The Patterson Footage .....

I'm fairly certain this was a clever hoax similar to "The Surgeon's Photographs" of Nessie.

Regardless, you keep saying so many people in costuming can't produce this quality of a suit... can you please source this? I'm not talking a single source, I'm talking every single studio and their costume / effects department saying they couldn't possibly create this suit. I'm just not convinced that any reputable Hollywood studio would admit that they were incapable of producing this kind of suit in writing or on camera. Please source, and please vet your sources so it's not just a bunch of bullshit.

sure - in that there are interviews with the guy who created the suits for Planet of the Apes who said he couldn't make it.

you have anthropologists who said the movement was too exact to be duplicated.

the BBC spent thousands trying to duplicate it and their result was a hilarious fail - i'll get you the links
 
c7bd1c97e489e47e8af613483ebb53ec.jpg

FUCKING LOL!

Thread is a successful ploy to get us all to look at a dude's butt in a gorilla costume.

Well played.
 
Nsfw titay!.... "Can't be a man in a gorilla suit, no fuckin way, no you know he's Real "- The D
 
Couple questions...

Why did these 2 "cowboys" carry and setup about a hundred pounds of 1960 recording equipment out into the middle of buttfuck nowhere?

Actually just the above question will suffice.
 
About 8 years after this video was shot, King Kong with Jeff Bridges was filmed. It is clear that it not a gorilla. THat was a major Hollywood film. So tell me how Patterson and Gimlin were able to pull of better special effects than Hollywood 8 years prior to a big budget film. Answer that question.

Also, notice that the subject has breasts. Why would they make the skookum a female?

Why is there a muscle irregularity at the bottom of the right quadricep? The muscle pops out. Answer those questions.
 
About 8 years after this video was shot, King Kong with Jeff Bridges was filmed. It is clear that it not a gorilla. THat was a major Hollywood film. So tell me how Patterson and Gimlin were able to pull of better special effects than Hollywood 8 years prior to a big budget film. Answer that question.

Also, notice that the subject has breasts. Why would they make the skookum a female?

Why is there a muscle irregularity at the bottom of the right quadricep? The muscle pops out. Answer those questions.

excellent observation !!
 
First there is the better-odds-of-winning-the-lotto-while-being-struck-by-lightning factor. Since this film was made, there have literally been thousands and thousands of hours of would-be Bigfoot hunters out in the forest looking to film Bigfoot, some today with modern equipment, who still have not filmed anything remotely as close as this film. Yet these guys, whose soul purpose mind you, was to create the first documentary ever about Bigfoot, go hiking for a few hours and just so happen to run into Bigfoot right out in the open and film incredible footage of it.

Second TS, you keep saying Hollywood says they can't reproduce this, as if Hollywood is some single unit. It's not like Hollywood sat down at a board meeting and said, "Okay everyone, I know all of you are working on ridiculously expensive projects right now, but stop! Until we solve this Bigfoot thing, we aren't doing anymore work. We need every special effects artist to try to recreate that Bigfoot costume now." Hollywood hasn't recreated it because, Hollywood doesn't care and isn't trying. Look, I can do the same thing here. A lot of people think this Bigfoot pic is fake:

Bigfoot%2BBesties.jpg


But if it's fake, then why hasn't "Hollywood" been able to reproduce it?!! Answer: because they aren't trying to!

Then there's your claim that world renowned "anthropologists" have even said that the movent is "to exact to be replicated." First, anthropologists are not anatomists, so you're quoting, well paraphrasing, some unnamed world renowned anthropologist (btw, there are very few "world renowned" anthropologist. "World renowned" tends to be a phrase stupid documentaries wanting to prove some point use to describe their so called experts.) about a field they aren't actually experts in. I can do that also: a world renowned therapist (that's me) says the muscle movement in the video is easy to fake.

Finally, in respects to the muscle movement and toe curl, I'm watching your gifs, and frankly...I don't see it.
 
Last edited:
Couple questions...

Why did these 2 "cowboys" carry and setup about a hundred pounds of 1960 recording equipment out into the middle of buttfuck nowhere?

Actually just the above question will suffice.

They had the equipment because they were filming a mini-movie and there were also reports of bigfoot in the area -

"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[18] Meadows. 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]
 
Eddie Bravo is a resident of Mayberry?

Nice...
 
in this case, isn't the burden of proof on those who claim it's fake ? the footage was taken and released, and it's stood the test of time, science, and technological scrutiny.

it's not enough to simply dismiss it - especially when professionals in the industry admit they still can't duplicate the suit.


Haha, no son. In this instance you're like Scyther claiming the earth is flat and all evidence of it's spherical nature is bunk.

You're making the extraordinary claim; you have to back it up.

Til then it's a man in a suit.

(Albeit, one that in it's primitive form creates a great illusion of genuine mystique - still a man in a suit)
 
First there is the better-odds-of-winning-the-lotto-while-being-struck-by-lightning factor. Since this film was made, there have literally been thousands and thousands of hours of would-be Bigfoot hunters out in the forest looking to film Bigfoot, some today with modern equipment, who still have not filmed anything remotely as close as this film. Yet these guys, whose soul purpose mind you, was to create the first documentary ever about Bigfoot, go hiking for a few hours and just so happen to run into Bigfoot right out in the open and film incredible footage of it.

Second TS, you keep saying Hollywood says they can't reproduce this, as if Hollywood is some single unit. It's not like Hollywood sat down at a board meeting and said, "Okay everyone, I know all of you are working on ridiculously expensive projects right now, but stop! Until we solve this Bigfoot thing, we aren't doing anymore work. We need every special effects artist to try to recreate that Bigfoot costume now." Hollywood hasn't recreated it because, Hollywood doesn't care and isn't trying. Look, I can do the same thing here. A lot of people think this Bigfoot pic is fake:

Bigfoot%2BBesties.jpg


But if it's fake, then why hasn't "Hollywood" been able to reproduce it?!! Answer: because they aren't trying to!

Then there's your claim that world renowned "anthropologists" have even said humans can't move like that. First, anthropologists are not anatomists, so you're quoting, well paraphrasing, some unnamed world renowned anthropologist (btw, there are very few "world renowned" anthropologist. "World renowned" tends to be a phrase stupid documentaries wanting to prove some point use to describe their so called experts.) about a field they aren't actually experts in. I can do that also: a world renowned therapist (that's me) says the muscle movement in the video is easy to fake.

Finally, in respects to the muscle movement and toe curl, I'm watching your gifs, and frankly...I don't see it.

Read my post above. Hollywod tried and failed to make a believable simian creature in 1976's King Kong. 8 years after The Patterson/Gimlin video.
 
Funny how the same people who think this is real think the moon landing was fake. They're super skeptical of everything except that which they want to believe.
 
About 8 years after this video was shot, King Kong with Jeff Bridges was filmed. It is clear that it not a gorilla. THat was a major Hollywood film. So tell me how Patterson and Gimlin were able to pull of better special effects than Hollywood 8 years prior to a big budget film. Answer that question.

Also, notice that the subject has breasts. Why would they make the skookum a female?

Why is there a muscle irregularity at the bottom of the right quadricep? The muscle pops out. Answer those questions.

Why doesn't it have a butt crack?
 
ITT I learned there seems to be some correlation between thinking Donald Trump should be president, and believing in Bigfoot.


Somehow I'm not very surprised.
 
First there is the better-odds-of-winning-the-lotto-while-being-struck-by-lightning factor. Since this film was made, there have literally been thousands and thousands of hours of would-be Bigfoot hunters out in the forest looking to film Bigfoot, some today with modern equipment, who still have not filmed anything remotely as close as this film. Yet these guys, whose soul purpose mind you, was to create the first documentary ever about Bigfoot, go hiking for a few hours and just so happen to run into Bigfoot right out in the open and film incredible footage of it.

Second TS, you keep saying Hollywood says they can't reproduce this, as if Hollywood is some single unit. It's not like Hollywood sat down at a board meeting and said, "Okay everyone, I know all of you are working on ridiculously expensive projects right now, but stop! Until we solve this Bigfoot thing, we aren't doing anymore work. We need every special effects artist to try to recreate that Bigfoot costume now." Hollywood hasn't recreated it because, Hollywood doesn't care and isn't trying. Look, I can do the same thing here. A lot of people think this Bigfoot pic is fake:

Bigfoot%2BBesties.jpg


But if it's fake, then why hasn't "Hollywood" been able to reproduce it?!! Answer: because they aren't trying to!

Then there's your claim that world renowned "anthropologists" have even said that the movent is "to exact to be replicated." First, anthropologists are not anatomists, so you're quoting, well paraphrasing, some unnamed world renowned anthropologist (btw, there are very few "world renowned" anthropologist. "World renowned" tends to be a phrase stupid documentaries wanting to prove some point use to describe their so called experts.) about a field they aren't actually experts in. I can do that also: a world renowned therapist (that's me) says the muscle movement in the video is easy to fake.

Finally, in respects to the muscle movement and toe curl, I'm watching your gifs, and frankly...I don't see it.

wrong ! several studios and even the BBC tried to make the suit and they couldn't.
 
Back
Top