Pattersons Bigfoot Exposed?

[Opera Ghost]

If anyone really wants to go in-depth on this, I'd recommend checking out this topic on the Bigfoot Forums: http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?s=07dca6f9bd16639e29d78cd1d6c19761&showforum=35.

Sculptor/efx man Bill Munns does some very intensive analysis of the Patterson footage. It's interesting stuff, although I'm still not convinced one way or the other.

HMmmm....sounds of conspiracy. When I went to the link, I got "[#10333] We could not find the forum you were attempting to view. "

[Opera Ghost]

Scatter...thanks so much for the amazing in-depth coverage. Very intriguing to read about all of the skeletons in that closet!


Speaking of Shattner....any CSI (OS) followers reading? Am catching up on Season 9, and they did an homage to STAR TREK (OS) in terms of JJ Abrahms, gone wrong. It was fun.

[Moonshadow]

HMmmm....sounds of conspiracy. When I went to the link, I got "[#10333] We could not find the forum you were attempting to view. "

Apparently they just switched to a new format -http://bigfootforums.com/- and I can't find the old posts. I hadn't been there in over a year but those posts by Bill Munn, regarding whether "Patti" (the Bigfoot in the Patterson film) was real or fake were very well-written, scholarly pieces. Unfortunately his website references the BF Forum site! But there's still some cool stuff here: http://www.billmunnscreaturegallery.com/bmcgsite_032.htm

Although I have become far more skeptical of the validity of not only the Patterson film, but the existence of Bigfoot over the years, there are still some things that bother me: like why would a couple of hoaxers go to the trouble of putting breasts on a costume?

[Fester]

" why would a couple of hoaxers go to the trouble of putting breasts on a costume?"


Because they were guys!

[judd]

I am not an expert of Bigfoot or the footage but I believe it to be a hoax.  I read an article in which a number of make up experts such as Bob Berns and Rick Baker, who stated they thought it was a costume in the footage.  I've seen good gorilla suits in films made in the 40's and 50's. 

I would enjoy seeing the look on the scientists faces who are positive Bigfoot isn't real if real proof was discovered.

I would need to see some evidence which is more credible than what has been discovered so far.  I don't believe a giant ape which has never been discovered by science  lives in the woods of North America.   

[Opera Ghost]

I am not an expert of Bigfoot or the footage but I believe it to be a hoax.  I read an article in which a number of make up experts such as Bob Berns and Rick Baker, who stated they thought it was a costume in the footage.  I've seen good gorilla suits in films made in the 40's and 50's. 

I would enjoy seeing the look on the scientists faces who are positive Bigfoot isn't real if real proof was discovered.

I would need to see some evidence which is more credible than what has been discovered so far.  I don't believe a giant ape which has never been discovered by science  lives in the woods of North America.   

What about cousin Yeti in the Himalayas?

[Radioactive Rod Whitenack]

Regarding the floppy breasts in the Patterson footage, I was told by those sources I mentioned earlier that John Chambers came up with the idea for inserting a "water bag" into the chest area of the suit. If this is true, then this wasn't done by some weekend hoaxers, but a professional and very creative small crew.

[Dr.Teufel Geist]

I am not an expert of Bigfoot or the footage but I believe it to be a hoax.  I read an article in which a number of make up experts such as Bob Berns and Rick Baker, who stated they thought it was a costume in the footage.  I've seen good gorilla suits in films made in the 40's and 50's. 

I would enjoy seeing the look on the scientists faces who are positive Bigfoot isn't real if real proof was discovered.

I would need to see some evidence which is more credible than what has been discovered so far.  I don't believe a giant ape which has never been discovered by science  lives in the woods of North America.   

Did you even read the other posts? like the ones..Scatter posted? 

Regarding the floppy breasts in the Patterson footage, I was told by those sources I mentioned earlier that John Chambers came up with the idea for inserting a "water bag" into the chest area of the suit. If this is true, then this wasn't done by some weekend hoaxers, but a professional and very creative small crew.

Did you read what Scatter posted?? 

[Radioactive Rod Whitenack]

Of course I read what Scatter posted, and I believe it as much as I believe that was a real Bigfoot in the footage. It's hard to tell what the truth is. Certainly, not everyone is telling the truth with regards to the Sasquatch legend.

[Fester]

"Certainly, not everyone is telling the truth with regards to the Sasquatch legend."

Of course! 
If they did, the legend would have gone the same way as the Loch Ness Monster!
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/archive/display/category/loch_ness_monster/

[Opera Ghost]

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/archive/display/category/loch_ness_monster/

Thanks for this posting Fester

[Moonshadow]

"Certainly, not everyone is telling the truth with regards to the Sasquatch legend."

Of course! 
If they did, the legend would have gone the same way as the Loch Ness Monster!
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/archive/display/category/loch_ness_monster/

As I said before, I hope we never know for certain whether the film is real or faked. I value the whole Bigfoot phenomena much more as a very charming legend than anything else. As a kid I was certain Bigfoot existed; a few years of zoology and ecology in college had me a confirmed skeptic. Now, I'm a Bigfoot agnostic. I enjoy the stories more than worrying about their reality. Besides, if Bigfeet are real, I'm sure humans would find them eventually and screw everything up, like we usually do.

[Dr.Teufel Geist]

As I said before, I hope we never know for certain whether the film is real or faked. I value the whole Bigfoot phenomena much more as a very charming legend than anything else. As a kid I was certain Bigfoot existed; a few years of zoology and ecology in college had me a confirmed skeptic. Now, I'm a Bigfoot agnostic. I enjoy the stories more than worrying about their reality. Besides, if Bigfeet are real, I'm sure humans would find them eventually and screw everything up, like we usually do.

could you explain why that made you a skeptic?...

[Moonshadow]

could you explain why that made you a skeptic?...

Sure. I was learning about animal populations and their interactions with their environment. Some of the concepts that got me thinking more critically about the existence of Bigfoot involved ideas regarding species population size and viable breeding populations. Basically, you have to have a certain minimal population size in order to preserve the species. I don't recall exact numbers (it's been 20+ years), but it seemed like if there were enough BF to keep the species going, we should be seeing more of them, or at least more signs of them. The Pacific Northwest is big, but we still see all sorts of critters there and find evidence of their existence. Why not with BF?

Also, a creature that big and muscular would have some pretty intense nutritional needs. It would likely have to be foraging/hunting/scavenging most of the time. Again, this is an activity that would have great potential to lead to contact with people or physical evidence of their existence. Yet outside of many unverifiable reports, we have no hard data.

I'm certainly no expert in this area but what little I have learned does lead me to being skeptical. However, I also think there's some room for the possibility of the creature, so I don't completely dismiss it. I just think it is very unlikely.

[Opera Ghost]

Sure. I was learning about animal populations and their interactions with their environment. Some of the concepts that got me thinking more critically about the existence of Bigfoot involved ideas regarding species population size and viable breeding populations. Basically, you have to have a certain minimal population size in order to preserve the species. I don't recall exact numbers (it's been 20+ years), but it seemed like if there were enough BF to keep the species going, we should be seeing more of them, or at least more signs of them. The Pacific Northwest is big, but we still see all sorts of critters there and find evidence of their existence. Why not with BF?

Also, a creature that big and muscular would have some pretty intense nutritional needs. It would likely have to be foraging/hunting/scavenging most of the time. Again, this is an activity that would have great potential to lead to contact with people or physical evidence of their existence. Yet outside of many unverifiable reports, we have no hard data.

I'm certainly no expert in this area but what little I have learned does lead me to being skeptical. However, I also think there's some room for the possibility of the creature, so I don't completely dismiss it. I just think it is very unlikely.

Very impressive arguments.