Patterson Gimlin Bigfoot Video

[BearGrounds]

I WANT to believe but there was an admission that it was faked by one of the makers of the film. I have seen it before but now I can’t find it....weird.

Neither of them ever admitted it was faked. They both always maintained it was authentic. Patterson went to his grave holding to his claim of it being real, and Gimlan (who's alive) still does.

 

[revoltub]

Neither of them ever admitted it was faked. They both always maintained it was authentic. Patterson went to his grave holding to his claim of it being real, and Gimlan (who's alive) still does.

I think hes thinking of Bob Heironimus.

Yeah everyone jumps on Bobs story and it seems like the smoking gun with his lie detector test. But the more I look into it the less I believe his account and question if the lie detector test he took was faked or falsified.

 

[BearGrounds]

I think hes thinking of Bob Heironimus.

Yeah everyone jumps on Bobs story and it seems like the smoking gun with his lie detector test. But the more I look into it the less I believe his account and question if the lie detector test he took was faked or falsified.

I never get tired of the irony in skeptics believing in Bob's story. The very same people will turn around and tell you how unreliable lie detector tests are when I share this video:



The guy claims to have killed a baby bigfoot, and passes a lie detector test.

Bob has nothing but his word and a poor excuse for recreating the walk to convince people he was the man in the suit, but skeptics don't seem too keen to apply their own standards for proof in his case; curious. He also aligned himself with Morris, whose costume claim was something he couldn't come close to proving when he tried.

For the life of me I can't understand, aside from bias, why Heronimous is so readily believed.

 

[revoltub]

I never get tired of the irony in skeptics believing in Bob's story. The very same people will turn around and tell you how unreliable lie detector tests are when I share this video:



The guy claims to have killed a baby bigfoot, and passes a lie detector test.

Bob has nothing but his word and a poor excuse for recreating the walk to convince people he was the man in the suit, but skeptics don't seem too keen to apply their own standards for proof in his case; curious. He also aligned himself with Morris, whose costume claim was something he couldn't come close to proving when he tried.

For the life of me I can't understand, aside from bias, why Heronimous is so readily believed.

I think it's the way his fox television special was presented. I haven't seen it in years, but I remember it coming off as legitimate at the time and readily portrayed Bob as the guy who "finally proved the hoax".

I think the special has really affected a lot of people's views on the Patterson films legitimacy because I see Bob's name or at least "that guy who admitted it was a hoax" come up time and time again when this is brought up.

 

[Hidden_Hand]

For me, the most compelling thing that points to it not being real is the fact that in all these years we haven't found more or proper concrete evidence. What are the odds of that?

The actual footage itself looks real if not then it's the best stunt i've ever seen especially that long ago.

 

[BluntForceTrama]

For me, the most compelling thing that points to it not being real is the fact that in all these years we haven't found more or proper concrete evidence. What are the odds of that?

The actual footage itself looks real if not then it's the best stunt i've ever seen especially that long ago.

There are so many weird things or extenuating circumstances like the one you just pointed out and yes I have thought about it as well

if it was a good suit like skeptics claim then I think they would've tried again. No ones been able to come up with the actual suit The ones a couple fakers said were the actual suit fell well short.

So many questions but like you I can't get past this video

 

[Deleted member 577981]

I dont understand people saying the technology wasn't there to make a gorilla/ape suit these are all pre Patterson Gymlin footage. Not saying it's not real but ruling out that no one could make a suit like it I find false.

Also note that some of these suits have proper gorilla arm length so I don't believe that to be a good indicator it's not a suit. Plus arm length varies greatly among humans , how many threads have there been on Jon Jones unfair advantage or fighters with Trex arms?

One of the best make up artist to ever exists ( Rick Baker) thinks it's a suit. I'll take his word over Bill Munns seeing as Baker hasn't written a book about it and profited off it.

I want to believe but I need more than grainy footage from the 60s before I can.

none of those examples hold up to the patterson gimlin footage imo. you can see muscles flexing and relaxing in the pgf. you cant see any of that in these examples.

 

[Hidden_Hand]

I think what alot of us are trying to say is the Gimlin footage doesn't look like a man in a suit, atleast not to me it doesn't This doesn't mean we are saying IT IS Bigfoot. What we are saying is if that is a man in a suit then it looks so good it doesn't look like a man in a suit... In 1968.

 

[DanSavage]

If you look closely at the left sole of the foot, the arch is on the outside of the foot. He's got two right feet.

In 1967? It's pretty obvious you haven't bothered researching this Im sure you haven't the time

 

[DanSavage]

For the life of me I can't understand, aside from bias, why Heronimous is so readily believed.

Because it wasn't just Heironimus making the claim about the costume.

It was also, Heironimus's mother Opal, Opal's SIL, Willa Smith, and Heironimus's nephew (8-yo at the time) John Miller. They all claimed to have seen the costume.

Heironimus's brothers, Mike and Howard, didn't see the costume, but heard about Bob's involvement in the filming.

Others, such as Merle Warchime, have seen the costume in other settings around Yakima.

Harvey Anderson, owner of a gun and camera store in Yakima, recounted his meeting of Patterson when Patterson brought in a plaster cast, supposedly taken from a bigfoot print and asked about renting a camera to film the 'creature.' Anderson pointed out the problems of the ball of the foot in the prints being too narrow to support a bipedal animal. A few days after their initial meeting, Patterson reportedly brought in other 'prints' where the shortcomings had been fixed.

Even Patterson's own brother-in-law Bruce Mondor outed Patterson's plaster casts as fake.

 

[BluntForceTrama]

If you look closely at the left sole of the foot, the arch is on the outside of the foot. He's got two right feet.



View attachment 826691

 

[BluntForceTrama]

Because it wasn't just Heironimus making the claim about the costume.

It was also, Heironimus's mother Opal, Opal's SIL, Willa Smith, and Heironimus's nephew (8-yo at the time) John Miller. They all claimed to have seen the costume.

Heironimus's brothers, Mike and Howard, didn't see the costume, but heard about Bob's involvement in the filming.

Others, such as Merle Warchime, have seen the costume in other settings around Yakima.

Harvey Anderson, owner of a gun and camera store in Yakima, recounted his meeting of Patterson when Patterson brought in a plaster cast, supposedly taken from a bigfoot print and asked about renting a camera to film the 'creature.' Anderson pointed out the problems of the ball of the foot in the prints being too narrow to support a bipedal animal. A few days after their initial meeting, Patterson reportedly brought in other 'prints' where the shortcomings had been fixed.

Even Patterson's own brother-in-law Bruce Mondor outed Patterson's plaster casts as fake.

Those claims have been countered so who do you believe is what it comes down to. Pure heresy

the other way to look at this.... if the suit is real and somewhere out there, why hasn't anyone tried using it again to fool us? I mean this first go around went so well right? Let me remind that this video was shot in broad daylight out in the open with predictable movement in a straight line less than 90 feet away from subject. There is no other Bigfoot video like it anywhere. All the others are from significant distance, in the dark, or obscured by growth.

if you were trying to pull this hoax why would you take your cheap suit and shoot a movie at high noon, pretty close up in an open area? You might ask why is the video so shakey? Low and behold the video looks even better slowed down and stabilized. Def not planned

The whole thing is counterintuitive

 

[lilianjie]

You do know that through the history of early man we had stories of them right? This didn’t start with a log cutter

Is that the reason this man did the hoax?
To pretend that the giant hairy beast spotted throughout history was in the woods where he cut wood?

Apparently the bigfoot/sasquatch/Skunk Ape/yowie/Orang Pendek/yeti creature is world wide and not just in North America.
The reason I am very skeptic is because back when everyone's camera was very poor resolution there were numerous sightings a year on film.
Then after camera quality increased to HD and 4K we do not have any sightings in HQ. If we do get something on film then it's blurry as hell and the camera is shaking all over the place.

 

[minute bull]

I think hes thinking of Bob Heironimus.

Yeah everyone jumps on Bobs story and it seems like the smoking gun with his lie detector test. But the more I look into it the less I believe his account and question if the lie detector test he took was faked or falsified.

Hindsight flattens perspective. It isn't that a confirmation is so easily believed -- people already rejected the footage long before time of the confession.

Bob's admission barely moves the needle.

....

We can look at this video and we can forget the many times it's been copied and enlarged; we can ignore film artifacts and errors and even natural illusions caused by dappled lighting.

Moreover we can want. It's adventurous and romantic, and comes from a nostalgic time before adult realities.

But to me that's a guy in a fursuit chiefly because he looks like he's wearing a shirt. See the crease moving at the waist? Is there any other animal that has such a demarcation in its fur? When a bear, gorilla, wolf pivots the coat moves as one. What about longer hair like an orangutan? Sections? Tell me that doesn't look like a bottom of shirt.

 

[revoltub]

Hindsight flattens perspective. It isn't that a confirmation is so easily believed -- people already rejected the footage long before time of the confession.

Bob's admission barely moves the needle.

....

We can look at this video and we can forget the many times it's been copied and enlarged; we can ignore film artifacts and errors and even natural illusions caused by dappled lighting.

Moreover we can want. It's adventurous and romantic, and comes from a nostalgic time before adult realities.

But to me that's a guy in a fursuit chiefly because he looks like he's wearing a shirt. See the crease moving at the waist? Is there any other animal that has such a demarcation in its fur? When a bear, gorilla, wolf pivots the coat moves as one. What about longer hair like an orangutan? Sections? Tell me that doesn't look like a bottom of shirt.

The film's been analyzed by dozens of people with more expertise in the area of wildlife and video fakery than either me or you. Its yet to be disproved. Confirmation bias works both ways. I do lean toward its authenticity.

 

[minute bull]

The film's been analyzed by dozens of people with more expertise in the area of wildlife and video fakery than either me or you. Its yet to be disproved. Confirmation bias works both ways. I do lean toward its authenticity.

See none of this addresses whether it looks like a shirt. I'm open to definitive evidence, so this isn't confirmation bias so much as refusing to jump the gun.

 

[revoltub]

See none of this addresses whether it looks like a shirt. I'm open to definitive evidence, so this isn't confirmation bias so much as refusing to jump the gun.

Well I don't see the shirt. And ive never seen a shirt brought up.

 

[cmw43]

I think the only way Bigfoot could be real is if it's some sort of interdimensional being. The fact that something so large is so rarely seen and never 100% clearly viewed (other than this video if real). Also never found a skeleton or corpse. We found skeletons millions of years old but never a bigfoot? Seems odd.

Reminds me of Bili Apes, they've only been documented in the last 20 years.

Huge 6ft tall upright walking chimps that sleep on the ground.

They're basically the African Bigfoot.

 

[minute bull]

Well I don't see the shirt. And ive never seen a shirt brought up.

Before Bigfoot, Bigfoot was never brought up either.

And I don't mean just look where I'm pointing -- follow the line through to the front of his waist. There's a slight curve.

 

[revoltub]

Before Bigfoot, Bigfoot was never brought up either.

And I don't mean just look where I'm pointing -- follow the line through to the front of his waist. There's a slight curve.

Looks like nothing to me. Just shadow or fur colorization