Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Man discovers 'Bigfoot tracks' in Washington

100 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

the13bats

Oldrover,

Let me grind on that 2nd reel question, i have a detailed brain but its been a mess lately as in the last year,

i seem to recall i saw reel 2 many years back before i was on the net and things that stood out are scrutinized in stills on the net so i wont swear at this second i saw it start to finish might have been teasers in a doc might have just seen bits, give me a few days i might have it on an old vhs doc, its also possible i saw other film with patterson making prints and i mistakenly believed it was the second reel from that day.

There is also the longer version of the money shot film.

I believe it was john green who gave them so much grief over the timeline that day that flying the flim out was the only answer, but then peter byrne researched flights and it didnt wash and and i dont believe the time and how, when etc the film got to the developer was ever put to rest and Patterson was arrested for stealing the camera so yeah.

I have noticed the big advocates in the film will overlook huge issues to stay in the its real camp.

So whats your opinion on Bob Hieronimus, he walks the walk, he had connection with gimlin and patterson, but he got involved with morris who i have doubts it was his suit.

I had to grin when gimlin said Hieronimus is a liar....but well yeah im riding his horse in the film...but no, he wasnt there we just used his horse.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oldrover
2 hours ago, the13bats said:

Oldrover,

Let me grind on that 2nd reel question, i have a detailed brain but its been a mess lately as in the last year,

i seem to recall i saw reel 2 many years back before i was on the net and things that stood out are scrutinized in stills on the net so i wont swear at this second i saw it start to finish might have been teasers in a doc might have just seen bits, give me a few days i might have it on an old vhs doc, its also possible i saw other film with patterson making prints and i mistakenly believed it was the second reel from that day.

Thanks, any further info on this would be great.

 

2 hours ago, the13bats said:

There is also the longer version of the money shot film.

Yes, I've seen this, there's a link to it on this FT thread, somewhere after page 8.

https://forums.forteana.org/index.php?threads/patterson-gimlin-bigfoot-film.1395/page-8

2 hours ago, the13bats said:

I believe it was john green who gave them so much grief over the timeline that day that flying the flim out was the only answer, but then peter byrne researched flights and it didnt wash and and i dont believe the time and how, when etc the film got to the developer was ever put to rest and Patterson was arrested for stealing the camera so yeah.

Yes, Byrne did check out one of the two local airports, but sadly not the other, so that's left a hole. Although, second airport aside, we know they didn't fly it out. But it raises an important obstacle in definitively proving it must have been a hoax. Between the three of them , Patterson, Gimlin, and DeAtley, none of them tell a consistent, matching, or detailed story. Meaning that no matter how much one of them paints themselves into a corner it's all so vague you can never quite hang them. It's either very clever, or lucky stupidity. 

The flight is a great example of this, DeAtley says 'oh wait, he didn't post it, I sent a plane'. So, the sceptic says, 'really? which company did you use'? DeAtley them comes up with the name of an air courier which did used to exist, but which is now gone and has no surviving records. 'How convenient. Never mind' says the sceptic, 'Even if we don't have records, what sort of planes were these people flying that they'd travel all the way from Yakima to Northern California, over the Cascades, at night, in 1967'? So you look for info on this company, and it turns out that in 1967 they were flying two Gruman Avengers, each  with a potential 1,200 mile range. It seems as if method can't win, you can make it obvious that the whole thing is madness, and I'd say well beyond reasonable doubt. But to those who believe the kind of nonsense spoken about this essentially  lacklustre little film 'reasonable doubt' doesn't really come into play. 

Further I don't think DeAtley even said it was definitely this company, he just suggested that it was probably them. So, even if records eve did turn up he could just say it might have been someone else. 

So, I believe that while the timeframe of film taking to first screening was an almighty foul up, I think at least DeAtley is very clever in keeping it all nice and vague. 

I don't believe the time either. We have no way to be certain that the first reel was taken anywhere near the time they said.

 

3 hours ago, the13bats said:

So whats your opinion on Bob Hieronimus, he walks the walk, he had connection with gimlin and patterson, but he got involved with morris who i have doubts it was his suit.

I had to grin when gimlin said Hieronimus is a liar....but well yeah im riding his horse in the film...but no, he wasnt there we just used his horse.

Don't know about Bob Hieronimous. My initial objection to him is that I find it difficult to accept that they had a third undetected man with them during the trip. Or that Hieronomus would have slipped all that way to California and slipped out again just to participate in the hoax. But, I didn't know it was his horse Gimlin was on, and, as above, we have no real idea that the film 1 was even taken during that trip. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
8 hours ago, the13bats said:

P&G did claim to have tracked it however they also claimed to have hurried back to get supplies to make the prints and they also somehow got the film in the air mail all that afternoon with some changes telling to telling, but there was a huge flap in the day because of all the mystic and lack of details on development of the film, it even upset their proponents.

Afaik Gimlin claims they only followed it's tracks for a little way before rushing off. Patterson claimed they tracked it for quite some time ( a couple of miles), before losing it in rugged terrain.

Then again, Gimlin claims the trip took a fortnight, while Patterson said it took a week.

I remember finding so many inconsistencies in the stories between the two of them, that it would make you wonder if they were both talking about the same thing.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

Get over all of it the bigfoots bones are ever found:)

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
On 3/9/2019 at 5:37 PM, openozy said:

Definitely BF tracks.

Hi Openozy

 They look like beerfoot imprints to me.:lol:

jmccr8

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy
2 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Openozy

 They look like beerfoot imprints to me.:lol:

jmccr8

I was thinking Boring F--- imprints.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles
On 3/12/2019 at 11:07 AM, oldrover said:

Me too. 

Yes they did claim to have gone ba k to get plaster etc, and as you say claimed to have, at about 18:00 Friday, posted it to Deatley in Yukama ready for the film's debut on the Sunday. I belueve the ckaims of it being sent by air were later when they were called on it? 

The greatest mystery posed by the PG film is how anyone can accept any of the above, plus sll the other details.

One of the drawbacks for me was never having been able to see the second reel, can I ask you where you found it. I'd love to see it. Segments if it have surfaced recentky in an old BBC documentary, which popped up fir sale on Ebay. 

For me, on of the most things that is suspicious is that before the video was taken, Patterson drew a pic of a bigfoot with boobs.    Then on his first day out he get a video of a bigfoot with boobs.   

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Robotic Jew
On 3/11/2019 at 11:35 AM, OverSword said:

What are you talking about?  Are you from around here?  If so you know damn well central Washington received well over 3 feet of snow and closer to 4 feet in just the last couple of weeks.  Hell here it is spring and if memory serves they're expecting 3 to 6 inches tonight.

This is called flirting in my house.

  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oldrover
4 hours ago, Myles said:

For me, on of the most things that is suspicious is that before the video was taken, Patterson drew a pic of a bigfoot with boobs.    Then on his first day out he get a video of a bigfoot with boobs.   

Exactly. I believe it was an illustration of the Ostman encounter. I've often wondered if tje suit was built to recreate that for his documentary. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Carnoferox
1 hour ago, oldrover said:

Exactly. I believe it was an illustration of the Ostman encounter. I've often wondered if tje suit was built to recreate that for his documentary. 

It was an illustration of William Roe's encounter actually

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
Posted (edited)
On 3/15/2019 at 11:56 PM, Myles said:

For me, on of the most things that is suspicious is that before the video was taken, Patterson drew a pic of a bigfoot with boobs.    Then on his first day out he get a video of a bigfoot with boobs.   

Patterson claimed they were actually looking around the area for a week before they staged found bigfoot. Two weeks according to Gimlin. Time probably spent in bars mostly, according to de Attley lol. Not that it matters, agree with your sentiment.

There was a spate of bigfoot sightings around Yakima at the same time that Patterson was putting up posters about his book, shortly before it was released (one of them a "white silvery coloured" bigfoot). There were also a few sightings around the Merritt property at the time he was trying convince his friend Merritt (who had Hollywood connections through his music) that bigfoot was legit. Merritt found tracks, some of which he thought "were probably planted", and one time his dog actually attacked bigfoot. It (bigfoot) ran up the road with his dog attached to it's "private parts", "screaming like a wild man" and with footsteps that "sounded padded". lol. This is all from Merritt himself, relayed to Greg Long. It almost sounds like bigfoot was working with Patterson, to promote himself...lol.

Patterson also tried to borrow a couple of people's cats for his documentary. He was going to let the cat go and set dogs after it apparently, to simulate them chasing bigfoot. These people recounted Patterson turning up in a pick up with others in costume (cowboys, someone in Indian garb etc). As he was making a doco about bigfoot, complete with costumes and a fake Indian tracker, the last thing you would expect him to have is a bigfoot costume, obviously...lol.

 

On 3/13/2019 at 2:41 AM, the13bats said:

I believe it was john green who gave them so much grief over the timeline that day that flying the flim out was the only answer, but then peter byrne researched flights and it didnt wash 

 

It's very likely the film was finished (and possibly edited) before that trip. The reason why no one was ever able to scrutinise an original is probably for this reason. It would have had this information. It seems strange to hear proponents talk about "first generation" copies. It seems more likely they simply make that assumption and no one knows what generation copies they really have.

 

On 3/13/2019 at 2:41 AM, the13bats said:

So whats your opinion on Bob Hieronimus, he walks the walk, he had connection with gimlin and patterson, but he got involved with morris who i have doubts it was his suit.

 

I think it very likely that Hieronimus did model a costume at bluff creek at some stage for Patterson. Not sure when though. Someone had to leave those silly fake tracks around bluff ck shortly before their "expedition", so who knows? Maybe then?

According to someone on bff who interviewed Morris and his wife, they both swore that Patterson ordered their gorilla costume. He also confided to a sporting goods salesman that he arranged a costume to be sent from LA  and it seems he might have had at least a couple of earlier bigfoot costumes before "Patty". Either that or bigfoot was very obliging in helping him with his promotional work lol.

 

ps. Hope you don't mind me butting into your conversation.

 

Edited by Horta
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats

Bob gilmin was the one posing indian in the doc,

Well, if i recall correctly both roe and ostman descrided creatures with breasts ostman said something like " the old ladys figure would have been improved with a brassiere" paraphased.

Thats intriguing what rover suggests, patterson was working for that nature film company making docs,

Perhaps as that was falling apart patterson jumped to claiming the suit to do a reinactment was the real deal to try to get the $$$ a real creature film it way better than just another doc

one thing for sure patterson was in a race against time and not just because he had cancer,

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

Gee get over it that there are no bigfoots and aliens, no evidence of ships and bones of bigfoots in America  and aliens:0)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MaxieRosalee
Posted (edited)

I'm a native Washington resident, though I live on the western side and not central. The area I live in is pretty much prime Bigfoot territory, though. Tons of thick forest absolutely everywhere. In my ten years of living here, I've never seen anything that would suggest Bigfoot lives out there.

Bigfoot is one of those sort of "local culture" things around here, where everyone is aware of him. I don't think it's too implausible that this might have been a hoax or someone having a little fun. But like I said, I live on the western side instead of central, so I don't know how relevant this all is to the topic. Thought it might be worth sharing.

Edited by MaxieRosalee
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Minimalists
10 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

Gee get over it that there are no bigfoots and aliens, no evidence of ships and bones of bigfoots in America  and aliens:0)

You could be right. But then agian Slenderman started as a joke and now people are claiming to have seen him everywhere..All it takes is for one person to plant that seed of urban legend..I am still on the fence when it comes to eyewitness testimony of these sightings...To me it's hard to believe that all those people could be making this stuff up...But then agian I have no hard evidence to back up any claim so I will let it go at that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oldrover
17 hours ago, the13bats said:

 

Perhaps as that was falling apart patterson jumped to claiming the suit to do a reinactment was the real deal to try to get the $$$ a real creature film it way better than just another doc

 

Horta, and 13bats, that's what I think happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats
13 hours ago, Alien Origins said:

You could be right. But then agian Slenderman started as a joke and now people are claiming to have seen him everywhere..All it takes is for one person to plant that seed of urban legend..I am still on the fence when it comes to eyewitness testimony of these sightings...To me it's hard to believe that all those people could be making this stuff up...But then agian I have no hard evidence to back up any claim so I will let it go at that. 

What i noticed reserching smaller folklore stories like dover demon, flatwoods monster etc is basically there are always contagion sightings, meaning fred saw it so sam saw it too then jenny sees it etc when it likely started as a hoax or misidentified known creature, some like nessie or bigfoot get big

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
On 3/17/2019 at 6:11 AM, the13bats said:

Bob gilmin was the one posing indian in the doc,

Well, if i recall correctly both roe and ostman descrided creatures with breasts ostman said something like " the old ladys figure would have been improved with a brassiere" paraphased.

Yes. An interesting point is that I have heard believers claim that "Patty's" breasts have only been noticed recently, through close up, digital enhancement and so on. Which helps it's authenticity because, why would someone do that?

Yet in Patterson's very first interviews he went to some length to stress the "creature" had breasts. It was like a selling point. He also claimed he stressed it to the the scientists (if there ever really were any) that he originally showed it to, and who found it uninteresting.

Quote

Thats intriguing what rover suggests, patterson was working for that nature film company making docs,

Perhaps as that was falling apart patterson jumped to claiming the suit to do a reinactment was the real deal to try to get the $$$ a real creature film it way better than just another doc

one thing for sure patterson was in a race against time and not just because he had cancer,

Yes, his "documentary" was being financed by American National Enterprises and various other people (the Radfords). It makes a lot of sense that he would then use these resources to claim he filmed a real bigfoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats

Im 54 so when the pgf came out i was little but recall it being a hyped up big deal and to see it you had to go to the theaters i remember grandmother insisting to my mom to go see it, and the tucket taker saying it my scare me.

The loud responses in the audience of oohs and ahs but not bood or dismissals,

There was that follow up doc from the with that ANE outfit the fist 20mins is the usual everything proves bf and the pgf are real but had charm with folks like myrtle walton and her husband but then for over an hour its a go nowhere waste of time with bob morgan at the helm, what became of him?

There was the doc with peter graves with the highlight to me when they take a small suut case containing a bigfoot track ro peter hurkos the fraud in extrasensory perception the flag of utter nonsence was flying full mast as hurkos not only channels its a bigfoot track but says its a real creature and draws it,

I can see that now, the productiin staff called hurkos saying they want him in a doc he says sure since he likes paychecks and asks whzt is the doc about the producters say bigfoot, but of course he channeled what was in the case, lol.

Many of those old docs have bits of info which do cloud ther stuff they preach today,

Krantz is in most of them beating his fist it just cant be a man in a fur suit, a man cant fit in a suit like that etc, he talked about perhaps those arent breast but aur sacs for vocalizing,

Seems in the early mid 70s people liked to blindly believe and enjoyed having something put over on them, now people got wiser not as comfortable looking ridiculous believing without proof, i know we have a few hold outs that dont mind how they appear.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
On 3/9/2019 at 10:26 PM, OverSword said:

Well in that case it still doesn’t hold up because that snow was 3 feet deep. Nobody in snow that deep is taking steps that long without leaving more behind than just foot holes. The snow would be near up to your crotch. I say fake feet strapped to the boots of a hoaxer. I’ve seen it done on a documentary. You strap these huge fake soles on and they hold you near the surface and you run to make the stride long.

Not a bad idea OverSword. But there are problems with that. Did you ever try to run in real deep snow?  You can't last long, it is exhausting, and fake feet exacerbate the problem.

If you looked closely at the photos you could see toe impressions in some. 24" long prints with toes...? Well, it's either a hoaxer or a BF. One has to follow the prints BOTH ways to know for sure. If the tracks go indefinitely into the woods, it's a BF. If the prints stop and you then see human prints, it's a hoaxer. The hoaxer cannot get out of this without leaving his real prints at *some* point (before or after the fakery). 

And 38" between  prints...? a hoaxer is not doing that for very long. His gate will deteriorate after just a few steps. I think it can be determined with a good examination.

One last thought. If a hoaxer put down prints going into the woods, wouldn't there be human prints coming OUT?  If it is a hoaxer, there should be signs *somewhere*

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the13bats

if its not a human hoaxer then it has to be a real bigfoot...thats a bit ridiculous, while i do not believe in bigfoot and believe this in all likelyhood to be a deliberate hoax it could be other things, so it might not be a hoaxer but that far from makes it automatically bigfoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles

With snow that deep, they should have been able to track the prints for miles.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
11 hours ago, the13bats said:

if its not a human hoaxer then it has to be a real bigfoot...thats a bit ridiculous, while i do not believe in bigfoot and believe this in all likelyhood to be a deliberate hoax it could be other things, so it might not be a hoaxer but that far from makes it automatically bigfoot.

agreed but we're running out of choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Myles said:

With snow that deep, they should have been able to track the prints for miles.

Yes. I don't at all lay responsibility for that on the naturalist who wandered upon these marks, but a volunteer BF org has said they will investigate.

Here's what I predict they will find: the tracks go on and on and suddenly... no more tracks! no big footed tracks, no human tracks, no NOTHING. *poof*

 

PS: Does anyone in here know what the expected value is of a BF stride?  

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.