I glanced through a few sites, I havent found anything conclusively debunking it. John, are you sure you are not mixing up the death bed confession of
the man who took the film of Nessie in the early 1900's?
Fr4om one site:
"My primary interest in Bigfoot has been with the famous Patterson film. The Patterson film was taken in the Pacific Northwest, the one where
the Bigfoot looks back over his shoulder," Davis said. "I did a lot of work with some of the frames. There is 100 percent evidence this was not
someone in a suit. There's no way it could be. I took some frames and put them through Animation Wizard, and I was able to identify muscle movement.
The hair was very thin and the sun was penetrating to the skin and you could see all the muscle movement just as plain as day. You could see skin
moving and you could see the gluteus muscles tighten as he walked. It wasn't a suit."
Hardly proof of its veracity. Oops, I lost the link to that one. However I checked
Snopes.com to see if they had anything, as they seem to debunk just about everything, and I found nothing.
Indeed, according to Loren Coleman, one of the leading cryptozoologists in the world:
On October 20, 1967, the Patterson-Gimlin film was taken. This now-classic footage by Roger Patterson (Bob Gimlin was also there, gun at the
ready) is the best evidence we have for a population of unknown primates (variously called Sasquatch or Bigfoot by the public) in the Pacific
Northwest. I have not seen any debunking that holds any water, and I sense the film is authentic.
www.lorencoleman.com...