Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

Status
Not open for further replies.
zaayrdragon said:
With our luck, we'd be immortal but still have a limited-capacity memory. Sure, you could learn most everything... but you'd forget just as much.

Then again, that could explain how immortal existence could be fun...
Click to expand...

Immortality would give you umpteen chances to correct memory deficiencies. Mortals are already working on this by writing down real-time real-life experiences so that they can be later referenced as "memory helpers". Maybe immortals actually cherish faulty memory, because it creates a warm and fuzzy world... one that you cannot escape whether your memory is accurate or otherwise. Can immortals commit suicide, or is that just not part of the ongoing reality of immortality? Are you immortal no matter what you do... or are you immortal because you never do kills yourself or end up gittin' kilt?
 
LTC8K6 said:
The baggy pants in the second frame should have been raising questions all along.
Click to expand...

It did raise questions among PGF advocates. They seem to have arrived at the conclusion that this is a thigh muscle hernia, or a thigh hair "demarcation/line/crease/scar" caused by continually dragging the thumb across the hairy thigh. The advocates obviously don't entertain the idea that this is a costume flaw, because to those folks... this is a real Bigfoot.
 
Personally, I believe it's indicative of a mental problem, which also explains why Patty reacted so non-typically (for BigFeets, and all). She was obviously having mental problems, and losing control over her shap-shifting ability. She's barely blurred at all, either, further evidence that she was losing her faculties.

:D
 
Even if Patty obviously showed a belly-pouch with a baby Bigfoot peeking out... the PGF advocates would only say that Patterson was lucky enough to film a bipedal marsupial "ape" in Northern California in 1967.
 
You know me, I'm just a close-minded skeptic, but how does an injury like that NOT cause a noticeable limp?
 
Hitch said:
You know me, I'm just a close-minded skeptic, but how does an injury like that NOT cause a noticeable limp?
Click to expand...

Hitch, you are not just a closed-minded skeptic. You are a frikkin' jag-off that wants to limit the wonderful potential biodiversity of our not-fully-discovered planet. Huntster told us all about your type.

About the injury/hernia: I am appealing to anyone reading this that has medical or physiological knowledge. Look at that thigh boo-boo. Could any animal walk properly with such an injury?
 
My bad, William. It read like I was restating what you just said about Patty's thigh, but I meant to say "the butt of those baggy pants in the second frame".....

Not that we haven't said that before... :D
 
I mean, just look at it for crying out loud! :D
The first and second frames, really.

post-1-1101237919.gif
 
Last edited:
These B&W copies of color Cibachromes don't reveal any colors. LTC, you may have noticed the color of Patty's left hand matching her feet in color "frame grabs" or color Cibachomes.

The "hand" in the color DC is gray. The color of gorilla hands and foot soles seems to pretty much be gray. Chimps and humans are not gray in these body parts.

It is my belief that the hands/fingers of the Patty costume are fixed in a semi-cupped or semi-curled form. I don't think they actually change shape during the PGF. It is even possible that fingers (if they are a distinct feature of the costume hands) are not discernable in any film frame or unmodified Cibachrome print.
 
My knowledge of the minutea of the Patterson film is not as extensive as others. With that in mind, it is possible I may be overlooking some esoteric historical fact.

I find it ironic that Sasquatch advocates claim that this film has been studied "scientifically" for many years, and, in the case of Glickman, many thousands of dollars have been invested in this study. If so, why was the "thigh hernia" feature discovered only about 5 years ago, by Doug Hajicek, I believe?

Various other claims have been made that turned out to be dead wrong, like Grover Krantz asserting that the film subject is unable to turn its head without turning the whole torso. This is simply not true.
 
William Parcher said:
[...]
I would now like to appeal to any JREFers who have knowledge and/or experience with the medical condition and physiology of "thigh hernias". Is this supposed to be a thigh muscle hernia? Is there such a thing in the medical record? If so, what do thigh muscle hernias look like? How might a thigh hernia of this sort affect the locomotion of a bipedal subject (human or hypothetical Bigfoot) that has such an injury?
Click to expand...
Well, I'm not a doctor, but I have had medical training in nursing and also have had formal training in human anatomy and physiology. Perhaps my judgment will be of some use?

My understanding of muscles and muscle injuries is limited, but I do know that a basic muscle hernia, where the muscle tissue protrudes through the outlying fascia, causes a good amount of swelling and some pain/discomfort. However, it wouldn't look anywhere nearly as bad as the "hernia" claimed to be on Patty's thigh. What would cause something so disfiguring as that would be (to my limited knowledge) a rupture, where the muscle tissue protrudes much more through the outer fascia. Ruptures, however, cause intense pain, as the tough fascia actually cuts into the muscle tissue as it contracts and relaxes in normal movement. If Patty had a rupture in her quadricep, she would barely be able to crawl, let alone walk.

I can't see how a simple muscle hernia would cause such a nasty looking bulge in the leg like that. Especially not with the well-defined edges of it. Simple muscle hernias cause localized swelling with no defined edge (to my knowledge). If I had to make a call just looking at the leg itself, I'd say it was a serious rupture. And if it was a rupture, that animal should be down on the ground, not walking, not even with a "compliant gait."

I would suggest you ask some of the members here with more extensive training on the subjects of medicine or anatomy though -- I think Dr. Kitten is a practicing physician, and she would likely be able to give a more informed opinion.

My references for the information in this post are all classroom-related. I will cite my anatomy professor W. Sanderson, and one of my nursing assessment instructors, L. Luka.

...

My opinion? That's just an ill-fitting costume.


*edited for typos, and to clarify*
 
Last edited:
Time to rationalization that Bigfoot just has an amazing pain tolerance, with citing of Astonishing Feats of Animal Strength...5...4...3...2...
 
Patty does appear to show many problems that are normally only seen in creature suits and NEVER in live animals.

I'm open to the idea there are other species that have existed we are not aware of. Even this one. But I can't use fake footprints or a hoaxed film as evidence for what I'd love to find some type of hard evidence for.

The skin of an ape suit popping away from the thigh isn't a hernia and real gorillas or humans never detach at the back of the neck while attempting to look over their shoulders. Patty does this. Sometimes that happens when a person wears a gorilla suit made with 1940's methods.

Roger kept filming for too long. He should've stopped earlier before this frame.

- Dfoot:boxedin:
 

Attachments

  • PAT-lil-HIP-prob.gif
    PAT-lil-HIP-prob.gif
    25.4 KB · Views: 83
I think the darkest part of Patty's butt in that frame is actually her left hand, visible and blending in, so her but isn't drooping quite as much as it appears in that frame.

It still looks like a full diaper, though....
 
LTC8K6 said:
The front part is covering a different track that is being suggested as the heel .
Click to expand...
Yep, it's exactly what a 4 legged bear does all the time when it walks, and it's exactly what a bear track should look like.
Click to expand...

I have seen and examined both brown bear and black bear tracks more times than I can possibly remember. I've seen them in long, extended trackways on sandy riverbars, in light snow, single prints in a small patch of mud in the trail, and even in mud that was underwater. I've seen the tracks of 10' coastal brown bears, and very small black bear cubs.

I have skinned several bears, both black and brown. I have held their feet in my hands as I cut through thier pads and turned their toes.

Yet I'm confused. Can you restate exactly what it is that "a 4 legged bear does all the time when it walks"?




With all due respect to Mr. Marcot, I have never seen a bear overstep that I would confuse with a sasquatch print. Further, Mr. Marcot is not stating that bear tracks fully explain the sasquatch footprint phenomenon:

...It is my interpretation that some, maybe many, tracks of Bigfoot and its global cousins, as reported earnestly by honest people (thus, excluding the hoaxers), are probably tracks of large wildlife ... and most likely bears that are simply enlarging their own tracks by sliding, by overstepping, or by having their tracks enlarged through weather effects....
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly with his interpretation. That doesn't explain all the prints that have been found. Neither does hoaxing.

I also find it amusing to read all the conjecture regarding a single photo of a single track, especially since there were at least 6 other prints in that trackway either photographed or cast.

One with a mind disciplined in science would be reserving judgement regarding that print until he/she was able to examine the evidence regarding the other prints (like tube has done).

Unfortunately, there are more prejudiced minds here than minds disciplined in science.
 
Huntster said:
I also find it amusing to read all the conjecture regarding a single photo of a single track, especially since there were at least 6 other prints in that trackway either photographed or cast.
Click to expand...
Meldrum published what looks like a bear track and said it was a sasquatch print. You claim that there are at least 6 other prints from that trackway. (Which you seem to be implying, don't look like bear tracks.) How about instead of a bald assertion, you point us to some pictures of these other tracks? So we can see what they really look like.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom