigfoot is an idea not an organization.

 

[minute bull]

Bigfoot is an idea not an organization.

Kind of like the King of the Burbs? John Brown?



He's not a rapper; he's an entity.

 

[BearGrounds]

That's what I find so incredibly interesting about this discussion because i feel exactly the same towards you

I've seen plenty of outside video 'evidence' of 'Bigfoot' and I can easily tell when I'm being fucked with the Freeman video is a prime example For whatever reason people tend to think that outside of PG, the Freeman video is next up as authentic. I watch that and I'm like WTF? Clearly a dude in a suit

The PG video is the only one where the subject is out in the wide open to virtually study I'm not going to repeat myself

if you're interested enough I encourage you to go down the MK Davis wormhole It's very compelling stuff and the dude has like 30 films of analysis on PG alone

What about the Freeman footage screams hoax?

 

[BearGrounds]

 

[BluntForceTrama]

What about the Freeman footage screams hoax?

Hope I'm not offending but the whole thing comes off a bit hokey to me from minute 1 basically

It looks like a man in a monkey suit and I get the feeling they're tying to hide something by how obscure and dark the video is You barely even seen whatever's being videod and when you do see it it doesn't look real

the PG film is bolstered by the fact that it's relatively close and shot in broad daylight Details of the thing were captured Nothing to hide here

And when freeman says 'look there it goes' I almost feel like laughing It just doesn't come off as genuine the entire thing

do you know something or have seen something I haven't?

 

[revoltub]

I'm perfectly happy to give anything a chance. That doesn't mean I have to buy into any silly claim. I've looked at the footage. I've looked at the credibility and history of the men involved in the footage.

You're talking to a guy who believes in aliens for fucks sake. It's not like you can pretend I'm that closed minded when I'm telling you I believe in aliens. I just don't find anything about bigfoot sightings or footage to be credible. I also don't find UFO sightings to be very credible.



What hearsay or second hand information do you think I'm relying on? I'm using my own critical thinking skills to look at that painfully fake footage to determine its authenticity.

Here's an easy reason not to believe this stuff. What is the last new species discovered in the North American wilderness that's even remotely in the same size as the bigfoot claims? If there's so much unexplored wilderness for these creatures to allegedly hide in, then it should be easy to find another example of a previously undiscovered 400lb mammal being recently discovered.

Gorillas weren't discovered until 1900.

 

[Bald1]

That show has done more to discredit the Bigfoot community then decades of looking for evidence yet finding none.

"Hey Bobo, why don't you go stand by that tree and act like a dumbass. Yeah, you got it, that's the move."

The campiness of the whole thing was pure cringe. Don't get me wrong, there was entertainment value in there at times, but it definitely wasn't something to be taken seriously.

 

[BluntForceTrama]

I'm perfectly happy to give anything a chance. That doesn't mean I have to buy into any silly claim. I've looked at the footage. I've looked at the credibility and history of the men involved in the footage.

You're talking to a guy who believes in aliens for fucks sake. It's not like you can pretend I'm that closed minded when I'm telling you I believe in aliens. I just don't find anything about bigfoot sightings or footage to be credible. I also don't find UFO sightings to be very credible.



What hearsay or second hand information do you think I'm relying on? I'm using my own critical thinking skills to look at that painfully fake footage to determine its authenticity.

Here's an easy reason not to believe this stuff. What is the last new species discovered in the North American wilderness that's even remotely in the same size as the bigfoot claims? If there's so much unexplored wilderness for these creatures to allegedly hide in, then it should be easy to find another example of a previously undiscovered 400lb mammal being recently discovered.

Quoting Wikipedia is pretty laughable I'm not saying it's not true but we all know half if not more of the stuff in that reference isn't validated

but of course that's your proof because asking you to delve deeper into this would mean you're actually putting effort into it and we all know that ain't worth it to you

much easier to quote Wikipedia right ? If I were to quote Wiki, I'd never hear the end of it but it's perfectly ok for you to?

great critical thinking skills you got there bud Think I've heard enough I know what you're about

 

[Stranger Come Knocking]

Did any of the Bigfoot mindmeld guys chime in yet? I think one was banned but could be back on a diff name who knows?

 

[BearGrounds]

Hope I'm not offending but the whole thing comes off a bit hokey to me from minute 1 basically

It looks like a man in a monkey suit and I get the feeling they're tying to hide something by how obscure and dark the video is You barely even seen whatever's being videod and when you do see it it doesn't look real

the PG film is bolstered by the fact that it's relatively close and shot in broad daylight Details of the thing were captured Nothing to hide here

And when freeman says 'look there it goes' I almost feel like laughing It just doesn't come off as genuine the entire thing

do you know something or have seen something I haven't?

Not offended by respectful disagreement. To me, it looks real. The backside slope of the head, how it turns, and its ease of movement while carrying such bulk (I don't see any obvious indications of artificial cavities to fake said bulk) makes it believable. It steps from the hip too, like Patty. You can tell the foot is pulled up high and the strides long.

Granted, the footage isn't the best, which is why it's not a definitive capture.

I think his reaction is just typical of his mannerisms. If you watch the extended version, and following report, it's pretty clear that he's not much of a colorful or animated guy.

 

[DoomPatrol]

Gorillas weren't discovered until 1900.

That's a blatantly incorrect statement. The earliest recordings of them from foreigners date back to the 1800s, but proof of their existence went back generations before then to locals. There's also no issue with finding them in the wild and documenting their lives. They weren't exactly a shocking discovery to people who lived in the area. There was plenty of testable physical evidence to support photos and videos.

And final point, I said NORTH AMERICA. We're talking about Patterson footage, which was filmed in northern California. If you think it's reasonable that the North American wilderness can sustain hidden populations of massive apex predators, then it shouldn't be an issue to give another example of a newly discovered species of mammal that's several hundred pounds in size. When is the last time someone went into the wilderness of the PNW and discovered a new species? And I'm not talking about a tiny salamander subspecies. I'm talking about something completely new to the region and large enough to make a 800lb ape seem reasonable.

The truth of the matter is you will be unable to present an example because our wilderness hasn't been that wild and undiscovered for decades. It's certainly large, but it's not mysterious. It's just a lot of the same shit over a huge area.

Quoting Wikipedia is pretty laughable I'm not saying it's not true but we all know half if not more of the stuff in that reference isn't validated

but of course that's your proof because asking you to delve deeper into this would mean you're actually putting effort into it and we all know that ain't worth it to you

much easier to quote Wikipedia right ? If I were to quote Wiki, I'd never hear the end of it but it's perfectly ok for you to?

great critical thinking skills you got there bud Think I've heard enough I know what you're about

Wikipedia is a decent enough source for gaining an elementary level of insight. I wouldn't use it as a primary source for a scientific paper, but it's decent enough at explaining who Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin were.

I'll just bring the text to you since you don't plan on going to it.

Patterson said he became interested in Bigfoot after reading an article about the creature by Ivan T. Sanderson in True magazine in December 1959.[16] In 1961 Sanderson published his encyclopedic Abominable Snowmen: Legend Come to Life, a worldwide survey of accounts of Bigfoot-type creatures, including recent track finds, etc. in the Bluff Creek area, which heightened his interest. Thereafter, Marian Place wrote:

In 1962 he visited Bluff Creek and talked with a whole host of Bigfoot-believers. In 1964[17] he returned and met a timber-cruiser named Pat Graves, who drove him to Laird Meadows.[18] There Patterson saw fresh tracks—for him an almost unbearably exciting, spine-chilling experience. What a tremendous feat it would be—what a scientific breakthrough—if he could obtain unshakable evidence that these tracks were not the work of a prankster, but the actual mark of a hitherto unknown creature! If he succeeded, he would be famous! And rich! Alas, fame and fortune were not gained that year, nor the next, nor the next. Patterson invested thousands of hours and dollars combing Bigfoot and Sasquatch territory. He fought constant ridicule and a shortage of funds. ... he founded ... the Northwest Research Foundation. Through it he solicited funds . ... The response was encouraging and enabled him to lead several expeditions. ... In 1966 he published a paperback book at his own expense. ... He added the income from its sales and his lectures to the search fund. As each wilderness jaunt failed to see or capture the monster, one by one the thrill-seekers dropped out. But Patterson never gave up.[19]

Patterson's book, Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist?, was self-published in 1966. The book has been characterized as "little more than a collection of newspaper clippings laced together with Patterson's circus-poster style prose".[20] The book, however, contains 20 pages of previously unpublished interviews and letters, 17 drawings by Patterson of the encounters described in the text, 5 hand-drawn maps (rare in subsequent Bigfoot books), and almost 20 photos and illustrations from other sources.[citation needed] It was first reprinted in 1996 by Chris Murphy,[21] and then again re-issued by Murphy[22] in 2005 under the title The Bigfoot Film Controversy, with 81 pages of additional material by Murphy.

In May/June 1967 Patterson began filming a docudrama or pseudo-documentary about cowboys being led by an old miner and a wise Indian tracker on a hunt for Bigfoot. The storyline called for Patterson, his Indian guide (Gimlin in a wig), and the cowboys to recall in flashbacks the stories of Fred Beck (of the 1924 Ape Canyon incident) and others as they tracked the beast on horseback. For actors and cameraman, Patterson used at least nine volunteer acquaintances, including Gimlin and Bob Heironimus, for three days of shooting, perhaps over the Memorial Day weekend.[23][24] Patterson would have needed a costume to represent Bigfoot, if the time came to shoot such climactic scenes.

Prior to the October 1967 filming, Patterson apparently visited Los Angeles on these occasions:

Roger drove to Hollywood in 1964 and visited rockabilly songwriter and guitarist Jerry Lee Merritt, a Yakima native who was living there in Hollywood then.[25][26] He was trying to sell his hoop-toy invention.[27][28]
In 1966 he visited Merritt again while he was still trying to sell his hoop-toy invention.[29]
Merritt soon moved back to Yakima and became Patterson's neighbor, and later his collaborator on his Bigfoot documentary.[30]

Later in 1966 he and Merritt drove down there for several purposes. Patterson visited cowboy film star Roy Rogers for help.[31] He tried to sell his ponies-and-wagon to Disneyland or Knott's Berry Farm.[32]
In the summer of 1967, apparently after getting $700 from the Radfords and shooting some of his documentary, they tried unsuccessfully to attract investors to help further fund his Bigfoot movie.[33] They copyrighted or trademarked the term "Bigfoot".[34]
Both Patterson [35] and Gimlin had been rodeo riders and amateur boxers—and local champions in their weight classes. Patterson had played high school football.

In October 1967, Patterson and his friend Gimlin set out for the Six Rivers National Forest in far Northern California. They drove in Gimlin's truck, carrying his provisions and three horses, positioned sideways. Patterson chose the area because of intermittent reports of the creatures in the past, and of their enormous footprints since 1958. (His familiarity with the area and its residents from prior visits may also have been a factor.)

The most recent of these reports was the nearby Blue Creek Mountain track find, which was investigated by journalist John Green, Bigfoot hunter René Dahinden, and archaeologist Don Abbott on and after August 28, 1967.[36] This find was reported to Patterson (via his wife) soon thereafter by Al Hodgson, owner of the Willow Creek Variety Store.[37][38]

Though Gimlin says he doubted the existence of Sasquatch-like creatures, he agreed to Patterson's insistence that they should not attempt to shoot one.[39]

I'm not sure what "proof" you think I'm presenting. I'm not making the claim that bigfoot exists. I'm telling you that I don't find the video of their "proof" to be that strong.

And again, I'm a believer in aliens. So don't pretend like I'm some square who couldn't believe in a bigfoot despite solid evidence. I understand what evidence is and how to analyze it for credibility. I don't find the video credible.

It's really silly. There are endangered species like the Amur leopard, of which less than 100 exist in the wild. This is the real wilderness of Asia. Biologists and photographers still regularly go out and find clear photographs of those majestic creatures. So I don't buy the excuse that the woods 3 hours outside of San Francisco are too remote for scientists to go find a giant monkey.

 

[BluntForceTrama]

That's a blatantly incorrect statement. The earliest recordings of them from foreigners date back to the 1800s, but proof of their existence went back generations before then to locals. There's also no issue with finding them in the wild and documenting their lives. They weren't exactly a shocking discovery to people who lived in the area. There was plenty of testable physical evidence to support photos and videos.

And final point, I said NORTH AMERICA. We're talking about Patterson footage, which was filmed in northern California. If you think it's reasonable that the North American wilderness can sustain hidden populations of massive apex predators, then it shouldn't be an issue to give another example of a newly discovered species of mammal that's several hundred pounds in size. When is the last time someone went into the wilderness of the PNW and discovered a new species? And I'm not talking about a tiny salamander subspecies. I'm talking about something completely new to the region and large enough to make a 800lb ape seem reasonable.

The truth of the matter is you will be unable to present an example because our wilderness hasn't been that wild and undiscovered for decades. It's certainly large, but it's not mysterious. It's just a lot of the same shit over a huge area.





Wikipedia is a decent enough source for gaining an elementary level of insight. I wouldn't use it as a primary source for a scientific paper, but it's decent enough at explaining who Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin were.

I'll just bring the text to you since you don't plan on going to it.

Patterson said he became interested in Bigfoot after reading an article about the creature by Ivan T. Sanderson in True magazine in December 1959.[16] In 1961 Sanderson published his encyclopedic Abominable Snowmen: Legend Come to Life, a worldwide survey of accounts of Bigfoot-type creatures, including recent track finds, etc. in the Bluff Creek area, which heightened his interest. Thereafter, Marian Place wrote:

In 1962 he visited Bluff Creek and talked with a whole host of Bigfoot-believers. In 1964[17] he returned and met a timber-cruiser named Pat Graves, who drove him to Laird Meadows.[18] There Patterson saw fresh tracks—for him an almost unbearably exciting, spine-chilling experience. What a tremendous feat it would be—what a scientific breakthrough—if he could obtain unshakable evidence that these tracks were not the work of a prankster, but the actual mark of a hitherto unknown creature! If he succeeded, he would be famous! And rich! Alas, fame and fortune were not gained that year, nor the next, nor the next. Patterson invested thousands of hours and dollars combing Bigfoot and Sasquatch territory. He fought constant ridicule and a shortage of funds. ... he founded ... the Northwest Research Foundation. Through it he solicited funds . ... The response was encouraging and enabled him to lead several expeditions. ... In 1966 he published a paperback book at his own expense. ... He added the income from its sales and his lectures to the search fund. As each wilderness jaunt failed to see or capture the monster, one by one the thrill-seekers dropped out. But Patterson never gave up.[19]

Patterson's book, Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist?, was self-published in 1966. The book has been characterized as "little more than a collection of newspaper clippings laced together with Patterson's circus-poster style prose".[20] The book, however, contains 20 pages of previously unpublished interviews and letters, 17 drawings by Patterson of the encounters described in the text, 5 hand-drawn maps (rare in subsequent Bigfoot books), and almost 20 photos and illustrations from other sources.[citation needed] It was first reprinted in 1996 by Chris Murphy,[21] and then again re-issued by Murphy[22] in 2005 under the title The Bigfoot Film Controversy, with 81 pages of additional material by Murphy.

In May/June 1967 Patterson began filming a docudrama or pseudo-documentary about cowboys being led by an old miner and a wise Indian tracker on a hunt for Bigfoot. The storyline called for Patterson, his Indian guide (Gimlin in a wig), and the cowboys to recall in flashbacks the stories of Fred Beck (of the 1924 Ape Canyon incident) and others as they tracked the beast on horseback. For actors and cameraman, Patterson used at least nine volunteer acquaintances, including Gimlin and Bob Heironimus, for three days of shooting, perhaps over the Memorial Day weekend.[23][24] Patterson would have needed a costume to represent Bigfoot, if the time came to shoot such climactic scenes.

Prior to the October 1967 filming, Patterson apparently visited Los Angeles on these occasions:

Roger drove to Hollywood in 1964 and visited rockabilly songwriter and guitarist Jerry Lee Merritt, a Yakima native who was living there in Hollywood then.[25][26] He was trying to sell his hoop-toy invention.[27][28]
In 1966 he visited Merritt again while he was still trying to sell his hoop-toy invention.[29]
Merritt soon moved back to Yakima and became Patterson's neighbor, and later his collaborator on his Bigfoot documentary.[30]

Later in 1966 he and Merritt drove down there for several purposes. Patterson visited cowboy film star Roy Rogers for help.[31] He tried to sell his ponies-and-wagon to Disneyland or Knott's Berry Farm.[32]
In the summer of 1967, apparently after getting $700 from the Radfords and shooting some of his documentary, they tried unsuccessfully to attract investors to help further fund his Bigfoot movie.[33] They copyrighted or trademarked the term "Bigfoot".[34]
Both Patterson [35] and Gimlin had been rodeo riders and amateur boxers—and local champions in their weight classes. Patterson had played high school football.

In October 1967, Patterson and his friend Gimlin set out for the Six Rivers National Forest in far Northern California. They drove in Gimlin's truck, carrying his provisions and three horses, positioned sideways. Patterson chose the area because of intermittent reports of the creatures in the past, and of their enormous footprints since 1958. (His familiarity with the area and its residents from prior visits may also have been a factor.)

The most recent of these reports was the nearby Blue Creek Mountain track find, which was investigated by journalist John Green, Bigfoot hunter René Dahinden, and archaeologist Don Abbott on and after August 28, 1967.[36] This find was reported to Patterson (via his wife) soon thereafter by Al Hodgson, owner of the Willow Creek Variety Store.[37][38]

Though Gimlin says he doubted the existence of Sasquatch-like creatures, he agreed to Patterson's insistence that they should not attempt to shoot one.[39]

I'm not sure what "proof" you think I'm presenting. I'm not making the claim that bigfoot exists. I'm telling you that I don't find the video of their "proof" to be that strong.

And again, I'm a believer in aliens. So don't pretend like I'm some square who couldn't believe in a bigfoot despite solid evidence. I understand what evidence is and how to analyze it for credibility. I don't find the video credible.

It's really silly. There are endangered species like the Amur leopard, of which less than 100 exist in the wild. This is the real wilderness of Asia. Biologists and photographers still regularly go out and find clear photographs of those majestic creatures. So I don't buy the excuse that the woods 3 hours outside of San Francisco are too remote for scientists to go find a giant monkey.

Yes I've read that more than once and a lot of it has been discounted by either biographers or Gimlin himself . Now what? I don't feel the need to go back and forth over unprovable data, I'm not sure why you're insisting on it knowing this.

these are all extenuating circumstances, hence why I can't go along with the idea of Bigfoot as a whole and why I reference it as thing or it.

my thing is only this video since it's the only thing that's actually black and white no pun intended. I mentioned that I'm a civil engineer by trade and have a good understanding of distance and how objects in a lens can be viewed

You think I'm retarded for having a view that this video is authentic in some ways I know what I'm looking at here I also know what the era back then I was capable of and how simple and broke these two were. We can only go off likelihood's and probability at this point I'd be willing to bet a mortgage that this is something real

 

[BluntForceTrama]

I just don't find this compelling or anywhere near the same league as PG

@jgarner Do you feel Freeman video and the above are the same league as PG?

 

[IloveTHIS]

my thing is only this video since it's the only thing that's actually black and white no pun intended. I mentioned that I'm a civil engineer by trade and have a good understanding of distance and how objects in a lens can be viewed

You think I'm retarded for having a view that this video is authentic in some ways I know what I'm looking at here I also know what the era back then I was capable of and how simple and broke these two were. We can only go off likelihood's and probability at this point I'd be willing to bet a mortgage that this is something real

Lol

 

[bandicoot]

In any thread that has to do with anything that isn't completely verifiable by way of scientific empirical evidence, you are absolutely guaranteed to find @jgarner stroking away, every witty quip and substantial source like a magnificent pulse coursing through his engorged cock of facts and logic, driving him ever closer to his ultimate climax; people getting so tired of his incessant insults and obsessive thread stalking, they finally abandon the discussion, dispersing from it like his eventual release.

It's remarkable, really.

 

[superpunch]

That's a blatantly incorrect statement. The earliest recordings of them from foreigners date back to the 1800s, but proof of their existence went back generations before then to locals. There's also no issue with finding them in the wild and documenting their lives. They weren't exactly a shocking discovery to people who lived in the area. There was plenty of testable physical evidence to support photos and videos.

And final point, I said NORTH AMERICA. We're talking about Patterson footage, which was filmed in northern California. If you think it's reasonable that the North American wilderness can sustain hidden populations of massive apex predators, then it shouldn't be an issue to give another example of a newly discovered species of mammal that's several hundred pounds in size. When is the last time someone went into the wilderness of the PNW and discovered a new species? And I'm not talking about a tiny salamander subspecies. I'm talking about something completely new to the region and large enough to make a 800lb ape seem reasonable.

The truth of the matter is you will be unable to present an example because our wilderness hasn't been that wild and undiscovered for decades. It's certainly large, but it's not mysterious. It's just a lot of the same shit over a huge area.





Wikipedia is a decent enough source for gaining an elementary level of insight. I wouldn't use it as a primary source for a scientific paper, but it's decent enough at explaining who Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin were.

I'll just bring the text to you since you don't plan on going to it.

Patterson said he became interested in Bigfoot after reading an article about the creature by Ivan T. Sanderson in True magazine in December 1959.[16] In 1961 Sanderson published his encyclopedic Abominable Snowmen: Legend Come to Life, a worldwide survey of accounts of Bigfoot-type creatures, including recent track finds, etc. in the Bluff Creek area, which heightened his interest. Thereafter, Marian Place wrote:

In 1962 he visited Bluff Creek and talked with a whole host of Bigfoot-believers. In 1964[17] he returned and met a timber-cruiser named Pat Graves, who drove him to Laird Meadows.[18] There Patterson saw fresh tracks—for him an almost unbearably exciting, spine-chilling experience. What a tremendous feat it would be—what a scientific breakthrough—if he could obtain unshakable evidence that these tracks were not the work of a prankster, but the actual mark of a hitherto unknown creature! If he succeeded, he would be famous! And rich! Alas, fame and fortune were not gained that year, nor the next, nor the next. Patterson invested thousands of hours and dollars combing Bigfoot and Sasquatch territory. He fought constant ridicule and a shortage of funds. ... he founded ... the Northwest Research Foundation. Through it he solicited funds . ... The response was encouraging and enabled him to lead several expeditions. ... In 1966 he published a paperback book at his own expense. ... He added the income from its sales and his lectures to the search fund. As each wilderness jaunt failed to see or capture the monster, one by one the thrill-seekers dropped out. But Patterson never gave up.[19]

Patterson's book, Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist?, was self-published in 1966. The book has been characterized as "little more than a collection of newspaper clippings laced together with Patterson's circus-poster style prose".[20] The book, however, contains 20 pages of previously unpublished interviews and letters, 17 drawings by Patterson of the encounters described in the text, 5 hand-drawn maps (rare in subsequent Bigfoot books), and almost 20 photos and illustrations from other sources.[citation needed] It was first reprinted in 1996 by Chris Murphy,[21] and then again re-issued by Murphy[22] in 2005 under the title The Bigfoot Film Controversy, with 81 pages of additional material by Murphy.

In May/June 1967 Patterson began filming a docudrama or pseudo-documentary about cowboys being led by an old miner and a wise Indian tracker on a hunt for Bigfoot. The storyline called for Patterson, his Indian guide (Gimlin in a wig), and the cowboys to recall in flashbacks the stories of Fred Beck (of the 1924 Ape Canyon incident) and others as they tracked the beast on horseback. For actors and cameraman, Patterson used at least nine volunteer acquaintances, including Gimlin and Bob Heironimus, for three days of shooting, perhaps over the Memorial Day weekend.[23][24] Patterson would have needed a costume to represent Bigfoot, if the time came to shoot such climactic scenes.

Prior to the October 1967 filming, Patterson apparently visited Los Angeles on these occasions:

Roger drove to Hollywood in 1964 and visited rockabilly songwriter and guitarist Jerry Lee Merritt, a Yakima native who was living there in Hollywood then.[25][26] He was trying to sell his hoop-toy invention.[27][28]
In 1966 he visited Merritt again while he was still trying to sell his hoop-toy invention.[29]
Merritt soon moved back to Yakima and became Patterson's neighbor, and later his collaborator on his Bigfoot documentary.[30]

Later in 1966 he and Merritt drove down there for several purposes. Patterson visited cowboy film star Roy Rogers for help.[31] He tried to sell his ponies-and-wagon to Disneyland or Knott's Berry Farm.[32]
In the summer of 1967, apparently after getting $700 from the Radfords and shooting some of his documentary, they tried unsuccessfully to attract investors to help further fund his Bigfoot movie.[33] They copyrighted or trademarked the term "Bigfoot".[34]
Both Patterson [35] and Gimlin had been rodeo riders and amateur boxers—and local champions in their weight classes. Patterson had played high school football.

In October 1967, Patterson and his friend Gimlin set out for the Six Rivers National Forest in far Northern California. They drove in Gimlin's truck, carrying his provisions and three horses, positioned sideways. Patterson chose the area because of intermittent reports of the creatures in the past, and of their enormous footprints since 1958. (His familiarity with the area and its residents from prior visits may also have been a factor.)

The most recent of these reports was the nearby Blue Creek Mountain track find, which was investigated by journalist John Green, Bigfoot hunter René Dahinden, and archaeologist Don Abbott on and after August 28, 1967.[36] This find was reported to Patterson (via his wife) soon thereafter by Al Hodgson, owner of the Willow Creek Variety Store.[37][38]

Though Gimlin says he doubted the existence of Sasquatch-like creatures, he agreed to Patterson's insistence that they should not attempt to shoot one.[39]

I'm not sure what "proof" you think I'm presenting. I'm not making the claim that bigfoot exists. I'm telling you that I don't find the video of their "proof" to be that strong.

And again, I'm a believer in aliens. So don't pretend like I'm some square who couldn't believe in a bigfoot despite solid evidence. I understand what evidence is and how to analyze it for credibility. I don't find the video credible.

It's really silly. There are endangered species like the Amur leopard, of which less than 100 exist in the wild. This is the real wilderness of Asia. Biologists and photographers still regularly go out and find clear photographs of those majestic creatures. So I don't buy the excuse that the woods 3 hours outside of San Francisco are too remote for scientists to go find a giant monkey.

Humanity hasn't killed every cat species into extinction. So, there's not as extreme of an evolutionary pressure to make those cats as reclusive and stealthy from humans by nature. They're also not intelligent; so they leave evidence behind. Every other species of humans: floresiensis, neanderthal, etc., human sapiens killed into extinction. The only left is the one that is one that evolved to stay away from us: Bigfoot. And it's intelligent enough to not leave behind clues of its existence. It buries its prey. It stays in its territories. It probably has lookouts and scouts in its "tribes" to look for people. Etc.

 

[BluntForceTrama]

In any thread that has to do with anything that isn't completely verifiable by way of scientific empirical evidence, you are absolutely guaranteed to find @jgarner stroking away, every witty quip and substantial source like a magnificent pulse coursing through his engorged cock of facts and logic, driving him ever closer to his ultimate climax; people getting so tired of his incessant insults and obsessive thread stalking, they finally abandon the discussion, dispersing from it like his eventual release.

It's remarkable, really.

Thanks for the heads up Am not familiar with the fella

Ur post style must be appreciated lol

 

[rex kramer]

Thanks for the heads up Am not familiar with the fella

Best not to engage him. He will. never. stop. Ever.

 

[DoomPatrol]

I just don't find this compelling or anywhere near the same league as PG

@jgarner Do you feel Freeman video and the above are the same league as PG?

Well just watching that video, I don't see anything in it that leads me to believe it couldn't just be a dude in a monkey suit. It also looks a lot like a person in how it stands up at the end. Looks pretty human in a suitish to me. I'm also not really believing the run at the end. Dude was calm enough to stand there filming it but the second it stands up he decides he needs to go crashing through the brush to escape? Just seems like poorly made fiction.

Even the Freeman footage is lame. Nothing about it looks like wild ape to me. Half of the time it looks like some dude staring at the ground trying not to trip while walking around in a monkey suit.

I just don't find this evidence compelling enough to believe in something so extraordinary as a big monkey. If anything I'm far more willing to believe that they were tricked by people who thought it would be funny to pretend to be bigfoot for some lunatic in the woods looking for bigfoot. That seems more reasonable than the monkey to me.

In any thread that has to do with anything that isn't completely verifiable by way of scientific empirical evidence, you are absolutely guaranteed to find @jgarner stroking away, every witty quip and substantial source like a magnificent pulse coursing through his engorged cock of facts and logic, driving him ever closer to his ultimate climax; people getting so tired of his incessant insults and obsessive thread stalking, they finally abandon the discussion, dispersing from it like his eventual release.

It's remarkable, really.

I'm sorry i ruin your fun fantasy world of magic, bigfoot, ghosts, crystals, Jesus, McFlurry, Q-anon, flat earther and whatever other crazy things people make up. I just can't help the way my brain works. Is it not a good thing to have high standards for information you use to go through life with? You're talking like using logic and accurate facts is a bad thing, which sounds crazy to me. The real world is cool enough for me. There are plenty of amazing things that actually exist in this world. That shit doesn't excite you more than silly fiction like bigfoot?

If you don't like what I have to say, you can choose not to interact with me. It's not like I'm knocking on your front door demanding you listen to me.

Humanity hasn't killed every cat species into extinction. So, there's not as extreme of an evolutionary pressure to make those cats as reclusive and stealthy from humans by nature. They're also not intelligent; so they leave evidence behind. Every other species of humans: floresiensis, neanderthal, etc., human sapiens killed into extinction. The only left is the one that is one that evolved to stay away from us: Bigfoot. And it's intelligent enough to not leave behind clues of its existence. It buries its prey. It stays in its territories. It probably has lookouts and scouts in its "tribes" to look for people. Etc.

Are you aware of how silly that sounds? Not even humans are smart enough to remain hidden from humans. You're now attributing super-genius and super-lucky characteristics to an animal to explain why there's no actual evidence of said animal even existing. It seems like a poor standard to be able to declare something as real on the basis that we can't prove it doesn't exist. You're getting into Flying Spaghetti Monster territory at that point.