wasnt it a guy who dressed up in a suit and mask... i remember a man told the public that it was him and his friend right before he died of cancer or something that he took the pictures of his buddy in the bigfoot suit, and that it was all a hoax?... i remember him talking about that.. so why is their still controversy on this topic of Bigfoot, when the men came forth and said it was a hoax and a joke to play on the public..

Because it is highly probable that these guys were talking BS.

if you are talking about the Patterson Video, then yes that was shown to be a hoax. That video is now known, (even by bigfoot believers) to be a fake. The reason the story continues is because these guys didn't invent Bigfoot, they just made a movie with him in it...bigfoot legends go back to the Native Americans. And people today still claim to see large creatures on the woods.

The video is a sore spot for most believers, because it takes away from any other video evidence that might surface

The Patterson Video has NEVER been shown to be a hoax

Yeah, that's true. Why would you say something like that? It's still under debate, and I'm pretty sure the video is real. Think about it, how cold people make such a complex hoax back in 1967? Even when professional film crews remake the incident today, it doesn't look convincing. Stop talking out of your a$$

That is true. The only hoax was the "admission" that it was faked.

I was under the impression for awhile that the Patterson video was an admitted hoax, however i was not in full possesion of the facts and now i am i don't believe it was a hoax.
Even if it were you cannot discount the sheer amount of hair, feces etc etc that have been found from a species currently unknown.

there is a lot of evidence to support the existence of bigfoot other than a few faked photos and the patterson footage....

all that people seem to care about is photos and video footage though, i mean what about all the reports, some people do tell the truth....

i feel bigfoot is one of the most likely cryptids to be real....

Well, this article is on the front page news today:

http://www.yakima-herald.com/?storyid=281619770695670


It clearly states that Patterson has admitted to hoaxing the whole video.

I don't deny the existance of a creature out there, but Pattersons video is the guy in the picture in the article.

well in the last bigfoot thread, didnt somebody say patterson swore it was real until he died?

Yeah, and he died in 1972 of cancer.
So pretty much we have this guys word, and evidence, to go on.

Now That You Have Brought It Up, It Seems True Enough.

i think the guys who said they did it were just trying to control the stories and such, so if anyone else came out with a bigfoot story, they could say its not true and when asked why, say that they did it and then sell their story to the media or whatever, even so, if they did fake a couple (i have no doubt the patterson film is real) they cant account for the stories of bigfoot from years and years ago, even the native americans have some strange stuff like bigfoot

It was his family who said it was fake AFTER he died, for 15 minutes of fame. They brought out some fake feet they said made the imprints.

An hour later the Bigfoot experts pointed out the feet didn't match the imprints at all. And the family admitted their story was full of cr*p


But they damage was done.

Paterson died still telling the world it was real.

It's very possible that almost all of bigfoot,yeti,skunk ape sightings are fake but with all the footprints bodyprints and hair which has been scientifically proved to be not made by man or any animal know to man isn't it at least a little possible that maybe 1 of these sightings is genuine there are alot of sightings so there has to be at least one real one.
In the past 10 years scientists have discovered 10 new species thought to be extinct
ex.The Sealacant
there has to be something we're missing

Tens of thousands of sitings even. True, I would say it impossible for all of these people to be lying

I am just looking at another site I go to and found a great thread about morris ape suits, pictures included you really need to read this it's already 3 pages long.

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=7461

I dont believe in Sasquatches, but let me tell you, if anything about the PG film is convincing, its the way that sasquatch walks. its extremely hard to duplicate, believe me, ive tried. in the privacy of my own home, of course.

The recent discovery of a new species of giant ape in the Democratic Republic of Congo seriously improves the probability of Bigfoot's existence, in my opinion.

Anyway, the suggestion that the Patterson footage is definitely faked is absurd. There are so many aspects of that creature's motion and appearance that just look genuine......

Athlon have you looked at my link, it's a thread started by a guy that has worked on movies and tv shows, it discusses ape suits, fx etc.
He has included some behind the scenes photos and has a lot of inside information from working in this are.
The feel of the thread is that in 60's they wouldn't have been able to create the muscle tone etc of patty.

Well,the guy on the news had been proven a filthy,waste of life,liar.He said it to get publicity.Scientists that studied this came to the conclusion that there is NO possibility that the sasquatch was this guy in a suit.Patterson and his buddy did not talk to this guy.The next day,they told the news that the sasquatch video is NOT a hoax and this guy is a liar.This guy is simply someone who wanted publicity and money.Patterson and his buddy have never even seen this guy!!!!!Also,this rotten loser was proven to be somewhat drunk at the time and also failed 2 lie detector tests.He lied on every answer(even his own name).This was all on the BC news(and everywhere else) a while back.I'm sure that everybody heard about this.

Haven't heard about that, but the problem is that description fits Patterson himself pretty well.

Tia,

I think that you may have misread my post. I am supporting the suggestion that Patterson filmed a real Bigfoot

Hi Athlon,
I read your post . I was just giving the link as anyone who has seen the Patterson film will find it interesting.
You talked about motion and appearance which is looked at and discussed on the thread.

There were many hoaxes and there will surely be more in the future. There will always be people who would want to make a quick buck creating hoaxes by capitalizing on the situations. There may be some real sightings, we can't possibly tell but I think stories about Bigfoot, yeti and other mysterious creatures will continue to go on....until the creatures themselves are captured or some irrefutable evidence which could prove their existence is found.

One of the main reasons why these stories continue is that most of us would like to believe in them. I'm not saying that all these creatures don't exist but I firmly believe that if they do exist, sooner or later strong evidence would be found or the creature itself would be captured.

OK, thanks for that

You did me a favour. Your link took me to the Bigfoot Forums, and I haven't visited that site in several months. It is now part of my Personal Favourites menu again

Okay is the Patterson tape a hoax or real?

I would say a hoax simply because the source of the tape has no credibility whatsoever. Patterson was a con man to the extreme. Heck, he was arrested for stealing the camera that he used to tape the creature. If a guy with prior convictions for scams, cons, and theft suddenly says to you "I wanted to go look for bigfoot, and I took a friend along as a witness, and hey, guess what!, I just happened to catch him on tape!" I would be more than a little suspicious.

But it has never been proved a hoax, and thats all that matters

i was watching a tv show about bigfoot and they analyzed that video they said the walking patterns of the "bigfoot" in the video were very unrealistic for a human to be able to walk like that and to walk like that so smoothly so that convinced me but there is still a possiblity that the video is fake though but you never know....... maybe its a cover up like roswell! lol

there have been reports world wide of bigfoot i think thay exist

Remember the scene in remake of Miricle on 34th Street? We should have Bigfoot version.

'I beleive'

i think bigfoot is a very likely cryptid to exist....theres loads of places for this species to hide and its only a matter of time before its proven real...

well thats what i think anyway...

Exactly.

I agree 110%

I can understand Aquatus1's viewpoint here. If Roger Patterson was indeed a bit of a con man, then it certainly raises doubts about the authenticity of the footage. However, we also have to remember that he wasn't alone during the encounter. Do we know what type of character Bob Gimlin was ? He has always maintained that this was a genuine Bigfoot.

In addition, there are plenty of features exhibited by the creature that do not suggest a man in an ape suit........like the visible rippling of muscles as the creature walks, or the way that it turns its entire upper body to look back at the two men (humans tend to simply turn their heads).

And then there are the breasts. Who in their right mind would risk exposing a fake by adding breasts to an ape suit ? It just doesn't make sense to me.

In my opinion, that is a real Bigfoot.....but it is only my opinion.

Actually, Bob Gimlim stopped maintaining it was a real Bigfoot a long time ago. Nowadays, he states that he doesn't know what it was. People who have spoken to him say they get the impression that he thinks he was used by Patterson, but won't admit it (old school stubborn streak).

Most of the features people talk about indicate to me that it is a man in a suit, especially how it turns its entire upper body (a real simian would only turn its head as well). The same goes for the alleged 'non-human' walk (a man wearing a 7 foot ape suit isn't going to be walking normally).

The one part that really gets me is the breasts. I agree that this is a detail that just doesn't seem like it would cross the mind of a con artist. It's almost too subtle. The breasts are the only thing on the Patterson video that keep me from completely believing it to be a fake, although I would not hesitate to denounce it as one, should I be forced to take a side.

Ahh, but the question is......would a real Bigfoot only turn its head ?

Why wouldn't it? What other creature in the entire animal kingdom has a neck, but chooses not to use it?

Don't gorilla's turn their bodies instead of their heads.

Not according to the nature films I've seen. Any creature that can't look around while walking on all fours, particularly when the habit is to carry a child on the back, can pretty much be considered a meal.

I don't buy this guy's story. First off, look at how big the bigfoot in the video is. It's huge and bulky. If that guy were in the suit, it would have been incredibly baggy.
Secondly, as the bigfoot walks away, you can see it's feet clearly. They bend and flex, and the feet from the guy's costume are stiff, and you can tell that they are a bad mock up job. Third, the face is off. The eye holes in the mask are way too big, and the face of the bigfoot in the video was not so hairy. Plus, the bigfoots arms were just too long and thick to be human. Plus the bigfoot had breasts, I don't think that a prankster would have thought of that. And another thing, the bigfoot in the video looks VERY convincing, and it's from the 60's. Why is it that this guy's new suit looks so corny? And Yet another thing, you can see the muscles of the bigfoot in the suit. Plus the hair seems to have a very natural flow. The hair on this guys suit is wild and goes all over. Plus, the strides that they measured were too long to be made buy this dumbass.

His is only one of many who claim to have been responsible for the video. This guy is lying.

And another thing, the bigfoot from the video has a distinct brow, and large lips, and the nose was high set and flat. The new costume was too human in the face. There is no thick brow like the one from the video, and the nose is too low and human shaped. And the face doesn't protrude enough. C'mon, how come he made such a perfect suit back in the 60's, but his suit now looks like every other suit out there. This guy is a LIAR!!!!
Plus it said that he did the walk for the people he was showing the suit to. Of course he would be bold enough to try it because he had time to study from the real thing!!! And yert ANOTHER thing, there is a second bigfoot in the video. It is a dark shape at the edge of the forest, and it then it dissappears. Analysts have only recently found this out. Why didn't he mention that??? This guy pisses me off. Dumbass rancher bastard.

Another thing!!! (This asshole's story is full of holes), He's lying because

If it was a gorilla costume:Whay would it be brown instead of black?
Why was it so tight fitting to the bulky scultpure and not baggy?
Even today, gorilla suits are baggy
Almost all gorilla suits have teeth. Plus the face was way too human/ape to be a gorilla suit from the 60's
Look at the monster costumes from the 60's/ Even the ones that PROFESSIONAL movie studios used. They don't look this good. How the hell could he manage to get a better suit than a pro movie studio???
He is only saying how he "Faked" all[ these anatomical details because he has had time to study the video and what people have said.
Why the f*** would the suit look so damn good if it was from 1967????

f*** this asshole racnher!!!

Take a deep breath......and RELAX

What is this about a second Bigfoot in the footage ? I really hope that certain people aren't suggesting that every area of dappled shadow in the film is a potential Bigfoot. That would be a dangerous assumption, and the credibility of the footage will only suffer as a result.

i think the bigfoot theories still exsist, even if the pattersons came forth and admitited it, i mean they still can be bigfoots, maybe the just told that THAT bigfoot they did was fake! ya no what im saying guys!

No, they showed a dark shape that moved at the edge of the forest. It wasn't in the main frame of the picture. But anyway, it shows the shape turniong and moving, and some appendage swings around and dissappears with it. don't tell me that you believe this f***ing farm jerk?

trust me, read what I wrote carefully, it makes sense. Plus, he's not the first one to claim to be responsible for this film.

i think there has to be some truth in the sasqwatch (sp?) yeti, abominable snow man etc... too many different cultures have viewed such a creature.. perhaps it is closer described as neanderthal man... i dont know just a speculation.. but ppl have seen something