Bigfoot Patterson Footage Analysed, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 7 times


reply posted on 8-9-2009 @ 12:29 PM by Kandinsky
reply to post by Shino

Interesting video. Until a thread by Gemwolf, logic has always dictated that Bigfoots don't exist IMO. I'm now more open-minded to the possibility. This video doesn't make me more or less open to the idea.

On the one hand, it adds details to the interpretation of the footage. It suggests that the figure's face is more realistic than a hoaxer would ever have attempted to achieve. The movement of the mouth and jaw muscles appear consistent with primates.

On the other hand, there are dozens of videos involving the highlighting of contours to demonstrate what that person sees. Moon and Mars videos show spaceports, critters, craft and buildings that aren't really there. The History channel is also prepared to air any old crap with a serious voiced narrator. This is compounded by the 'talking head' Dr Swindler being dead for some 2 odd years.

It's a new YT video and perhaps the show aired last night, but the doco is at least two years old. Folk will see in it whatever makes them happy. For my penny, it doesn't alter anything

Other thread by Gemwolf is...here. One of my Top 10 ATS Threads because it changed my opinion by the end





[edit on 8-9-2009 by Kandinsky]


reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 10:45 AM by havok
reply to post by SLAYER69



Nice! I've never seen that one.

Re-analyzing the footage? What is this...4 times now? Sheesh.
All I can say is this:
If it was a hoax, it was done with hollywood-ish money.



reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 11:20 AM by SLAYER69
reply to post by venividivici



Then can you provide us with your own analysis?

If you feel so strongly against it then please provide us with your own evidence that it's a hoax. I'll be very interested in seeing what you come up with to disprove the only concrete evidence that has not been proven a fallacy.



reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 01:32 PM by SLAYER69
reply to post by punkinworks



Without a link to more evidence. That's like saying I knows somebody who knows somebody who states that it's fake!

Yadda yadda blah blah blah...


reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 01:58 PM by venividivici
Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to
post by venividivici



Then can you provide us with your own analysis?

If you feel so strongly against it then please provide us with your own evidence that it's a hoax. I'll be very interested in seeing what you come up with to disprove the only concrete evidence that has not been proven a fallacy.


I never said the Patterson film is a hoax. I just said this particular analysis is unconvincing. The Patterson film is fascinating even after all these years.

I will give the researcher credit for making the point that if it was a hoax and the film makers knew (at the time) nobody would be able to make out any finite details on film, then after 40 years we are able to digitize and zoom in on certain aspects and not find any tell-tale signs of a mask or ape suit, then the hoaxers were certainly ahead of their time.


reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 02:02 PM by punkinworks
reply to post by Kandinsky



I used to be a semisceptic on this subject till I had my own personal experience.
I witnessed a track of foot prints just minutes after they were laid down, and heard the animal that made them moving through the brush.

Given where we were at the dinkey lakes wilderness, a hoax is not likely, the area is very remote and has a history of sightings going back 40 years for modern man, and centuries in native american lore.
Pictographs of "the hairy man" on a reservation in the nearby foothills at Painted rock






The local tribes have many names for BF, the tule river band calls him mayak datat.
The miwuk call him yayali

[edit on 9-9-2009 by punkinworks]

[edit on 9-9-2009 by punkinworks]


reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 02:51 PM by punkinworks
reply to post by SLAYER69


It was this episode of monster quest




reply posted on 9-9-2009 @ 03:39 PM by Kandinsky
reply to post by punkinworks

Hiya Punkinworks,
Your account is the kind of thing that changed my mind. Logically, I can't imagine how a great big critter can remain so elusive for decades. No s***, no bones, no corpses, no roadkill, no nests, no young, no stillbirths etc.

When I started reading about the accounts from witnesses, it seems improbable that every witness is a BSer, hoaxer or idiot. Most maybe, but ALL is unlikely. In that thread I linked earlier, I posted about a cast of footprints that showed a foot deformity. The prints showed a bias of weight distribution to allow for a limp.

I'm not convinced that there are bigfoots out there...but I'm not convinced they aren't out there. Have a look at this link...interesting...Sasquatch: Size, Scaling, and Statistics


reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 02:56 PM by kidflash2008
reply to post by SLAYER69



The comparison video you did still is one of the best I have ever seen. It is hard to not conclude that the creature in the Patterson Film is an unknown hominid.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



Strange creatures from Marianas Trench
  Posted 6 days ago with 26 member flags
\'Woolly mammoth\' caught on camera in Siberia
  Posted 5 days ago with 20 member flags
icelandic lake monster spotted! (VIDEO)
  Posted 6 days ago with 16 member flags
Shape-Shifting Dinosaurs by Jack Horner (TED Talk)
  Posted 3 days ago with 6 member flags
Bigfoot Attack...or is the Lizard Man in Georgia?
  Posted 11 days ago with 5 member flags
\'mutant spider fears at nuclear wastelab\'
  Posted 7 days ago with 4 member flags
here is how to catch sasquatch
  Posted 8 days ago with 3 member flags