Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

Status
Not open for further replies.
Huntster said:
So, once again, let's see someone (another liar) make a film that looks to me like a big, heavy, bipedal creature, complete with associated footprints, and have an independent liar come by the next day and inspect the scene.
Click to expand...

And here we are, 38 years later, with no verdict...

Independent is not synonomous with qualified ..

I know you have a dictionary.. Need a thesaurus ?
 
Titmus actually brought a couple of people up to Bluff Creek to see the tracks. They did an informal test and arrived at a weight of 600-700 pounds.
They only did this while walking though, rather than actually trying to create the tracks as a hoaxer would. Still, his heel went in 1/2 an inch, which suggests it wouldn't be too hard to make deeper tracks.


While passing through Weaverville I had phoned my sister and brother-in-law in San Diego and invited them up to Bluff Creek for a visit after my several years away and also to see the tracks. They arrived at my camp this particular evening shortly before I was preparing to leave. We stayed over another day. Allene was a skeptic and Harry a hard-headed non-believer. Both of them left there believing in the existence of this creature. I didn't try to convince them of anything. I simply took them to where the tracks were and let them examine them to their own satisfaction and draw their own conclusions. Harry has hunted big game all of his life. He has been all over Africa, Alaska, Yukon Territory, Canada, Mexico and the U.S. and stated that this impressed him more than anything he had ever seen in the bush in all of his travels. Harry made several tests and observations, one of which was walking briskly beside the tracks to try to match their depth of up to an inch and a quarter and more in places. Harry is a 200 pounder and the best he could do was an imprint of about 1/2 of an inch on the rear portion of his shoe heel and one-eighth of an inch and less on the rest of his shoe imprint. We both agreed, considering the depth of the two imprints and the difference in the amount of bearing surface, that the creature that made these tracks would have to weigh at least 600 to 700 pounds.
Click to expand...
 
LTC8K6 said:
....Titmus is sure that Patty sat down and watched Roger and Bob. The evidence is very plain. Meaning anyone would probably see it......
Click to expand...

...About 80 or 90 feet above the creek and logging road there
was very plain evidence where Bigfoot had sat down for some time among
the ferns. He was apparently watching the two men below and across the
creek from him. The distance would have been approximately 125-150
yards. His position was shadowed and well screened from observation from
below....
Click to expand...

This is classic bear behavior. I'm not surprised to read that a sasquatch would do the same thing.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Titmus actually brought a couple of people up to Bluff Creek to see the tracks. They did an informal test and arrived at a weight of 600-700 pounds......
Click to expand...

Without the benefit of seeing the tracks on the ground and the surrounding area, but having seen juxtaposed photo's of the subject next to 6'6" McClarin, and having a fair share of experience judging the size/weight of bears, I'd estimate the subject's weight (if it is truly an animal) at 600 to 800 lbs.

...Allene was a skeptic and Harry a hard-headed non-believer. Both of them left there believing in the existence of this creature. I didn't try to convince them of anything. I simply took them to where the tracks were and let them examine them to their own satisfaction and draw their own conclusions. Harry has hunted big game all of his life. He has been all over Africa, Alaska, Yukon Territory, Canada, Mexico and the U.S. and stated that this impressed him more than anything he had ever seen in the bush in all of his travels....
Click to expand...

I, too, have hunted big game regularly, but primarily in Alaska. I have had plenty of experience hunting and just viewing both black and brown bears.

I found a trackway as a teen in 1972 in a very remote area of the southern Sierra Mountains in California. Several other people were with me. There were several footprints in the trackway, and three of the prints were in mud and very clear. They were not bear tracks.

I have believed in the existence of these creatures ever since. So have my companions on that trip.
 
Diogenes said:
Or that what he found, was the sign of a classic bear ..


Oh, wait.. That wouldn't fit the ad hoc conclusion..


Never mind...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Are you prepared to debate that the 14.5" tracks at the film site were those of a bear, and that the subject of the film was a bear?

Frankly, I wouldn't be the least surprised if that's where we are going next.

....Could you explain why we think Sas share Bear behaviour...
Click to expand...

We?

What? Do I have a mouse in my pocket?

The act of seeking good cover, then stopping to watch intruders from that cover, is a behavior that I have seen repeatedly, and many times, by both brown bears and black bears. When encounters with bears weren't of the close, disturbing variety, I'd say that this behavior occurred nearly 90% of the time I encountered a bear in the woods, on the railroad tracks, or on lonely roads (not busy, active highways).

Since Titmus found evidence that the PG film subject did the same thing, I associate that with the bear behavior I've seen repeatedly.

I would speculate that it may be a common behavior between wild omnivores who prefer to avoid man, yet are very curious creatures.

Of course, I don't have proof of that.

But since I'm not a scientist, I'm not discussing this with a scientist, most scientists aren't interested in this phenomenon, etc., my lack of proof isn't much of a big deal, is it?
 
LTC8K6 said:
Titmus actually brought a couple of people up to Bluff Creek to see the tracks. They did an informal test and arrived at a weight of 600-700 pounds.
They only did this while walking though, rather than actually trying to create the tracks as a hoaxer would. Still, his heel went in 1/2 an inch, which suggests it wouldn't be too hard to make deeper tracks.
Click to expand...
"Informal test"?
Exactly how was this test made?
How precise it was?

A number of things must be remembered (or, in some cases, learnt) when it comes to inferr weights from footprints. It's not just a matter of "I weight Y kg, my imprint is Z cm-deep, thus a W cm-deep imprint means a weight of X kg". Oh, even if you are not using metric system, the above statement is still true. Why?

Because two variables (moisture and compaction) are not being taken in to account.

Footprints are recorded only at the very upper parts of the soil or sediment surface. This upper part is (usually) the least-compacted part. And water content can alter a lot its mechanical properties. If its' wet, it will have less mechanical resistance, thus allowing greater penetration of the foot and resulting in a deeper footprint. If the sandbar had a smaller water content when it was tested, then of course the resulting footprints would be shallower... And soil or sediment water contents at the upper levels can change a lot during a day, not just due to rain, but also due to the dew, for example.

Ever dug out or tried to thrust a stick in the ground? If the answer is yes, you will remember that after a certain depth, the resistence increases a lot. This is due to compaction. Beyond a certain point, you will have to thrust really hard to advance. Depending on the conditions and structure of the soil, a man's foot prints will not be deeper than those of cow, for example. This brings down another mistaken argument, that someone using wooden feet would make always shallow imprints. Imprint depth will depend on soil structure and moisture content. Beyond a certain point, unless a really big force is used, there will be no advance. Note that this has another implication- depending on soil conditions, if the footprints are too deep...
 
Last edited:
Sure, the soil could have been very dry earlier, very wet later on, compacted by heavy rain and then dried out on top, etc., etc.

None of these stop the hoaxer from making deep prints though. :D
 
So, if we believe Titmus, then P/G tracked what exactly for 3+ miles, and how did they get their horses to stay calm either in the area or when tracking right past a big stinky seated Patty?

Then again, did they track Patty on foot, or on horseback? If on horseback, how did the horses get over their fear of Patty?
 
Ever dug out or tried to thrust a stick in the ground? If the answer is yes, you will remember that after a certain depth, the resistence increases a lot.
Click to expand...

Here in the piedmont, your stick will go in about 1/2 an inch. You will then encounter hard red clay for as far as you'd care to try to dig.

Good for making bricks, though. :D
 
LTC8K6 said:
So, if we believe Titmus, then P/G tracked what exactly for 3+ miles, and how did they get their horses to stay calm either in the area or when tracking right past a big stinky seated Patty?

Then again, did they track Patty on foot, or on horseback? If on horseback, how did the horses get over their fear of Patty?
Click to expand...

They no longer saw her, and weren't startled by her unexpected appearance again.
 
P/G smelled Patty, and therefore so did the horses. I'll leave the implications of that up to the reader.

What appearance again?

If Patty was squatting in the woods near them, then what did P/G track?
 
LTC8K6 said:
Here in the piedmont, your stick will go in about 1/2 an inch. You will then encounter hard red clay for as far as you'd care to try to dig.

Good for making bricks, though. :D
Click to expand...

Bigfeet make bricks? Or that would be brickfeet? Look! I just coined an unknown North America Primate that Coleman is not aware of!:D

Aniway, my point is that the weight estimates based in footprint depths can be quite incorrect. And if the footprint is too deep, maybe it's just because the hoaxer was making too much downward force with the fakefoot, while trying to create what he/she considered would be the effect of a heavy animal.
 
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