Patterson film

[Deleted]

I saw on TV a program on whether or not some mysteries were true or false,or hoaxes. They said that the patterson footage was proved to be a hoax. I don't remember the name of the show, but i saw it about 2 years ago. I noticed on BFO, they say that it is not a hoax. What is it really,truth or hoax?

[Deleted]

Firstly, welcome to the West Coast Sasquatch Research forum, Rico.

Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin filmed what many people believe to be a bigfoot or sasquatch at Bluff Creek, California, on October 20, 1967.

According to everything I have read, the Patterson/Gimlin film has been subjected to many systematic and multifaceted scientific analysis. Despite years of rigorous examination by many noted scientists, the film has not been declared a hoax or forgery.

Authorative conclusions on the Patterson/Gimlin film nearly all state that the size and shape of the creature's body cannot be duplicated by a man.

Some of the world's best special effects people say they could not have duplicated the creature seen in the Patterson/Gimlin film with materials available in 1967.

So, to answer your question: to the best of my knowledge the Patterson/Gimlin film has never been declared a hoax or forgery.


Bushman

[Deleted]

i think that film is genuine its kind of freaky! how far away are the two men filming ? also the sasquatch dosent seem in the slightest concerned at the intrusion i saw a rendition of the film where its been cleaned up by an expert so its not so juddery and its zooms in and freezes for a second on the creatures face it is very freaky indeed also it zooms in on the creatures posteria and you can clearly see the buttock muscles moveing in relation to its strides! and there is no way you could fake that i think !

[Deleted]

reddandoc said:

i think that film is genuine its kind of freaky! how far away are the two men filming ? also the sasquatch dosent seem in the slightest concerned at the intrusion i saw a rendition of the film where its been cleaned up by an expert so its not so juddery and its zooms in and freezes for a second on the creatures face it is very freaky indeed also it zooms in on the creatures posteria and you can clearly see the buttock muscles moveing in relation to its strides! and there is no way you could fake that i think !

Welcome to the West Coast Sasquatch Research forum, reddandoc.

There's a beautiful diagram of the Patterson/Gimlin film site—with distances included to the subject filmed—at the following link:

forum.hancockhouse.com/images/articles/20050924140836229_1_original.jpg

To read more about the Patterson/Gimlin filming of a possible sasquatch at Bluff Creek, California and much, much more, check out the following link to the Murphy File:

forum.hancockhouse.com/index.php?topic=crypto_mam_murphy&page=1

IF for some reason the above links don't work, click on the link below and then on the "Murphy File" link on the site's menu:

forum.hancockhouse.com/

Hope this helps.

Bushman

[Deleted]

If you put yourself in Pattersons shoes,and after years of searching and BOOM they round a corner and there it is ,first there is got to be a second of shock then grabbed his camera as fast as he could and shot the film, and he probly figured there i got it on film PROOF for everyone to see, never thinking that it would be questioned as a fake, its never proven to be a fake and no suit has ever been found or pictured, alot of people claim to have a connection with the hoax but no hard evidence has been found to validate there stories, so it still stands today as one of the best pieces of evidence of a sasquatch.

[westerncanadian]

Any documentary that has made the assertion the Patterson film is a hoax has not done their homework. No one has 'proved' the film is a hoax. People with stories they can't even keep straight have claimed to be the man in the suit in the Patterson film, but their stories are full of holes and egregious errors. Not one shred of tangible, I repeat tangible evidence has been produced to assert the film is a hoax.

On the contrary, one has to be blind not to see actual muscle movement that takes place particularly along the right thigh and around the right knee. You can't do that with a suit .

Craig Woolheater of the Texas Bigfoot Research Center and I interviewed Bob Gimlin last year for a video record that would be saved for posterity. I used police questioning techniques and body language observation methods during the interview and I can tell you categorically Bob Gimlin was telling the truth about the envcounter he and Roger Patterson had with a sasquatch.

The only way anybody is going to prove the film is a hoax is to produce a suit made in 1967 that had functioning muscles, natural hair movement and was better than any suit built by the special effects industry before or since.

Until that is done, the film remains the best image evidence of a sasquatch yet obtained.

[Deleted]

YEP!!! Well said my friend....

[Deleted]

Thanks, that was some good info. What was that that they shot in 1920? Have you guys heard of "jacko". The sasquatch that supposedly was caught in the early 1900's?

[Deleted]

yea i know about the BC Jacko story, sounds interesting if true, but the evidence is lacking.

[Deleted]

Here's a short note I found on Jacko:

In 1884 the newspaper, Daily Colonist, of Victoria, British Columbia told of the capture of a "Sasquatch." The creature was spotted by a train crew along the Fraser River. The crew stopped the train, gave chase, and captured the animal after following it up a rocky hill. The creature was given the name "Jacko" and was "...Something of the gorilla type, standing four feet seven inches in height and weighing 127 pounds. He has long black, strong hair and resembles a human being with one exception, his entire body, excepting his hands (or paws) and feet are covered with glossy hair about one inch long...he possesses extraordinary strength, as he will take hold of a stick and break it by wrenching it or twisting it, which no man could break in the same way."

The description of Jacko is so much like that of a chimpanzee, and so unlike later Bigfoot reports, that some have suggested the animal actually was a chimpanzee. If brought back by a sailor from Africa, the animal might have escaped or been turned loose. There is also the strong possibility that the entire story was a hoax. Newspapers of that era often printed hoax stories to amuse their readers (perhaps not unlike some tabloids sold today).

[westerncanadian]

John Green exposed the Jacko story as a hoax some years ago.

[Deleted]

westerncanadian said:

John Green exposed the Jacko story as a hoax some years ago.

Hi Westerncanadian,

I'd like to see your sources for that claim. Why?
That's not what John Green told me when I asked him about Jacko.

Bushman

[westerncanadian]

I refer you to page 86 of Sasquatch Apes Among Us. Both the Mainland Guardian and Columbian newspapers rebuked the Victoria Colonist for publishing the Jacko story and deemed it a hoax. If it had not been a hoax the Colonist would have responded, but they let the whole affair tamely die. Why? Because it was a hoax.

Skeptic magazine interviewed John and Loren Coleman about Jacko Here is the quote:

"We asked Coleman and Green point blank: "Was the Jacko story bogus?" Coleman answered, "I sense that the Jacko story is a journalistic hoax, begun to increase sales ia a war between rival newspapers." Green cautiously agree, saying, "I lean that way. (he warns however that there's no real to settle the question today."

Furthermore, in 1975, John Green co-wrote an article in Pursuit magazine with Ivan Sanderson's widow in regard to the Jacko story probably being a piece of journalistic fiction.

Those are my sources.

[Deleted]

westerncanadian said:

John Green exposed the Jacko story as a hoax some years ago.

When Thomas, Gerry, Bill Miller and I were out to visit John and June last fall, I made a point of asking John about Jacko and he stated that with the information available today the story of Jacko could neither be proven to be true or deemed a hoax.

On page 37 of "The Best of Sasquatch Bigfoot" John Green states the following:

"As to Jacko, whether he really existed or was just a newspaper spoof probably can't be established beyond doubt, no matter what new information may turn up in the future."

Bushman

[Gerry]

It will probably never be proved, or disproved. The anecdotal evidence and all of those involved are long gone.


As for the creature which was shot in the twenties...According to Chris Murphy..this is the story...

A team of Swiss geographers under Francois de Loys shot the creature seen here in the jungles of Columbia, Venezuela in 1920. De Loys stated that two of the creatures attacked his team, forcing them to defend themselves. One of the creatures fell and the other made its escape. De Loys' claimed that the animal shown was just over five feet tall. He removed the creature’s skin and cleaned its skull/jaw and attempted to bring these back to Switzerland for scientific analysis. Unfortunately, the artifacts were lost in a boating accident.