The Patterson Footage .....

[Scyther]

I'm a flat Earther and I admit I haven't done a lot of research into Bigfoot but I've always been skeptical. I'll have to go back and do more research into the subject matter.

 

[Bob Gray]

"Impossible to duplicate"

Now imagine him in a monkey suit, shoulder pads and clown shoes.

 

[BearGrounds]

Let's be honest here. You've always seemed like a good dude and and a good poster. But you don't know shit about musculature, toe offs and normals stride lengths. I mean, neither do I. Nor does probably anyone on this forum save for perhaps a handful of people. People watch these "documentaries" and paranormal research shows and an "expert" comes on and says "The musculature and striding blongs of his glumptoo plumpees are clearly not faked".

Then you get a mess of people repeating it with absolutely no idea what they're talking about. Not because theyre' dumb, but because it makes perfect sense if you were already inclined to side with it.

This will be the 3rd time I've provided this expert's analysis to back up my claims that the biomechanics are impressive and "non-typical" of man. Read it if you want, or just feel free to continue thinking I don't know shit about movement.

Dr. Dmitri D. Donskoy
Chief of the Dept. of Biomechanics at the USSR Central Institute of Physical Culture in Moscow, 1973

As a result of repeated viewings of the walk of the two footed creature in the Patterson film and detailed examination of the successive stills from it, one is left with the impression of a fully spontaneous and highly efficient pattern of locomotion, with all the particular movements combined in an integral whole suggesting a smoothly operating and coherent system.

In all the strides the movement of the arms and of the legs is well coordinated. A forward swing of the right arm, for example, is accompanied by that of the left leg. This is called cross-limb coordination and is a must for man, and is natural in many patterns of locomotion in quadrupeds (in walking and trotting, for instance).

The strides are energetic and big, with the leg swung far forward. When man extends the leg that far he walks very fast and thus overcomes by momentum the "braking effect" of the virtual prop that is provided by the forward leg. Momentum is proportional to mass and speed, so the more massive the biped the less speed (and vice versa) is needed to overcome the braking effect of the leading leg in striding.

The arms move in swinging motions, which means the muscles are exerted at the beginning of each cycle, after which they relax and the movement continues by momentum. The character of the arm movements indicates that the arms are massive and the muscles strong.

After each heel strike the creature's leg bends, taking on the full weight of the body and smoothing over the impact of the step, acting as a shock absorber. During this phase certain muscles of the leg are extended and become tense in preparation for the subsequent toe-off.

In a normal human walk such considerable knee flexion as is exhibited by the film creature is not observed; it is practiced only in cross country skiing. This characteristic makes one think that the creature is very heavy and its toe-off is powerful, which would contribute to rapid progression.

In the swinging of the leg, considerable flexion is observed in the joints, with different parts of the limb lagging behind each other: the foot's movement is behind the shank's, which is behind the hip's. This kind of movement is peculiar to massive limbs with well-relaxed muscles. In such a case the movements of the limbs look fluid and easy, with no breaks or jerks in the extreme points of each cycle. The creature uses to great advantage the effect of muscle resilience, which is scarcely used by modern man in the usual conditions of life.

The gait of the creature is confident, the strides are regular, and exhibit no signs of loss of balance, of wavering, or any redundant movements. In the two strides during which the creature makes a turn to the right, in the direction of the camera, the movement is accomplished with a turn of the torso. This reveals alertness and, possibly, a somewhat limited mobility of the head. (True, in some critical situations man also turns his whole torso and not just head alone.) During the turn the creature spreads its arms widely to increase stability.

In the toe-off phase the sole of the creature's foot is visible. By human standards it is large for the height of the creature. No longitudinal arch typical of the human foot is in view. The hind part of the foot formed by the heel bone protrudes considerably back. Such proportions and anatomy facilitate the work of the muscles which make standing postures possible and increase the force of propulsion in walking. Lack of an arch may be caused by the great weight of the creature.

The movements are harmonious and repeated uniformly from step to step; harmony is provided by synergy (the combined operation of a whole group of muscles).

Since the creature is man-like and bipedal, its walk resembles in principle the gait of modern man. But all its movements indicate that its weight is much greater, its muscles especially much stronger, and its walk swifter than that of man.

Lastly, we can note a characteristic of the creature's walk that defies exact description: expressiveness of movement. In man this quality is sometimes manifest in goal-oriented sporting or labor activities, and leaves the impression of economy and accuracy of movement. This characteristic can be noted by an experienced observer even if he does not know the specifics of a given activity. “What need be done is neatly done” is another way of describing expressiveness of movement, which indicates that the motor system characterized by this quality is well adapted to the task it is called upon to perform. In other words, neat perfection is typical of those movements which through regular use have become habitual and automatic.

On the whole the most important thing is the consistency of all the above-mentioned characteristics. They not only simply occur, but interact in many ways. And all these factors taken together allow us to evaluate the walk of the creature as a natural movement, without any signs of artfulness that would appear in intentional imitations.

At the same time, despite the diversity of human gaits, such a walk as is demonstrated by the creature in the film is absolutely non-typical of man.

The funny thing is you'll sit there and insult my intelligence while linking those unrepresentative gif loops of Herionimus failing to even replicate the stride properly.

 

[BearGrounds]

He worded it in a confusing way. He was saying the boobs couldn't bounce on the Patterson suit because they weren't bouncing on his reenactment suit, and since he made a suit he believed wouldn't have bouncy boobs, there's no way Patterson got them to bounce on a suit that Morris made. He later realizes that they do indeed bounce on the reenactment suit.

This is the most bouncy boob talk I've ever had in a non-sexual way.

Well, according to the wiki, the guy wouldn't even consent to his recreation being aired on Nat Geo because it was such a monumental fail.

A re-creation of the PGF was undertaken in October 6, 2004, at "Cow Camp," near Rimrock Lake, a location 41 miles west of Yakima. This was six months after the publication of Long's book and 11 months after Long had first contacted Morris. Bigfooter Daniel Perez wrote, "National Geographic's [producer] Noel Dockster . . . noted the suit used in the re-creation ... was in no way similar to what was depicted in the P–G film."

Morris wouldn't consent to release the video to National Geographic, the re-creation's sponsor, claiming he hadn't had adequate time to prepare and that the month was in the middle of his busy season. However, he has not attempted to create a suit more to his liking since that time.

That said, I have no real issue with you or anyone else taking his word for it (which is all he has) that he created the suit. It's understandable. Personally, I remain unconvinced by his claims, seeing as how he's failed to be able to create anything like what we see in the PG film.

Loled at bouncey boob talk BTW. Same here haha.

 

[scorpipede]

I've read well over 10,000 pages on the subject of Bigfoot or Sasquatch and I've never been convinced of anything other than we don't necessarily know what is out there. It's vain to think we do.

plus eat a dick Joe Rogan

 

[DrVanNostrand]

"Impossible to duplicate"

Now imagine him in a monkey suit, shoulder pads and clown shoes.

Was he one of the filmers?

 

[scorpipede]

"Impossible to duplicate"

Now imagine him in a monkey suit, shoulder pads and clown shoes.

that's the guy that claims he was in the suit right? There is that of course but really who couldn't mimic something they've seen however many times?

 

[BearGrounds]

Yeah well by that logic then aliens, fairies, unicorns, demons, loch ness, chupacabras, and dragons have a good chance of being real too.

I know exactly how much undeveloped land is in America, and ain't no giant monkeys running around that shit. You're crazy as fuck.

Apparently bigfoot is the hide and seek champion of the world, making it 15000 years without a shred of biological evidence.

If you say so broski.

 

[scorpipede]

How about the fact that a known con man set out out do a Bigfoot documentary and found Bigfoot in 5 minutes?

but at this point you're believing the con man no?

plus, cite the con man's name at least.

 

[the muntjac]

Well, according to the wiki, the guy wouldn't even consent to his recreation being aired on Nat Geo because it was such a monumental fail.



That said, I have no real issue with you or anyone else taking his word for it (which is all he has) that he created the suit. It's understandable. Personally, I remain unconvinced by his claims, seeing as how he's failed to be able to create anything like what we see in the PG film.

Loled at bouncey boob talk BTW. Same here haha.

The only reason I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt is because he really has no reason to make it up other than just for the sake of making it up. And if what he's saying is true about Patterson screwing over investors and trying to not return the camera equipment, then that's more reason to believe Patterson is dishonest and can't be trusted. I'd have to look more into it, but I'm starting to lose interest in this topic altogether.

To me, the bigfoot in the video has always looked fake, and the filming has always looked sketchy. Trust me, I would think it would be cool as shit if there were Bigfeet. I loved Harry & the Hendersons as a kid.

Oh, and bouncing boobs.

 

[BearGrounds]

The only reason I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt is because he really has no reason to make it up other than just for the sake of making it up. And if what he's saying is true about Patterson screwing over investors and trying to not return the camera equipment, then that's more reason to believe Patterson is dishonest and can't be trusted. I'd have to look more into it, but I'm starting to lose interest in this topic altogether.

To me, the bigfoot in the video has always looked fake, and the filming has always looked sketchy. Trust me, I would think it would be cool as shit if there were Bigfeet. I loved Harry & the Hendersons as a kid.

Oh, and bouncing boobs.

He's a costume maker. Having people believe you crafted the most famous and convincing Sasquatch "costume" ever, can generate revenue and attention for your business.

Fair enough about you losing interest though, I get it. But I'd suggest, if you're still even somewhat interested, you go beyond this film and really dig into the phenomena. It's more compelling when you look at the overall picture (track evidence, eyewitness accounts, unidentified hair and scat samples, folklore, the fact that it's ecologically possible, etc.) and not just this film alone.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

"Impossible to duplicate"

Now imagine him in a monkey suit, shoulder pads and clown shoes.

This is one of the greatest posts in the history of the internet.

 

[Bob Gray]

This will be the 3rd time I've provided this expert's analysis to back up my claims that the biomechanics are impressive and "non-typical" of man. Read it if you want, or just feel free to continue thinking I don't know shit about movement.



The funny thing is you'll sit there and insult my intelligence while linking those unrepresentative gif loops of Herionimus failing to even replicate the stride properly.

You missed my point. I don't deny that you can find someone saying these things. I never have. I also went out my way to indicate that I don't think you're unintelligent. I'm saying none of us "know shit" about movement. All the things people bring up about musculature, movement, strides, biomechanics, etc, etc is just parroting what these people say, without any real knowledge on how accurate it is. Lots of people have lots of opinions, even scientists. This is one of the reasons why science tends to give more credence to majority opinion as opposed to a handful of outlying opinions, which is what these people are.

He replicates it well enough to be convincing that if he were wearing shoulder pads, a monkey suit, foot prosthetics and were 50 pounds lighter it would look pretty goddamn similar. Unless you want to give me a scientific analysis of why it isn't replicated properly, despite looking eerily similar. I'm well aware of the other sites lining up his gait and attempting to disprove it. However, they make comparisons between his stride now, as a 60 or whatever year old man in plain clothes, and compare it to when he would have been wearing a suit and shoulder pads, etc.

Was he one of the filmers?

He claims he was wearing the suit.

that's the guy that claims he was in the suit right? There is that of course but really who couldn't mimic something they've seen however many times?

Sure, but I'm more responding to the people saying the walk is "impossible" to duplicate. And then we immediately get two people who have no idea who he is but instantly know that he's imitating the walk.

but at this point you're believing the con man no?

plus, cite the con man's name at least.

I don't see how.
Roger Patterson.

He's a costume maker. Having people believe you crafted the most famous and convincing Sasquatch "costume" ever, can generate revenue and attention for your business.

You know what else can generate a lot of revenue and attention? People thinking you have a video of Bigfoot.

 

[BearGrounds]

You missed my point. I don't deny that you can find someone saying these things. I never have. I also went out my way to indicate that I don't think you're unintelligent. I'm saying none of us "know shit" about movement. All the things people bring up about musculature, movement, strides, biomechanics, etc, etc is just parroting what these people say, without any real knowledge on how accurate it is. Lots of people have lots of opinions, even scientists. This is one of the reasons why science tends to give more credence to majority opinion as opposed to a handful of outlying opinions, which is what these people are.

If you want to dismiss a great breakdown of the video by a proven expert, that's your prerogative. If you also want to think that I don't know shit about movement, go right ahead.

I've been involved in athletics my entire life, have a league and section title and have placed in NYS in track and field at the HS level, wrestled in college, have taken ameteur MMA fights (still train) and have spent a considerable amount of time studying strength and conditioning - so I've been interested in biomechanics for quite some time, long before I ever took a close look at the PG film. But I'm not going to go any further than that trying to prove to you that I'm knowledgeable enough to know what I'm looking at without Donskoy's assistance. Believe what you will, but you're projecting.

He replicates it well enough to be convincing enough that if he were wearing shoulder pads, a monkey suit, foot prosthetics and were 50 pounds lighter it would look pretty goddamn similar. Unless you want to give me a scientific analysis of why it isn't replicated properly, despite looking eerily similar. I'm well aware of the other sites lining up his gait and attempting to disprove it. However, they make comparisons between his stride now, as a 60 or whatever year old man in plain clothes, and compare it to when he would have been wearing a suit and shoulder pads, etc.

You're convinced that a guy who is already not doing a great job at it is going to get even better with a severely cumbersome getup on?

You know what else can generate a lot of revenue and attention? People thinking you have a video of Bigfoot.

Yea, I'm aware. It can also bring lots of criticism and ridicule, as Gimlin himself has said he's endured as a result of being a part of all this.

 

[Bob Gray]

If you want to dismiss a great breakdown of the video by a proven expert, that's your prerogative. If you also want to think that I don't know shit about movement, go right ahead.

I've been involved in athletics my entire life, have a league and section title and have placed in NYS in track and field at the HS level, wrestled in college, have taken ameteur MMA fights and have spent a considerable amount of time studying strength and conditioning - so I've been interested in biomechanics for quite some time, long before I ever took a close look at the PG film. But I'm not going to go any further than that trying to prove to you that I'm knowledgeable enough to know what I'm looking at without Donskoy's assistance. Believe what you will, but you're projecting..

I've dismissed nothing. I'm saying minority opinions aren't convincing enough on their own.

Lots of people have been involved in athletics, including myself. That doesn't make us able to analyze a stride and determine whether it's human or an unprecedented species of hominid.

I'm projecting what? You don't think maybe it's possible you're projecting? I mean, you post in a lot of Bigfoot threads about how you think it's possible they exist or existed given the heavily wooded areas of the pacific northwest, etc. That's fine and all, but don't you think that can render you a bit biased?

You're convinced that a guy who is already not doing a great job at it is going to get even better with a severely cumbersome getup on?

You keep indicating it's a poor job despite numerous people having no idea who he is immediately recognizing what he's doing.

Yea, I'm aware. It can also bring lots of criticism and ridicule, as Gimlin himself has said he's endured as a result of being a part of all this.

Con men generally aren't too concerned about ridicule. Especially in exchange for financial compensation for several decades.

 

[BearGrounds]

I've dismissed nothing. I'm saying minority opinions aren't convincing enough on their own.

Lots of people have been involved in athletics, including myself. That doesn't make us able to analyze a stride and determine whether it's human or an unprecedented species of hominid.

I'm projecting what? You don't think maybe it's possible you're projecting? I mean, you post in a lot of Bigfoot threads about how you think it's possible they exist or existed given the heavily wooded areas of the pacific northwest, etc. That's fine and all, but don't you think that can render you a bit biased?

You keep indicating it's a poor job despite numerous people having no idea who he is immediately recognizing what he's doing..

You're projecting your admitted inability to closely analyze the subject's gait and locomotion onto me.

Con men generally aren't too concerned about ridicule. Especially in exchange for financial compensation for several decades.

Yet, Gimlin has gone on record saying that the experience has been a hindrance in his life.

 

[Bob Gray]

You're projecting your admitted inability to closely analyze the subject's gait and locomotion onto me..

Thats not what projection means. You haven't given any reason why you're more qualified to analyze and decipher the gait of the subject any more than I am. We've both played sports. Even if we were professional athletes we'd still have pretty useless opinions on the topic.

I mean, think about that for a second. If one of these paranormal shows brought in a professional wrestler or football player to analyze the stride, gait and movement on the video, how ridiculous would that seem? Because their opinion is useless.

And, again, given how often you're in Bigfoot threads posting and talking about the possibility of their existence, you don't think that might render you a little biased?

Yet, Gimlin has gone on record saying that the experience has been a hindrance in his life.

It's possible that it was. So? If it was a hoax and a prank, it wouldn't be the first time one backfired. It's now like he knew prior to doing it it would have a negative effect.

And there are numerous people on record describing how Patterson was a con man and a fraud. So, you would have to agree it's a pretty big coincidence that a man with a reputation as a con artist set out to do a Bigfoot documentary and immediately found one, isn't it? Like, you can see how for many people that would a bit hard to swallow, right?

 

[BearGrounds]

Thats not what projection means. You haven't given any reason why you're more qualified to analyze and decipher the gait of the subject any more than I am. We've both played sports. Even if we were professional athletes we'd still have pretty useless opinions on the topic.

I mean, think about that for a second. If one of these paranormal shows brought in a professional wrestler or football player to analyze the stride, gait and movement on the video, how ridiculous would that seem? Because their opinion is useless.

You're right, it doesn't automatically mean they're an expert or even knowledgeable; they could be complete meatheads. But any athlete that wants to maximize their potential will study such things. I have. You're projecting because you called me a shit judge of movement without even asking me any questions. And not that it's important, but a track athlete like Micheal Johnson is likely to know a thing or two about stride mechanics, whereas a pro wrestler, not so much. So it would matter who you brought on.

And, again, given how often you're in Bigfoot threads posting and talking about the possibility of their existence, you don't think that might render you a little biased?

The topic interests me and I've looked into it quite a bit. I try to remain unbiased as best I can. I see in the mechanics something impressive, truthfully, which is why I'll argue that.

It's possible that it was. So? If it was a hoax and a prank, it wouldn't be the first time one backfired. It's now like he knew prior to doing it it would have a negative effect.

And there are numerous people on record describing how Patterson was a con man and a fraud. So, you would have to agree it's a pretty big coincidence that a man with a reputation as a con artist set out to do a Bigfoot documentary and immediately found one, isn't it? Like, you can see how for many people that would a bit hard to swallow, right?

Yea, the fact that Patterson was evidently a shady character is without question reason to give pause. It's one of the very things that disallows me to fully believe the account was authentic and a real video capture of a Sasquatch.

 

[Takanori Gomez]

The BBC spent thousands trying to replicate the suit - this was their pathetic attempt

Well these are some dumb fucks they cant even get the color right.
and lol at hollywood cant create something similar,i am pretty sure if the incentive was right they would,and the suit would be even better:


to fast and bad footage to say anything

 

[DoomPatrol]

Anytime someone says that we can't replicate the biomechanics of the Patterson footage, a real scientist dies.

If you really think that walking like that is soooo hard that it can't be faked or that the suit bends in a way that's impossible to fake, then you don't know the first fucking thing about biomechanics or costume creation.

The sole fact that in 15,000 years nobody has brought forth DNA or verifiable proof of bigfoot is proof enough that it's a fake animal. How gullible do you have to be to think that bigfoot is around often enough to get photographed, but it's too hard to be killed by hunters through thousands of years of hunting these woods?