The Patterson Footage .....

[Deleted member 220895]

I'm more interested in the Pattinson Footage.

 

[BearGrounds]

... by people not accepted by the vast scientific community.

By guys like wildlife biologist John Bindernagel, anthropologist Grover Krantz, and professor of anatomy Jeff Meldrum.

The vast majority of the scientific community hasn't analyzed the data or done the field research necessary to have a properly informed opinion on the matter.

 

[Stargazer Rex]

The Bili ape was just first documented in 2003.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bili_ape

I want to knock that motherfucker clean out.

 

[computer fogie]

Patterson had been trying for years to claim bigfoot is real, he even self-published a book a year before he made that film. From wiki:

"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.""

So no, it isn't real. Patterson was a dope.

 

[JosephDredd]

By guys like wildlife biologist John Bindernagel, anthropologist Grover Krantz, and professor of anatomy Jeff Meldrum.

The vast majority of the scientific community hasn't analyzed the data or done the field research necessary to have a properly informed opinion on the matter.

That's not how science works. This is how science works: Bindernagel, Krantz and Meldrum collect evidence / perform experiments, publish it and then it gets reveiwed by their peers. If their peers don't find any procedural / analytical flaws or any illogical conclusions, then it gets moves ahead into scientific discussion. It may not replace the dominant theory right away, but it is certainly acknowledged as a compelling alternative.

Where do you think Bindernagel, Krantz and Meldrum keeping falling down in that process?

 

[Organic Damage]

I'll believe Bigfoot is real when I see an instagram with dozens of hairy booty photos.

 

[00 Buck]

I think that footage is legit. Ass and teddies too fine to fake. Face is 7/10.

80% sure sasquatch is real.

Gonna hook up with some of dere females and take n00ds for mine sherbros!

Prime example of natural beauty IMO.

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

The problem with the Patterson footage is the death bed confession that it was a hoax. Possibly more damning though is that the group that filmed it were actively looking for Bigfoot.

So they went out looking for Bigfoot, actually found him and got the most famous footage of all time? That's 1 in a billion odds and luck. You would think if someone got actual footage of Bigfoot, it would be by complete accident or something like a deer camera.

 

[Idonotbelieveit]

Very good hoax

Bigfoot is like lock best fantasy bullshit

There would have been real evidence by now

 

[DoomPatrol]

The problem with the Patterson footage is the death bed confession that it was a hoax. Possibly more damning though is that the group that filmed it were actively looking for Bigfoot.

So they went out looking for Bigfoot, actually found him and got the most famous footage of all time? That's 1 in a billion odds and luck. You would think if someone got actual footage of Bigfoot, it would be by complete accident or something like a deer camera.

You mean a con artist claiming to find bigfoot on day one of his bigfoot search isn't a reliable source?

 

[BearGrounds]

That's not how science works. This is how science works: Bindernagel, Krantz and Meldrum collect evidence / perform experiments, publish it and then it gets reveiwed by their peers. If their peers don't find any procedural / analytical flaws or any illogical conclusions, then it gets moves ahead into scientific discussion. It may not replace the dominant theory right away, but it is certainly acknowledged as a compelling alternative.

Where do you think Bindernagel, Krantz and Meldrum keeping falling down in that process?

I'm aware of how science works. The gears turn slowly and the vast majority are always playing catch up. Plus the community often isn't as unbiased as it touts itself as being.

Which is why for stigmatized topics such as Bigfoot/Sasquatch, I get my information directly from those that have actually done the proper research and work - like the PhDs I've already mentioned, among others. Not from those that haven't scrutinized the data or done their research.

 

[JosephDredd]

I'm aware of how science works. The gears turn slowly and the vast majority are always playing catch up. Plus the community often isn't as unbiased as it touts itself as being.

Which is why for stigmatized topics such as Bigfoot/Sasquatch, I get my information directly from those that have actually done the proper research and work - like the PhDs I've already mentioned, among others. Not from those that haven't scrutinized the data or done their research.

So you get your information from people who have never subjected their work to scrutiny from people who could prove them false. That is a decision that has certainly never been associated with frauds and hucksters over the entirety of human existance.

 

[BearGrounds]

So you get your information from people who have never subjected their work to scrutiny from people who could prove them false. That is a decision that has certainly never been associated with frauds and hucksters over the entirety of human existance.

Their work is available for scrutiny by anyone who wishes to do the reading.

 

[JosephDredd]

Their work is available for scrutiny by anyone who wishes to do the reading.

Everybody's work is available for scrutiny by anyone who wishes to do the reading.

Science isn't like a Hollywood director discovering his next engenue.

 

[BearGrounds]

Everybody's work is available for scrutiny by anyone who wishes to do the reading.

Science isn't like a Hollywood director discovering his next engenue.

Then you understand that I have indeed gotten my information from people who have made their work available for scrutiny. Good.

 

[JosephDredd]

Then you understand that I have indeed gotten my information from people who have made their work available for scrutiny. Good.

I understand you've gotten your information from people who have either deliberately not subjected their work to scientific scrutiny or already had it rejected by scientific scrutiny.

Not sure why that makes you feel good, but whatever.

 

[00 Buck]

The problem with the Patterson footage is the death bed confession that it was a hoax. Possibly more damning though is that the group that filmed it were actively looking for Bigfoot.

So they went out looking for Bigfoot, actually found him and got the most famous footage of all time? That's 1 in a billion odds and luck. You would think if someone got actual footage of Bigfoot, it would be by complete accident or something like a deer camera.

The problem with your "deathbed confession" is that it has nothing to do with whether the filmed sasquatch was real or not.

Roger Patterson confessed to Bob Gimlin that when he was doing tours with the footage, he had someone dress up as a cowboy to impersonate Bob as part of the show.

AFAIK Patterson went to his grave insisting it was real and the surviving Gimlin is still holding firm.

They were out filming tracks and happened to catch one.

Gimlin is an interesting old guy. Tough as hell. Was a boxer back in the day, almost died from breaking in horses, traveling, etc...

 

[BearGrounds]

I understand you've gotten your information from people who have either deliberately not subjected their work to scientific scrutiny or already had it rejected by scientific scrutiny.

Not sure why that makes you feel good, but whatever.

It doesn't bother me, because I understand the topic. Someone submitting a Sasquatch paper would be lucky not to have it rejected before it's even reviewed, or even accepted for presentation at a scientific forum. It's a highly stigmatized topic that rarely gets assessed with objectivity.

There's very little incentive for the scientists involved in the research to attempt to publish with any scholarly journals at this juncture. Instead they write books, do documentaries/interviews, write articles, and continue their research.

 

[JosephDredd]

It doesn't bother me, because I understand the topic. Someone submitting a Sasquatch paper would be lucky not to have it rejected before it's even reviewed, or even accepted for presentation at a scientific forum. It's a highly stigmatized topic that rarely gets assessed with objectivity.

There's very little incentive for the scientists involved in the research to attempt to publish with any scholarly journals at this juncture. Instead they write books, do documentaries/interviews, write articles, and continue their research.

you've got your head up your ass about how exclusionary the scientific community is (pro-tip: it's charlatans and conmen who get get ostracized; people with unorthodox get published in peer-reviewed journals as long as they fulfill the basic requirements.)

And are you seriously saying there is very little incentive for scientists to make one of the biggest discoveries of all time? Certainly it's not like scientists to be motivated by the thrill of discovery or humans to be motivated by fame or fortune: it makes much more sense for them to self-publish and avoid scientific scrutiny at all costs, exactly like the frauds cashing in on the lucrative bigfoot community.

 

[BearGrounds]

The problem with your "deathbed confession" is that it has nothing to do with whether the filmed sasquatch was real or not.

Roger Patterson confessed to Bob Gimlin that when he was doing tours with the footage, he had someone dress up as a cowboy to impersonate Bob as part of the show.

AFAIK Patterson went to his grave insisting it was real and the surviving Gimlin is still holding firm.

They were out filming tracks and happened to catch one.

Gimlin is an interesting old guy. Tough as hell. Was a boxer back in the day, almost died from breaking in horses, traveling, etc...

There was no deathbed confession, that's fake news. A mix up with a story about the Loch Ness dude. Roger went to his grave maintaining his encounter was legit.

"A few days before Roger died, he told [Bigfoot-book author Peter] Byrne that in retrospect, . . . he [wished he] would have shot the thing and brought out a body instead of a reel of film."

They were investigating a region that they were put onto by other researchers, because tracks had been found. People often try to make it sound like they just derped their way out into the woods one day and found one, but that's simply not the case.