ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags bigfoot , Bob Gimlin , Patterson-Gimlin film , Roger Patterson

Closed Thread
Old 13th May 2011, 01:06 PM   #6601
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
I have that part of the film. That is Roger Patterson with the pack horse. I know this is that John Green said it was.
Actually, L.B., that is not true.

Watch the film clips from the X-Creatures documentary, and you'll see that John Green identifies Bob Gimlin:
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigfootB.../5/dZcJ29iW8GU

Also notice, the two guys have two different colors of SHIRTS on, one light blue, the other checkered red.
Patterson:

Gimlin:


I would suggest a new field of research for you, Leroy... Bigfoot on MARS:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/2008...ot-on-mars.htm



BFBM

Last edited by BigfootBookman; 13th May 2011 at 02:31 PM.
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th May 2011, 02:42 PM   #6602
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 9,151
Who filmed Roger there? Not Bob...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


And why does he say he was the horse person when he told Chris Murphy Roger was the horse person?

Quote:
Horse Sense

I have confirmed with Bob Gimlin that Patterson definitely rode a small quarter horse (which he owned), not his Welsh pony "Peanuts." Also, that Patterson had arranged to borrow a horse by the name of "Chico" from Bob Heironimus for Gimlin to use.

That Patterson and Gimlin had borrowed a horse from a man with whom they were friends, and which would later (1999) claim to have been the "creature" in the film seems odd on the surface. However, Gimlin did not have a horse that was suitable (old enough) for the expedition, so Patterson arranged to borrow Chico as stated. It is all that simple. The three men were friends and neighbours and borrowed horses from each other. Although Gimlin can't specifically recall, it is likely he had a borrowed horse for the previous Mt. St. Helens expedition.
http://books.google.ca/books?id=0_vF...page&q&f=false
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th May 2011, 03:12 PM   #6603
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,717
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
That is Roger Patterson with the pack horse.
No chaps = no Roger.

You've failed again, Leroy. Over and over and over... you get things wrong.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th May 2011, 03:40 PM   #6604
DennyT
Master Poster
 
DennyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,526
Originally Posted by BigfootBookman View Post
It is hardly "gymnastics." Gimlin describes a real place that is actually there, as we have found.

BFBM
you wish.
__________________
unlikely to stay thirsty, my friends.
DennyT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th May 2011, 06:14 PM   #6605
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
WP-
The last comment I left was the wrong comment. I was talking to someone else at the same time and they ask me about a piece of film I had and they ask me about who was the man riding in the woods with the pack horse and making the cast prints. The comment I was going to leave on here was send to the other person I was talking to.

Now what I think is so funny is the post by BBM he post a video that I piece together and send it to him over 2 year ago and he place it on his youtube account and post his site here and he come here and talk BS about my research but, he use the video I piece together. That was my work piecing it all together.

Now about the other video that was posted here. The video by MK Davis. Who filmed Roger Patterson. I send the audio to MK Davis. That was from the interview on Nov 5, 2009. The interview was with Bob Gimlin and John Green. I used this same audio in my video. Again people say bad things about my research but, even they use my work I have done.

Now if I did not send the audio to MK Davis then he would have not made that video or post it. Just like BBM If I did not piece the video together and send it to him he would have not even post the video he shows. Again they can use my work but, put down my work.
Leroy Blevins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th May 2011, 06:25 PM   #6606
Drewbot
Illuminator
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,405
I figured out L. Blevins. Read his posts as though he were a french-Canadian trapper in Nippigon Country in the early 20th century.
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 05:05 AM   #6607
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
WP-
Now what I think is so funny is the post by BBM he post a video that I piece together and send it to him over 2 year ago and he place it on his youtube account and post his site here and he come here and talk BS about my research but, he use the video I piece together. That was my work piecing it all together.

Again people say bad things about my research but, even they use my work I have done.

Just like BBM If I did not piece the video together and send it to him he would have not even post the video he shows. Again they can use my work but, put down my work.
Last I checked, Blevins, that film is by Roger Patterson and the BBC. You cannot claim any form of authorship. And, as I recall, it was *I* who informed you about the X-Creatures documentary. Before that, before you "lost all of your files," you were only using MK Davis clips in your "research." There is no original "thought" in that video from you, and you have no intellectual property in it. I only posted it for other people's reference.

Almost all of your work is highly derivative. It's only the outrageous claims without any foundation that you can really call your own.

BFBM
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 05:14 AM   #6608
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by parnassus View Post
you wish.
I was only trying to be helpful in answering your questions to the best of my ability, Parnassus. What is it with this strange compulsion you have to be a sarcastic contrarian?

Look, if any of you on here have any theories or data you want tested on the ground in Bluff Creek or locally here, or if you want particular things Hieronimus has said tested out, do please post them. I will take them into account in our research and try them out locally for verification.

I was in Bluff Creek just today, having re-read Roger Knights' "He Drove a Crooked Mile," and I was simply astonished at the inaccuracy of the Bob H. route description. I am, however, open to all plausible data and historical accounts and anecdotes surrounding the area and the PGF.

Bluff Creek IS a real place, Parnassus, whatever you think of "Bigfoot."

BFBM

Last edited by BigfootBookman; 14th May 2011 at 05:19 AM.
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 06:15 AM   #6609
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,644
Its my opinion that not much information can be gleaned from Bluff Creek at this point. Even if one were to pinpoint the area, the landscape has likely changed to the extent any measurements or comparisons are invalid at this point.

It does remain a fascinating historic place and story though. BigfootBookman: What information do you hope to clarify by your research there? Just curious what your goals are at this point in Bluff Creek.
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 06:26 AM   #6610
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by River View Post
Its my opinion that not much information can be gleaned from Bluff Creek at this point. Even if one were to pinpoint the area, the landscape has likely changed to the extent any measurements or comparisons are invalid at this point.

It does remain a fascinating historic place and story though. BigfootBookman: What information do you hope to clarify by your research there? Just curious what your goals are at this point in Bluff Creek.
We just want to verify or debunk whatever we may from the stories told over the years, whether from the believer or the skeptical camps. I know there are real historical and geographical data points, and we want to FIND them. We're not out to prove any particular position, though we are operating under the hypothesis that what P and G and others said MAY indeed be true.

Changed the landscape is, but we feel very confident we have found the site, the old creekside road remains, possibly the base camp, and of course much of the logging and road building history of the area.

To me it is a beautiful and fascinating place, regardless of whether Bigfoot ever walked in it.

If Bill Munns or Kitakaze can benefit from our research and findings in any way, so be it. Both are invited to join us out here.
BFBM

Last edited by BigfootBookman; 14th May 2011 at 06:31 AM.
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 09:25 AM   #6611
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
BigfootBookman-

One I am not claiming ownership of the Patterson film. And about the X-Creatures documentary do you think you are the only one that seen that documentary sorry to say I have seen it way before you said anything about it.
You see we was talking about a movie converter and you can not download the converter so I said I will piece it all together and send it to you. You even ask me how I can slow the film down where you can look over it frame by frame. I try to tell you how to do it but, you had no luck in doing it.
Now
You like looking at fact ok let us look at facts.

One John Green only has copyright to 30sec of the Patterson film. But here you have John Green showing over 1 min of the film on the X-Creatures documentary. Now how can he do that when he only has the right to 30sec and not over 1 min of the film.

Everyone calls the film the PG film or Patterson and Gimlin film when it fact it's the Patterson film and not Gimlin.
Gimlin claim he had nothing to do with the filming. Even Bob Gimlin himself said "no it's the Patterson film I had nothing to do with it."

And as far as who owns the rights to the film here is what John Green said to me when I ask him about how can I get a copy of the film.

John Green
I don't have the facts myself but I am told that the original film was left in storage with the company that made the first documentary. Roger, of course, died.That company later folded and the film passed into possession of another company, which also went bankrupt. A third company now has the film, but ownership is in dispute.

As you see when John Green said "ownership is in dispute."

Now two things that stands out by what John Green said. One is the ownership of the film that I have pointed out. And two is original film. No one has the original film all they have are copies of the film. Even Miss Patterson has a copy of the film she does not have the original film however these researchers claim they base their research on the original film when it fact it was a copy of the film.
With that in mind how do they really know what kind of camera Roger Patterson used or what speed he was filming it? And how do they know what kind of film is the original Bigfoot on? You can make copies of this film on any type of film and even change the speed of the film but without them looking over the original film they can not base nothing on what they find in the film.
You see people can say this or that about the film like the camera Roger Patterson used they are going on the word of Roger when it come to the film but, it was told that Roger had more then just this one camera. So who really knows what kind of camera or film that Roger Patterson used to film the Bigfoot.
Or was John Green telling me a lie about the original film and the ownership of the film.

Just like in the past few months here you have Bill Munns telling people he can not show the film at this time but, he has been posting all these different frames from the film.

Now back to the beginning
And as you know that no where on the net you can find the whole footage all you can find are pieces here or there. So I piece together all the pieces I can find to show the whole film and not just parts of the film. That is the only thing I claim as my work is piecing it all together so everyone can see the whole film and not just parts of the film.

Just like the film site. People placing the film site here or there now if this was a real Bigfoot then why they never marked the location as a historical film site as they do with other sites all over the world. Now it was told that Roger Patterson never gone back to the film site after he filmed his Bigfoot. Plus Roger Patterson was going to another place to see if he can find another Bigfoot. Two things bother me about this is if I was going to film another Bigfoot then I would have gone back to the same location I filmed my first Bigfoot. And two is if the film was real then why go back out looking to film another one when I had the proof to show they are out there by my first film.
Leroy Blevins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 10:53 AM   #6612
RayG
Master Poster
 
RayG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,538
Originally Posted by BigfootBookman View Post
We just want to verify or debunk whatever we may from the stories told over the years, whether from the believer or the skeptical camps.
Oy vey, where does one start?

P&G track Patty for 3.5 miles, yet Titmus says Patty sat down and watched them from less than 200 yards away ... rained so heavily it caused mudslides, but tracks not negatively affected... airport or post office?... where is original film?... bent stirrup or no bent stirrup?... was Patterson slick hoaxer or dumb cowboy?...

That last one is hardly fair as it presents a false dilemma. Strong PGF proponents do seem to think it was beyond Patterson's mental abilities to carry off such an elaborate hoax though.

RayG
__________________
Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts.
--------------------
Scrutatio Et Quaestio
RayG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 11:19 AM   #6613
DennyT
Master Poster
 
DennyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,526
Originally Posted by BigfootBookman View Post
I was only trying to be helpful in answering your questions to the best of my ability, Parnassus. What is it with this strange compulsion you have to be a sarcastic contrarian?

Look, if any of you on here have any theories or data you want tested on the ground in Bluff Creek or locally here, or if you want particular things Hieronimus has said tested out, do please post them. I will take them into account in our research and try them out locally for verification.

I was in Bluff Creek just today, having re-read Roger Knights' "He Drove a Crooked Mile," and I was simply astonished at the inaccuracy of the Bob H. route description. I am, however, open to all plausible data and historical accounts and anecdotes surrounding the area and the PGF.

Bluff Creek IS a real place, Parnassus, whatever you think of "Bigfoot."

BFBM
When you come here and make claims that you found their campsite, with the info you have, then you get a negative on that. Trying to exaggerate my comment is transparently lame. I appreciate what you are trying to do but your methods and logic escape me and you haven't located the campsite.
I would be interested in seeing the Knights piece. I have read his criticisms of Long but I am not familiar with that title. Where can I find it?
__________________
unlikely to stay thirsty, my friends.
DennyT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 12:27 PM   #6614
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by parnassus View Post
When you come here and make claims that you found their campsite, with the info you have, then you get a negative on that. Trying to exaggerate my comment is transparently lame. I appreciate what you are trying to do but your methods and logic escape me and you haven't located the campsite.
I would be interested in seeing the Knights piece. I have read his criticisms of Long but I am not familiar with that title. Where can I find it?
There is scant mention of the P-G base camp anywhere. We don't claim to have proven it. We only say that from the best sources possible so far the best we can say is that the area we found seems to be correct, and that possibly, just possibly, that rebar could have been left by Dahinden marking the site Wasson refers to in her book. Knights says, however, that they camped on the west side of the creek; so now I have to track down his sources.

Roger Knights' work is unpublished as yet, though much of it was on the old BFF. What I have is a draft version he made up for distribution at the Yakima Bigfoot Round-up, where I met him. I'll ask him if he will let me post limited scans of certain pages here. There are a few errors in it, which I've found and which he also told me needed to be corrected before final publishing. Hence, we may have to wait. He seems to have withdrawn somewhat from Bigfoot studies, though, so I'm unsure of the status of his work.

Re. Methodogy: what other method would you suggest? Just giving up, staying home, and being a snarky forums commentator from my armchair and computer? Living in Willow Creek, this history is all around me. It is fascinating and frustrating. I am trying to unearth the real events and places before all of the old-timers who were actually there are dead and gone.

BFBM
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 01:44 PM   #6615
DennyT
Master Poster
 
DennyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,526
Ahh yes the well worn bigfooter "armchair" canard. Go back and read my post to see my criticism (not all negative) of your method. you even criticize it yourself.

Thanks for the info on Knights and I hope you can publish it.

Keep on chooglin. I know you are an intelligent and educated person.
__________________
unlikely to stay thirsty, my friends.
DennyT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 02:01 PM   #6616
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by parnassus View Post
Ahh yes the well worn bigfooter "armchair" canard. Go back and read my post to see my criticism (not all negative) of your method. you even criticize it yourself.

Thanks for the info on Knights and I hope you can publish it.

Keep on chooglin. I know you are an intelligent and educated person.
I was only kidding about the armchair. You're welcome to join us out there sometime, Mr. P.

All I ask is that you understand the difficulties we face in trying to piece together this broken, mixed-up puzzle. Sometimes I think it is several puzzles all tossed together. Sometimes there are no "facts," but only hazy and often conflicting memories from 44-54 years ago. Because it was Bigfoot-related, this history was never properly documented, unfortunately.

BFBM
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 04:09 PM   #6617
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
Here is a video found on youtube that talks about the location of Bluff Creek and the Patterson film site.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOA3d8-23Z0

In this video they talk about a cable that was used as a marker at Bluff Creek and the film site.

You can tell it was MK Davis was doing the filming by his voice and by the way the guy talked about him.
Leroy Blevins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 05:49 PM   #6618
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
Here is a video found on youtube that talks about the location of Bluff Creek and the Patterson film site.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOA3d8-23Z0

In this video they talk about a cable that was used as a marker at Bluff Creek and the film site.

You can tell it was MK Davis was doing the filming by his voice and by the way the guy talked about him.
MK is wrong. There are lots of those old logging cables along Bluff Creek. It was actively logged on the hillsides, and thoroughly salvage logged after the 1964 flood. He found his "film site" merely by it "feeling right." He thinks that metal cable is the cable or wire seen in one of the Byrne-Dahinden trip photos. Only in that photo, not there later, too. With no evidence he just assumes. Sound familiar, Leroy?

We found many of those old metal wires along the creek area, too. Are ALL of those spots the film site, then?

We found only ONE piece of rebar; but still, we know that proves nothing about the P-G base camp location without other evidence to corroborate it.

BFBM

Last edited by BigfootBookman; 14th May 2011 at 05:53 PM.
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 06:58 PM   #6619
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
BigfootBookman-

I post the video on here to show the location MK Davis found now if he is wrong then tell him he was wrong.

I just got done going over all the reports by Bill Munns and two things I like to point out that back up what I claim about the film.

One- even in Bill Munns report you can see the original PG film was with Ron Olson and his company is the one that has the original PG film. Bill Munns also points this out. And Ron Olson was the one that made John Green and Roger Patterson copy of the film.

Two- The film had sound. In Bill Munns report on part of the film where it shows Bob H and Jerry Merritt riding down the hillside with the pack horse. In that part of the film the narrator on the film claim it was Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin riding down the hillside with the pack horse. Now Bill Munns did not agree with the narrator on the film and points out it was Bob H and Jerry Merritt.

You see Ron Olson had the original PG film and Ron Olson was the one that added the sound to the film and narration to the film in 1968. In 1968 is when Ron Olson made the two copies and gave one to Roger Patterson and the other to John Green. Now someone in Florida was the original but no one knows who has it. The original PG film was sold off when the company gone bankruptcy. I found this out and even Bill Munns also found this out in his research.

So no one looked over the original film.

And yes the PG film has sound to it.

So again you see I said there is sound to the PG film.
Bill Munns claim sound on the PG film
MK Davis claims sound on the PG film.

Last edited by Leroy Blevins; 14th May 2011 at 07:00 PM.
Leroy Blevins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 07:32 PM   #6620
RayG
Master Poster
 
RayG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,538
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
You see Ron Olson had the original PG film and Ron Olson was the one that added the sound to the film and narration to the film in 1968. In 1968 is when Ron Olson made the two copies and gave one to Roger Patterson and the other to John Green. Now someone in Florida was the original but no one knows who has it. The original PG film was sold off when the company gone bankruptcy. I found this out and even Bill Munns also found this out in his research.

So no one looked over the original film.

And yes the PG film has sound to it.

So again you see I said there is sound to the PG film.
Leroy, are you claiming the original film had sound? If so, why would Olson add sound/narration to it in 1968?

If anything, your argument shows the original did NOT have sound on it.

RayG
__________________
Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts.
--------------------
Scrutatio Et Quaestio
RayG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 07:59 PM   #6621
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,729
Originally Posted by RayG View Post
Leroy, are you claiming the original film had sound? If so, why would Olson add sound/narration to it in 1968?

If anything, your argument shows the original did NOT have sound on it.

RayG

IIRC, he has claimed all three, that it had sound, didn't have sound, and Olsen added sound to it...
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

Last edited by LTC8K6; 14th May 2011 at 08:00 PM.
LTC8K6 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 08:14 PM   #6622
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
RayG-

I found out that the sound was not added to the film until 1968 when Ron Olson took over the film.

When I first talked about the sound they claim the sound was on the original film but, when I started to look into this They claim again the original film had sound to it so I also made this claim. But then when I found that Ron Olson took over the film he was the one that added the sound to the film with narration. And this was in 1968 for Roger Patterson met Ron Olson in the summer of 1968. Also at that time Ron Olson was the one that added more scenes to the film and the film became longer. The original film and showing of the film was only 30sec long and the only part that was shown was the part when the Bigfoot looked back and walked away off into the woods. When Ron Olson took over the film he was the one that added the scenes of Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin and Bob H and Jerry Merritt and the first part of the Bigfoot walking and the tracks scene and Roger holding the cast prints and Roger making the cast prints. There was more color added to the film to make the film look better then what the original shown. Ron Olson was the one that he claim he improve the color of the film and improve the Bigfoot in the film. He was the one that claim the original film did not show that much color and you can not make out that much detail on the Bigfoot. So he improve the color and the Bigfoot in the film so the film can show more details in the surroundings and the Bigfoot.

Then after Ron Olson was done re-making the film he then made two copies of the film. The one copy gone to Roger Patterson and the other copy gone to John Green. Now Roger made two more copies that he shown around the USA and John Green took his copy and made copies to give to friends.
So you have 1 Original film that was in the possession of Ron Olson
Then you have 2 copies of the 1st Generation of the film that is owned by Roger Patterson and John Green
Then you have 7 copies of the 2sd Generation of the film.
You can even see this on Bill Munns report.

Ron Olson got the film around August of 1968 and he got done with the editing in Nov 1968. He made the copies for Roger Patterson and John Green on Nov 7, 1968. That gave 3 months for Ron Olson to re-make the PG film. And 3 months is a long time to added everything they need to add to the film to make it look more real then what the original film shown.
Leroy Blevins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th May 2011, 08:48 PM   #6623
RayG
Master Poster
 
RayG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,538
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
RayG-

I found out that the sound was not added to the film until 1968 when Ron Olson took over the film.

<snip snip>
So would you now agree that the original film did NOT have sound, just like people here have been trying to tell you all along?

RayG
__________________
Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts.
--------------------
Scrutatio Et Quaestio
RayG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 09:50 AM   #6624
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
RayG-

Well it's hard to say because no one knows what the original film had on it or if it had sound.

Look at this when we look at the PG film today we are looking at what Ron Olson did to the film. Remember when they first shown the film they only shown 30sec of film that is only a little piece of film. Now the reels Roger Patterson used had 5min of film but they cut 30sec of film off of this 5min reel and only shown that 30sec.
Now the part they cut out that shows the Bigfoot was that at the beginning of the film or the middle of the film or was it that last part of the film. You see no one knows because we are looking at the film after Ron Olson took it over. And we can not say well Roger said it was at the end of the film and Bob Gimlin said it was at the last part of the film. When they both been shown that their claims you can not trust.
Now the other films that are from Roger Patterson documentary it had sound to it as well. So with that in mind Roger Patterson was using film with sound.
Just like if you watch the film frame by frame you can see it was pieced together. Now this brings up a question why did they piece a 30sec film together if it was filmed all at one time?
The whole film was pieced together and you can tell this even MK Davis made this claim and Bill Munns also shows this.

You see all the PG film was made to make a lot money and nothing more then just that.

So to set here and say for a fact that the original film had sound or did not have sound no one can answer that.
Leroy Blevins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 10:49 AM   #6625
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,729
Leroy, what did Roger film with the Kodak K-100?
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 11:01 AM   #6626
Gilbert Syndrome
Muse
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 857
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
Here is a video found on youtube that talks about the location of Bluff Creek and the Patterson film site.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOA3d8-23Z0

In this video they talk about a cable that was used as a marker at Bluff Creek and the film site.

You can tell it was MK Davis was doing the filming by his voice and by the way the guy talked about him.


The best part of that video is where the fella says: "he's a professional Sasquatch hunter..." haha. I'm a professional unicorn racer.
__________________
1. Non Scouser - a person from Runcorn, Wirral, Southport, St Helens etc; specifically from provincial town outside of Liverpool.

Scouse saying - Wool, woolyback.

Usage: 'That's proper Wool behaviour, like.'
Gilbert Syndrome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 12:02 PM   #6627
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,113
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
RayG-

Well it's hard to say because no one knows what the original film had on it or if it had sound.

Look at this when we look at the PG film today we are looking at what Ron Olson did to the film. Remember when they first shown the film they only shown 30sec of film that is only a little piece of film. Now the reels Roger Patterson used had 5min of film but they cut 30sec of film off of this 5min reel and only shown that 30sec.
Now the part they cut out that shows the Bigfoot was that at the beginning of the film or the middle of the film or was it that last part of the film. You see no one knows because we are looking at the film after Ron Olson took it over. And we can not say well Roger said it was at the end of the film and Bob Gimlin said it was at the last part of the film. When they both been shown that their claims you can not trust.
Now the other films that are from Roger Patterson documentary it had sound to it as well. So with that in mind Roger Patterson was using film with sound.
Just like if you watch the film frame by frame you can see it was pieced together. Now this brings up a question why did they piece a 30sec film together if it was filmed all at one time?
The whole film was pieced together and you can tell this even MK Davis made this claim and Bill Munns also shows this.

You see all the PG film was made to make a lot money and nothing more then just that.

So to set here and say for a fact that the original film had sound or did not have sound no one can answer that.
But didn't you tell us a few weeks ago that it had sound?
__________________
SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF
I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 12:50 PM   #6628
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
Actually, there ARE people who can tell you what was on the original PGF film roll: the people who SAW it. Among the living still: John Green, Jim McClarin, Al DeAtley and even Bob Gimlin. Presumably, also, those scientists and journalists at the BC Canada showing saw the original or a full-roll copy of the filming material. Why don't you ASK them, rather that just making up all of this stuff about it being produced and edited, or having sound on it?

Please explain, Leroy, how do you know all of this "information" about Ron Olson? I re-viewed SASQUATCH: THE LEGEND OF BIGFOOT recently. Aside from having some horses and an Indian tracker in it, and a quest to find Bigfoot, it hardly matches any of your claims about it having a direct lineage with the Patterson docudrama project. The PGF clip in it is fuzzy and brief, far from the reworked and colorized original you claim it to be. At the end they used their own guy in a Bigfoot suit, not the PGF.

And yes, there is sound narration over it. X-CREATURES, SASQUATCH: LEGEND MEETS SCIENCE, and all the other documentaries using it had voice-over production added, too. So what?

If Patterson sold the rights or the original film roll to ANE that says nothing about Ron Olson doing anything to the film save using clips from it in his films.

I asked John Green, and he said the original film roll was just as described: scenic shots with horses, then Bigfoot, and then the roll runs out. It was not only 30 seconds. See? We can know these things, and we already DO know them.

BFBM
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 02:25 PM   #6629
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
Bigfootbookman-

I ask John Green about the documentary Ron Olson made and he used Roger Patterson Ideal.

John Green-They were hoping with the computer to determine a location where they could get their own sasquatch movie, and only turned to using Roger's movie when the computer attempt proved to be useless.

I ask John Green what the original film show

John Green-Much of the footage Is just scenery or someone riding, and both before and after the short clear section of the creature walking.

However as it was told they only shown 30sec of the film at first but here you have John Green talking about more then 30sec of film. As you also see as it was told by John Green the film shows someone riding and scenery before and after the creature walked.
That is more then just the 30sec of film.
So I like to point out that John Green seen the original film and he said it was only 1 reel he seen. But he tells me the original film shows scenery and someone riding before and after the creature. Now how can there be any more scenery parts or someone riding if the Bigfoot was shot at the end of the reel. Again this shows that John Green is talking about the film after Ron Olson re-made the film. For the scenes of someone riding and even after the Bigfoot walked was added by Ron Olson in 1968. So with that in mind John Green and all the rest are telling the story they started in 1968 and not 1967.

So I also ask John Green about the color of the Bigfoot in the film as it was told by Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin the color of the Bigfoot was reddish brown.

John Green-While a witness might have assigned some other tint to what he saw, as it was recorded on the original film the animal was just plain black.

Now John Green did not get his copy of the film until Ron Olson made the copy for him in 1968.
Leroy Blevins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 02:29 PM   #6630
Drewbot
Illuminator
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,405
BFBM, how do u know the film they saw was unedited?
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 03:31 PM   #6631
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
I'm afraid this is just a hopeless discussion. If we cannot establish reliable facts anywhere, what is the point?

BFBM
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 04:46 PM   #6632
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 13,723
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
BFBM, how do u know the film they saw was unedited?
Not to mention, we have never seen anything approaching the four minutes or so that would have been on 100 feet of film ..

Haven't we also heard that the first showing in DeAtleys basement consisted of only the Patty footage ?
__________________
" What if the Hokey Pokey is what it's all about? "

Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join Team 13232 !
Skeptical Greg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th May 2011, 05:58 PM   #6633
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,729
Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg View Post
Not to mention, we have never seen anything approaching the four minutes or so that would have been on 100 feet of film ..

Haven't we also heard that the first showing in DeAtleys basement consisted of only the Patty footage ?
Murphy's PGF history. Only showed the Patty part. Film was either edited, or they fast forwarded past the first 3/4 roll. My guess is that it was already cut, otherwise you have a lot of fast forwarding to get to Patty.

Gimlin was so excited at being involved with the first ever film of bigfoot, that he didn't bother to show up...

Quote:
Al De Atley picked-up the film at the Seattle airport on the morning of Saturday, October 21, 1967. He had the film processed at the Alpha Cine laboratory in Seattle and returned to his home in Yakima that same day. Patterson and Gimlin arrived at Yakima sometime on Sunday morning, October 22, 1967. During this time, John Green arrived at De Atley's home and the two men awaited Patterson's arrival. When Patterson arrived, De Atley took him alone to the basement of his home and showed him the film. The film was then shown to John Green. Bob Gimlin was not present. We are told he was at home resting.

Dahinden and McClarin arrived at Al De Atley's home at about 3:00 p.m. the same day (Sunday, October 22, 1967). Upon their arrival, Patterson showed the film to all present and the group discussed how Patterson and Gimlin should go forward with the new evidence. Patterson did not show the group the general movie footage he had taken (i.e., the first 76-feet of the first roll). Nor did he show the other footage on the second roll if he did, in fact, have the developed roll. Nevertheless, the film of the creature apparently impressed the researchers. Nothing appeared to indicate that Patterson and Gimlin were being untruthful.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

Last edited by LTC8K6; 15th May 2011 at 06:00 PM.
LTC8K6 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th May 2011, 01:01 AM   #6634
BigfootBookman
Thinker
 
BigfootBookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 235
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
Murphy's PGF history. Only showed the Patty part. Film was either edited, or they fast forwarded past the first 3/4 roll. My guess is that it was already cut, otherwise you have a lot of fast forwarding to get to Patty.

Gimlin was so excited at being involved with the first ever film of bigfoot, that he didn't bother to show up...
I asked John Green about this. He recalls the first roll, but just that it had a bunch of scenery on it with horses and such, and then ending with the Bigfoot part. His memory of the second roll seems to have faded away, though he did see it at some time. You guys here will surely call me a blind believer, but I do tend to take the word of the guys who were actually there over a lot of latter-day theorizing. The problem is that those guys like Green, Hodgson, Gimlin, McClarin, whomever, are rather aged, and 1967 was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

LTC, Gimlin had driven all night after a long and trying day. Can you really blame him for sleeping?

BFBM

Last edited by BigfootBookman; 16th May 2011 at 01:04 AM.
BigfootBookman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th May 2011, 03:51 AM   #6635
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,729
Originally Posted by BigfootBookman View Post
I asked John Green about this. He recalls the first roll, but just that it had a bunch of scenery on it with horses and such, and then ending with the Bigfoot part. His memory of the second roll seems to have faded away, though he did see it at some time. You guys here will surely call me a blind believer, but I do tend to take the word of the guys who were actually there over a lot of latter-day theorizing. The problem is that those guys like Green, Hodgson, Gimlin, McClarin, whomever, are rather aged, and 1967 was a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

LTC, Gimlin had driven all night after a long and trying day. Can you really blame him for sleeping?

BFBM
That's why I mainly use contemporary sources to discredit the PGF.

Can I blame Gimlin for sleeping? Absolutely. Crazy and totally not believable.

This is a man who went to the trouble to ride back out to the site in the rain and peel bark to cover the tracks. A trip that must have taken a couple of hours, and been especially difficult in the darkness. It was cloudy, so it would have been quite dim.

He'd actually thought to get cardboard boxes from Hodgson's the night before, for the purpose of covering the tracks...he says.

(Why does Gimlin think cardboard or bark will stop the tracks from being washed out? They certainly wouldn't have helped any at all.)

When I take a picture of a flower, I'm anxious to see how it comes out.

Were I to take video of a sasquatch, nothing would stop me from being the first to see what I actually got in the frame.

In the 67 interview, it is Gimlin who takes the camera and goes off to film the tracks, not Patterson. So, Gimlin himslef is as much a part of filming the PGF as Patterson.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

Last edited by LTC8K6; 16th May 2011 at 04:02 AM.
LTC8K6 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th May 2011, 05:14 AM   #6636
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 13,723
Originally Posted by BigfootBookman View Post
.....

LTC, Gimlin had driven all night after a long and trying day. Can you really blame him for sleeping?

BFBM
Yep ..

However, if he knows they didn't really film a Bigfoot, then it doesn't sound like any big deal ..
__________________
" What if the Hokey Pokey is what it's all about? "

Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join Team 13232 !
Skeptical Greg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th May 2011, 06:16 AM   #6637
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,717
A Bluff Creek Massacre program is being produced for fall release.

Video trailer for Incident at Bluff Creek.

"Blood in the water.
Blood on the ground.
Blood on the hands of those who were there."

Patty was human and she was murdered.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th May 2011, 06:23 AM   #6638
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 10,717
Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg View Post
However, if he knows they didn't really film a Bigfoot, then it doesn't sound like any big deal ..

I would expect that Gimlin had already seen the film multiple times before Sunday.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th May 2011, 07:00 AM   #6639
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,729
If I were DeAtley, and this were indeed the one and only real film of a bigfoot, I would have had the lab make a copy of the film then and there, and I would have had that copy, since I financed this expedition, and the film is priceless.
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 16th May 2011, 08:28 AM   #6640
DennyT
Master Poster
 
DennyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,526
Originally Posted by BigfootBookman View Post
...You guys here will surely call me a blind believer, but I do tend to take the word of the guys who were actually there over a lot of latter-day theorizing.


BFBM
Lol you are taking the word of Murphy, who is just theorizing. I don't remember him being there...eg How does he know what DeAtley did? Can't you see that? Sometimes I wanna give you a noogy, get some sense into that head.
__________________
unlikely to stay thirsty, my friends.
DennyT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:46 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.