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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Patterson Bigfoot may be bigger than first thought

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I was looking at the original film when I first noticed this.
In fact I was on a forum that was promoting this as authentic.
I was in favor of it and was looking for evidence to build my case for its authenticity when I suddenly saw the face. I did then vanish from the forum.
Just look at the pic of it above.
There are none so blind as those who willl not see.
Explain to me that light area.
No one will do that.
Why?

And the arms.....They are not extra long.

And what do you say about his flat White feet?




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by OhZone
 


The arms are very long. Go to any pic you will see a very extended forearm. Second with regards to the "White" soles of their feet? It's walking through dirt barefoot how do you expect it to look.




[edit on 14-7-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


huggs slayer!!!!

you always make me smile!!!



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
If you will measure the arm you will see that upper an lower arms are the same length. And the fingers only come to the mid thigh.

The feet on the film where she was apparently walking thru snow, are very, very white. Snow sticking to the bottoms?

The face, I'm waiting for you to describe the face. What do you see there?



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by OhZone
 


NO!

YOU made the claim it's fake.

YOU do the work to prove your point. I'll provide mine after you give something worth substance instead of an OPINION.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by OhZone
The feet on the film where she was apparently walking thru snow, are very, very white. Snow sticking to the bottoms?


It's not snow


Dont you know Anything about the film besides the short video that has been shown for decades? Have you ever been hiking or camping deep in the woods?

Patterson Film

The Patterson-Gimlin film (also referred to as simply the Patterson film) is a short motion picture of an unidentified subject filmed on October 20, 1967



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by OhZone
 



it looks quite real to me,,,,

sure i could be wronge but nobodys jumped the gun here,,,,many have seen and studied this due to the fact we have had many years to do so yet its still pretty solid case!!!!

it moves quite smoothly/graciously yet solid!!!

I personally dont think we can get better then this,,,,



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by OhZone
I suddenly saw the face. I did then vanish from the forum.
Just look at the pic of it above.
There are none so blind as those who willl not see.
Explain to me that light area.
No one will do that.
Why?


Many see a "Face" But for most of us it's not a man's face in a old style football helmet covered with fur glued to it.




posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   
I don't feel like elaborating on everything that's pretty much been covered by members before me, but if you review all the evidence and possibilities it seems the chances of this being a real life Bigfoot are much more likely than this being a hoax.
I can never decide whether Bigfoot or UFO research is my true passion.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xeven
The USAF has the ability to settle this once and for all. They have many aircraft with nigh sensors that no animal could hide from. They should attempt to locate one and use special forces to capture it. It would make very realistic training.


I suspect that Forest Service rangers run across them all the time but are generally hesitant to talk about them to anyone but close friends and relatives. Probably for the best.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 07:12 PM
link   
I saw the one guy on discovery or geographic that said he had a part in the film and he walked almost exactly like the bigfoot in the film..... Obviously he could have mimicked the walk for a claim to fame but it was a eerily similar walk........ I looked on the internet for the clip and couldn't find it, plus I don't know how to embed videos can anyone else find it?



posted on Aug, 30 2016 @ 02:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: iamcamouflage
reply to post by Gemwolf
 


My problem with the Patterson footage, that makes me question its authenticity is that this footage was taken 1967 by men who said they were going out to look for bigfoot. These guys say, "hey, lets go look for bigfoot" and bang, they get the footage they wanted.


It is best to remember that it took Patterson 6 years of searching to see a bigfoot. And he was out looking for them. This film was no overnight success.


edit on 30-8-2016 by spiritualarchitect because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

I think science is proving it's many flaws by not accepting
the evidence as it is today. Slayers little piece even shows the
cone on the head come into view as it turns. A lesser known attribute at
that time. And the fact that as technology has increased? This footage
should have been easily dismissed a long time ago if it were faked.
But instead we have the opposite happening? That alone is a big WTF?
And we wonder about mysterious disappearances and deaths in the woods?
Not to bright goin out there unarmed.


originally posted by: OhZone
If you will measure the arm you will see that upper an lower arms are the same length. And the fingers only come to the mid thigh.

The feet on the film where she was apparently walking thru snow, are very, very white. Snow sticking to the bottoms?

The face, I'm waiting for you to describe the face. What do you see there?


Wow, some of us just aren't that good at hiding from the truth.


edit on Rpm83016v19201600000037 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

Do you know about the sighting at Silverwood Lake and around Lake Arrowhead-Big Bear? Have any of these made your local news? These are recent, but there is a history in the San Bernardino Mountains of BF sightings and activity.



posted on Aug, 30 2016 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: desert

I read a chlling account involving a family a while back.
At siverwood, but it wasn't recent. I'm aware of the history tho indeed.
I'll check those out not now but right now. Thanks.



My wife says she saw one as plain as day near Big Bear early one morning.
It was in the middle of the street with a trash can just sitting there as
they drove by. Eating something from out the trash.
edit on Rpm83016v53201600000040 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

We could be talking of the same Silverwood sighting.

Your wife SAW one....near Big Bear? Anywhere near Baldwin Lake? (I only ask, because a sister had a cabin years ago at Baldwin.)



posted on Aug, 30 2016 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: desert

No I believe it was one of the roads right by Big Bear lake.



posted on Aug, 30 2016 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kandinsky
This footage takes me back to being a kid and watching it with my brother in awe. For this reason, I'd be pleased if it was confirmed as authentic footage of a Bigfoot. It's unfortunate that hoaxers have taken away the joy and wonder and replaced them with automatic doubts and jaded cynicism


Whatever the truth of the video, nobody has ever definitively nailed it as real or hoax. If we're now talking about 7' 4", it lends itself to the 'real' side of things purely because a 7'4" gorilla costume would stay on the clothes rack for a long time. Then again, it could be made specially for the video? Round and round we go again....


I'm 56 and remember seeing it in a movie theater as a documentary preview before a regular movie in the late '60s, early 70s. Even my old man, who was a classic skeptic, was intrigued.



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: SLAYER69
That picture gif you show makes a mistake according to this video:


At 51:23. What looks like a mouth in your pic isn't. I think it's above the lip? It's supposed to be like chimps? The dark area is where the actual mouth starts.

EDIT: Accoding to that vid. Thought I'd bring up. I don't really believe any of it myself. Still think high chance it's a hoax.
edit on 8/31/2016 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2016 @ 01:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Gemwolf

Bill Munns did a perfect job of finding out that the lens Patterson reported was the incorrect one. Patterson reported the wrong lens aperture before he died. Bill Munns obtained a direct copy of this situation. He analyzed, frame by frame, using a laser ranging system. You can can see tits, you can see quadricep flexion, you can see massive calve flexion, you can see muscular arm and dorsal flexion as she leaves the frame.
According to Gimlin, he had his rifle spot on it, but could not shoot. Seemed too human. There is a even anecdotal evididence that the horses got spooked.

The documentary is on YouTube




top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join