It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

patterson bigfoot stabilised ~fake

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Here is the footage stabilised, makes it much easier to see that its definatly a man in a suit!

www.unexplained-mysteries.com...




posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 03:20 PM
link   
I though patterson's video was established fake a long time ago...



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 03:24 PM
link   
He (or members of his family, can't remember the details) admitted it was a fake a while back...



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 06:34 PM
link   
How exactly does thismake it fake?



posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 10:11 PM
link   
It dosent "make" it fake, it is already. It just stops the deliberate camera shake so you can more clearly see its just a guy in a suit. Yes it was debunked long ago but this is the first time I have seen the stabilised footage, until now I wasnt convinced either way 100%. Now I am



posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I have heard some convincing evidence that proved it was real but also that it was fake lol...

I guess it dies when someone admits it's fake


Are there any other bigfoot videos?



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 05:26 PM
link   
ther are like 50, dude. And they are all fake. Or at least chances are they are. It's a 10000-to-one prbability you'll being seeing are big-footed friend and have a camera at the same time, let alone be doing either.



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I don't know what a guy in a suit (or a bigfoot for that matter) is going to look like anyway, so this isn't really doing anything for me. Maybe someone could link to an analysis as to why this cements that it was a guy in a suit?



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 01:42 AM
link   
They did have a show on Discovery Channel about Big Foot and where they had the noises (big foot sounds) recored along with video footage and pattersons. It had quite a few experts convinced!Click here
or Click Here



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Esoterica
I don't know what a guy in a suit (or a bigfoot for that matter) is going to look like anyway, so this isn't really doing anything for me. Maybe someone could link to an analysis as to why this cements that it was a guy in a suit?


LMAO, he's going to look exactly like the guy in the suit above, walking away as fast as possible, taking a peek for the camera, and looking embarrassed! The only thing that could have cemented it better would be if he tripped as he turned around! C'mon get real, no analysis nessesary.


@ points for you though:
(a) the seem line down the back.

No primate has a neat part down the spine

(b) the perfectly hairy arse

No primate's arse is totally hairy either

conclusion: Its a suit padded extensivly, note no obvious musculature in the back as he turns. You could also mention the quick strides and obvious human gait, even bonobo's walking upright have an obvious bowlegged slightly sideways gait, the guy above walks perfectly straight in a forward motion.
images.google.com.au...://www.mc.maricopa.edu/~reffland/anthropology/anthro2003/origins/primates/gorilla_human.jpeg&imgref url=http://www.mc.maricopa.edu/~reffland/anthropology/anthro2003/origins/primates/locomotion.html&h=352&w=333&sz=15&tbnid=sRoQn85cMO4J:&tbnh=115&tbnw= 109&start=9&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dprimates%2Bgorilla%2B%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DG

oregonbigfoot.com...





[edit on 023131p://51012 by instar]



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 02:37 AM
link   

The Patterson footage has never been debunked as a hoax. No one has ever demonstrated how it was done. Neither the original "costume," nor a matching costume, has ever been presented by honest skeptics, nor by various imposters who claim to have worn the costume.

Source: www.bfro.net...

According to BFRO's site the Patterson footage hasn't been debunked. I don't think I'm convinced one way or the other, although it's kind of strange that with the ongoing development of remote areas no other convincing footage has surfaced. On the other hand if there was, would anyone believe it? All I know is spend a while late at night by yourself reading "eyewitness" accounts and listening to the supposed Bigfoot recordings with the lights out and see if you don't get the willies!



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 03:39 AM
link   
MORE

If you look at the above footage carefully frame by frame or as close as poss by pausing, you can see the back of the neck appeard to be folds of a hood hanging down. likewise there appears in certain frames, a clear demarcation of the hands from the sleeve cuffs and a clear line (belt/line) in another frame.
As much as i would liketo beleive it, the footage just dosent ring true.



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 05:36 PM
link   
So we are making a conclusion that Bigfoot walks differently? Does he have a cool swagger?

I don't know if it was real or fake but honestly I don't see how anyone looking at this old piece of 8mm film could figure it out. I've seen similar movies taken of real monkeys and when they were shown to an audience there were some people who thought the monkey was a guy in a suit because they could see folds and a zipper. lol



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Well Id love to see them! Im not making any conclusion about how bigfoot walks because it hasnt been proven, even to exist. Im saying thats how a hot, embarressed man in a good suit walks!


[edit on 053131p://39015 by instar]



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 05:48 PM
link   
To be fair instar you making conclusions by comparing it either any known ape or a human is flawed. If Bigfoot is real it would not have to be the same as either and likely would not be the same.

So you cant say "No primate's arse is totally hairy either" or "No primate has a neat part down the spine" This would be a unknown animal



posted on Jan, 8 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Look closely at the right leg at about the thigh in the footage. Notice anything on it?



posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 01:57 AM
link   
Apparently i dont understand the way you people think. There is more evidence that sasquatch is real (sounds,and different forms of DNA that have been found), than there is that they are fake. But thousands of people dont see the SAME thing, and it be fake. People would get no positive results out of lying about seeing a bigfoot. They dont get any attention, really. And the little they do get is usually negative. Ive been in forest areas most of my life, i know wildlife, i know how animals behave, what they eat, and how they move. I see nothing to make me think that P&G Video is fake, but it could be. Even if it is, that doesnt mean the entire existance of sasquatch is fake as well. The only thing that strikes me as odd about the video, is that the creature continues to walk even after seeing the men. it makes me wonder if that was set up... Just so people could get a good enough look at it.



posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Look closely at the right leg at about the thigh in the footage. Notice anything on it?


Yes I was going to mention there appears to be a pocket, but I thought it might be overkill!
Really tell me why a new animal of this kind would be so vastly different?



posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by antigovFZ777
Apparently i dont understand the way you people think. There is more evidence that sasquatch is real (sounds,and different forms of DNA that have been found), than there is that they are fake. But thousands of people dont see the SAME thing, and it be fake. People would get no positive results out of lying about seeing a bigfoot. They dont get any attention, really. And the little they do get is usually negative. Ive been in forest areas most of my life, i know wildlife, i know how animals behave, what they eat, and how they move. I see nothing to make me think that P&G Video is fake, but it could be. Even if it is, that doesnt mean the entire existance of sasquatch is fake as well. The only thing that strikes me as odd about the video, is that the creature continues to walk even after seeing the men. it makes me wonder if that was set up... Just so people could get a good enough look at it.


What different forms of DNA have been found? Please post a link, this would be evidence indeed of a new animal. However I think you will find there is no DNA evidence, certainly none conclusive, although iv heard of red hair being found, no test of DNA seem to ever accompany such claims!
You would think with them running around, leaving hair, perhaps even getting injured from time to time, not to mention urinating and crapping , there would be ample dna evidence. Not the least no skeletal remains either! I remain skeptical.

[edit on 023131p://12012 by instar]



posted on Jan, 9 2005 @ 11:31 PM
link   
So what's on the right thigh?

Anyway, here's a thought. The fact that it does walk away and not run says a lot. Would a wild gorilla or monkey, or any creature for that matter just walk away when approached? Photographers can barely get close enough to primates by sneaking up in the wild before they run. Now imagine 2 men on horseback, clunking along, trying to approach the thing. I guarantee you it would run, not casually stride away.

Also it's convenient that they saw the thing in broad daylight, rather than night. During the night a creature may be more inclined to walk away, feeling more security. But during the day you can bet it would run for it's life, it's a natural instinct that all creatures do. If it were a real bigfoot, what reason is there for not running?

[edit on 9-1-2005 by Ajax]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join