posted on Dec, 3 2011 @ 02:28 AM
For a long time I believed the Patterson footage to be a hoax, as I made the mistake of judging the man and not the footage. What changed my mind was
viewing the HD enhanced version made from a 1st generation copy, which has more color and many of the film artifacts removed.
What you pointed out in this thread is extremely interesting, mainly because there is "something" large that can be seen to move behind the brush.
This would make sense judging from what I have learned of sasquatch behavior. A female is not likely to be by herself most of the time.
What the males seem to do is "shadow" the females, staying anywhere from 20+ feet away. If there is a young one present, it too stays with the
mother, no matter if it is male or female. One would be more likely to see a male off on its own, as opposed to a female, which this creature
obviously is in the film.
So was this her male companion? Possibly. The sad thing is that there is nothing definitive in the video. All we can see is "something" moving. I
would concede that it does seem biological in nature, and is unlikely to be natural foliage moving with the wind, etc.
Even though we cannot tell what exactly is moving at that spot, I agree that this adds credibility to the video footage. The purported hoax theories,
to my knowledge, involve only three people being present at the Bluff Creek location, so it is highly unlikely that this is a person brought along by
Patterson and Gimlin, and the likelihood of some random individual shadowing the two (or possibly three if there were an actor) men in the isolated
region they were filming in does not seem very likely.
So my conclusion is that despite the fact that we cannot make out what exactly is moving in the upper right of the film, the fact that it appears
large, as well as seemingly being biological in nature, but probably not human, and that it jives well with known sasquatch behavior, does much more
to add to the credibility than detract from it.
I think that at this point in time, decades after the film was created, taking into consideration the sheer number of individuals with Class A
encounters who say that the creature in the PG film is almost exactly what they witnessed, as well as the amount of expert analysis that concludes the
footage to be impossible to hoax, should be enough to convince anyone that has an open mind.
The most convincing evidence for the authenticity of this film, and I apologize for going off-topic, is the ratio of upper to lower leg length, as
well as the location of the knee, because it would be impossible for a human in a suit to duplicate as to get the joints and limbs to line up one
would have to be floating above the ground.