Ever Notice This About The Patterson Film?

www.bfro.net...

Look at the calf muscle on its right leg. Can a suit produce this "effect?"

Have you never seen those muscle costumes? Suits can be designed do look like anything. Sure, the suit could do that, then again do you have a picture of what the dead guy looks like? Perhaps the suit is skin tight and he is a really huge guy. I never seen him. So who knows?

im not sure if the movie is true or not, i tend to lean on its authenticity. even though technology was growing in 1967, i dont think a suit that convincing could have been created then. tons of sightings have been recorded throughout the years and alot of Native American stories have been handed down with the same creature. out of thousands of reports, they all cant be wrong or hoaxed, i dont buy it. Patterson vowed on his deathbed that it was true, Gimlin wont debunk it either, maybe we will never know.

I think the walk in the film is too human... with far too many human tendencies... like arm swinging, minimal shifting of weight, etc. I've heard this before from anthropologists studying the "creature's" walk and tend to agree.

I'm with Hellion. I'm pretty pleased that they have been able to enhance this film in this manner. I can tell you this, up until now my opinion was it was a guy in a suit...but with these enhanced frames, I'm set back to...

crap, that could be something!

There's just one flaw in that logic though. IF this is truly a different species then any one who postulates how it SHOULD walk is full of crap! They don't know how it should walk. And I don't care WHAT field they work in...they don't know!

See my point?

Ok, a hypothetical(sp?) situation. Someone records a Utah Raptor. Takes it in, yet a guy who studies walking habits says it can't be a Utah Raptor because it doesn't walk like one. Guess what? How would he know! Utah Raptors were early Cretacous, never seen by a human, let alone seen one walk. How can you say it's walk means it isn't one?

But I tend to beleive there is a bigfoot, but the film might not be it.

I agree we have no idea how such a species might walk.

However, it's likely not to walk using typical human motions and mannerisms.

Just an observation.

unless it is a human offshoot or very close to human. Hey, its possible...

XAOS

Could be a new alien. Or maybe a NWO project. Pump soilders full of stuff to make their feet big, send them somewhere and see if the ladies in that country believe the saying "People with big feet have big d*(k$"

Never know, they could have been getting bored one day, or smoked a bong full of fruit loops one morning and came up with it.

admit it was a hoax? I thought I remembered hearing as such not too far back?

Originally posted by Gazrok
admit it was a hoax? I thought I remembered hearing as such not too far back?

yeah he did and his son.

Correction to that. His family said he said it was a hoax. No one recorded him saying it was. They probably just wanted 15 minutes of fame.

Did anyone posting on this thread see the History Channel special where the team of scientists tried to prove or disprove the existence of Sasquatch? when looking at the Patterson film, they noticed two very distinct things about the creature. One, the "muscle bulge" as you describe it is not actually a muscle, but a muscular cist, and it is on the thigh region. Making a suit that would produce such an anomalie for a 15 second hoaxed video is ridiculous. It would have been outrageously expensive to produce such a costume in the 60's. Two, while it would appear in the footage that the creature is walking like a big, fat guy, it's actually walking in a stride not likened to any other two-legged mammal we have ever seen. I reccomend you pick up this documentary from the HC, it's quite new and very informative.

Originally posted by xaos
unless it is a human offshoot or very close to human. Hey, its possible...

XAOS

I have to chime in with XAOS on this one. Unless they have a sample of the species for study, there is no way for them to make assumtions from the evidence. Besides, it may walk like a human because it may be a genetic relative to us, or more so than the chimp, or great ape. Lloyd Pye has some very interesting theories on this subject. One being that the big foot is really our missing link, genetically speaking.

It could be a case of not, them walking like us, but rather, we walk like them..............

[Edited on 9-7-2003 by All Seeing Eye]

Gore, I've seen it and many others. Still say it is real, not a fake. The family said he confessed, but no one recorded him, so suspicous.

Besides, there were all kinds of animals that don't exist today but did in the past. When is the last time you've seen a Wooly Mammoth? Never, for they died out. But who's to say they did? In this part of the world maybe, but has anyone gone through the artic with a fine tooth comb? On Elsmere(island in artic) they found remains of pygmy mammoths, not babies, but pygmies who became pygmies to accomodate the land. So there could be pygmy mammoths left, which is why we haven't found them yet.

Or the fish that was said to be extinct till one was caught. Bigfoot could be like that. An old species of ape that died off alot, but not completely, a type of ape we thin is extinct when in truth we just haven't caught one yet.

In the Amazon, there are species still not found or proven to exist. Heck, when a guy sent a stuffed Platypus back to England, the people said he was joking and it wasn't real. This could be the case with bigfoot. have video proof of him, but just like the first Platypus, "you're joking with us, ha ha, very funny."

Or an extreme theory, it is an alien. Why we see it so little for it is rarely on the planet, but in the space craft flying to other places and such.

Originally posted by William
I think the walk in the film is too human... with far too many human tendencies... like arm swinging, minimal shifting of weight, etc. I've heard this before from anthropologists studying the "creature's" walk and tend to agree.

wouldn't normally question you William, but i saw a program where experts said the exact opposite, that the walk wasn't at all human, this was on the history channel, i have no links. But i don't think the walk is enough to go on, this animal to me, clearly has it's own walk. The human tendancies are obvious, the head turning, but not at all conclusive.

I wonder why Patterson didn't try to take more footage, follow the beast for example. Maybe others have and have been killed.

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Could be a new alien.

That raises another questions. Does anyone believe that some sasquatch are actually alien visitors? I have read reports from witnesses who have seen sasquatch have also seen a UFO in the area shortly after spotting the creature.

I do believe that there are too many eye witness reports for it not to be a hoax and if Bigfoot is an alien from another planet maybe thats why he doesn't stick around in one area for very long. Any thoughts?

----------------------------------------------------------

"After all I've seen and experienced, I refuse to believe that it's NOT true!" - Agent Fox Mulder

" too many eye witness reports for it not to be a hoax"

read that carefully, I don't think that's what you meant to say...

Originally posted by Greyhaven
" too many eye witness reports for it not to be a hoax"

read that carefully, I don't think that's what you meant to say...

Oh yeah! Thanks! I meant " too many eye witness reports for it to be a hoax"