All Activity

So I am able to collect hairs from them on a pretty repeatable basis over time, and am interested in starting a routine of getting these hairs I collect collected in the best way possible and also getting them tested(of course). I can likely fund the effort myself. I work a lot, this is a very busy time for me, but would like to get this effort rolling. Anyone that has some pointers on how to proceed can PM me or preferably just reply here.

So I’ve been a “researcher/experiencer” since 2008, and had my first sighting late 2013/early 2014. So far I’ve had three up close sightings, tons of audio(and have some audio too!), tonnnnns of gifting experience etc. I love interacting with the Bigfoot. I have a method of leaving laminated pictures out for them in the spots I go to and have found it’s a fantastic way to collect hair from them as it sticks to the pictures, I currently have some from a year or so ago from a few different states and am very interested in starting a routine of collecting hairs and testing them. I can probably fund it all myself, and would love some pointers and direction on how to go about collecting the hairs in the best manner possible and the whole process of getting them tested!

Locking this thread temporarily in case we we merge topics.

The only thing that's been proven in this thread is that you are a fool.

You sure do seem to place lots of store into this "influencer's" opinion.

It’s over for Patty but there was Bigfoot before and after so Bigfoot is not dead.

Okay, so my long winded two cents is this: If this was a hoax, where is the costume? If it was that good and undoubtedly revolutionary in design and realism, then why would they destroy it or let it be lost? Any good con man would keep such an article around to keep milking the public. Cripes, look at Fraud Standing and his abysmal fakes. Everyone with half a brain cell can see his evidence is as phony as a football bat but that doesn't keep him from parading it out for whatever publicity he can get. By all accounts Patterson was an opportunist. So why didn't he keep that suit working for more such amazing film and press? You can't tell me something as good as that would be allowed to be lost or disposed of out of fear. As for Meldrum saying something big was coming, perhaps he was NOT talking about it being proven a hoax, but rather this film would stir up a detrimental controversy and set BF research back several years. Maybe he knew the powers that be would be working to suppress evidence or muddy up the waters. What about Gimlin? Has anyone gotten his reaction to this yet? I'd be real interested to see his reaction to it and what his response would be. I can't honestly think anyone involved would be worried about legal repercussions as we've seen hoaxes before and nothing of substance has happened to the hoaxers. Hell, if it was a hoax, they could make even more money writing books and making appearances talking about how they pulled it off over so many years. Could this be people just tired of dealing with it and deciding the best way to get bigfooters off their backs and make a little cash is to **** in everybody's punchbowl and call it a hoax? Or even simpler, it is just a way to get a bit of money and be sensationalistic to feed the machine? Because....why now? Why now are they choosing to make this revelation at this time? Why not 5 years ago or 10? It seems over 10 years ago I read a book, forget the title, about it being a hoax and people who knew Patterson at the time talked about seeing the suit in a box in a trunk and how they all knew what was up but had reasons for keeping quiet. I didn't let it eat at me. But you are forced to keep a open mind to the possibility. And after reading Munns book, and others, I leaned further into it being legit. I agree that too many people have seen and heard Sasquatches and collected enough evidence that they more than likely exist. I also know that until we have at least two bodies, the mystery will always be with us. I've always felt the footage was real. But I will admit, now there is that kernel of doubt. And that is sad. It's akin to seeing your dad stuff your stocking at Christmas when you're a kid.

Oops. A re-check of Eric Hairy Man's commentary says 'square circle' . No mention of ++ . That means it was 1965. If its triangle circle its 1966.

now there's a YT video saying two plus marks on the film indicate it was manufactured in 1968. A PDF straight from Kodak shows all the codes and ++ = 1968. So maybe Munn's is correct and it was a post PGF filming (my apologies). I have no idea why DeAtley would create a risky film (that would cast serious doubt on the PGF if revealed) when you already have film of seemingly a real Bigfoot.

The end of Patty 😢

Meldrum is on a podcast dated May 3rd and there's no mention of the new footage or wavering of opinion about the PGF. I dont know how long it takes to go from 'finished podcast to uploaded to YT', but if he's telling people in April that big things are coming, yet makes no mention of it on a May 3rd podcast, that's confusing. When did Meldrum see the footage (on a projector I hope) ? Some obnoxious poster (the guy who insists the helmet is the Wu Chang mask or something like that) says Meldrum saw the footage 2 years ago. I hope this new footage is going to show what has long been rumored at: Roger did have a suit for playing around with. Unless the suit matches Patty very well, it's a nothing burger. But if it does, then its hard to escape the conclusion.

The dude jumped so many conclusions that he had to duck hitting the moon.

Bigfoot Sticker 50pcs Camping Nature Forestry Themed Waterproof Stickers Pack Sasquatch Gifts hotelier.com.pyView the full article

As always, everyone will have to make their own evaluation. No doubt, this new documentary is going to be scrutinized as much or more than the PGF itself, at least for the next few months, or at least until it is absolutely proven right or wrong, one way or the other... Obviously, the key evidence is going to be the found film and whether experts, both sympathetic and hostile, and others can actually examine it for themselves (not counting on that to happen). Even then, we may not get a undisputable answer.

In this preview episode, you’ll hear a glimpse into several encounters shared inside an episdoe just for the Bigfoot Society Members community. We begin in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina, where a young woman ventures far off trail into a remote area few ever reach. What unfolds during a quiet moment alone in the forest leaves her questioning what was watching from just beyond the trees. From there, we head into the secluded backroads of southeast Oklahoma, where a worker at a remote cabin property hears something echo through the hills in the early morning hours. The experience is brief, yet powerful enough to change how he moves through that area from that day forward. To hear the full episode and the complete accounts, join the Bigfoot Society Members community and unlock the full story. Note: To get this full episode (and tomorrow's episode) early and ad-free then become a supporting member over at https://www.bigfootsocietypodcast.com OR become a Youtube member by tapping the JOIN button. Share your story by emailing me at bigfootsociety@gmail.comListen to the Podcast

Bill has seen the footage, apparently he's in the documentary as well. He shared his opinion on a podcast this week but it takes over an hour of Tom Clancy like details to get to his opinion. Which was essentially he thinks that it has no legs to stand on. I don't think he is able to sperate himself from his work on the PG film to review this footage objectively. I could be wrong but it didn't come across that way in his interview.

Hairymanroad, a YouTuber, went to SXSW to watch the second screening. Based off of his, and one other individual who went to a screening from the BF community the 40sec of 1966 film, in the words of Jeff Meldrum, "looked like a test run". Then goes on to describe how "it was "patty" but slightly different, a different guy in the suit. The lines were all the same." It's not looking great guys. Steenberg, and small handful of others, seem to have been told the same message from Meldrum starting in April of 25. "Something big is coming in relation to the PG-film". I want to see the film too, they are shopping around for a market release but according to the director they have two more film festivals to attend before anything like that will happen.

Same here. I could not read the entire thing since I do not do FB, but what I did read was on target in my opinion. Unless they were at SXSW, I doubt it. Guessing at some point in the not too distant future, it will start appearing on streaming services.

A great deal of rumors, innuendo, and supposition being put forth about what people "hear, imagine, and think" what's revealed in the "new" documentary. Has anyone personally actually viewed this documentary? Buehler, Buehler?

I posted on another thread about this that Bill Munns opines that the new found footage was Al trying to convince himself that Roger's PGF was not itself a hoax (since Al was going to take it on tour and was worried he'd be at risk of fraud). My head was spinning at that explanation. If the new footage has the 'subject' doing Patty things (lifing it's foot to 90 degrees, etc), has breasts , and has a similar head (the most important), then it's pretty much done. Why Roger would wait a year (being constantly poor) to film the cash cow makes no sense to me however. That the film was in the possession of someone who worked at Boeing (they had a film lab) may finally explain how the PGF was developed so covertly.

If I had a Bigfoot movie with my friends back in my youth (1970's ) any bigfoot would look like footage from the PGF in the following sense: -Any footage would have a Bigfoot subject. -The camera would come on to the subject. -Unless the video was designed to have bigfoot attack the cameraman, the Bigfoot would walk away or run away. -The setting would be in some sort of outdoors, probably wooded area. That generic happening would be common in nearly any bigfoot video. It wouldn't make it "Trial Run" or anything else. This reminds me of the Roger Patterson drawing appearing in Roger's book PRIOR TO the PGF event. It didn't signal a pre-PGF tell, it was just a drawing inspired largely from other reports.

Here is the PGF section link: For newer members, Kit was a long time and strongly anti-PGF skeptic on here some time back. His postings can still be found in the PGF section if anyone is interested in his comments. I saw those comments a few days ago when all of this broke. I guess he is still around... Welcome back SW! Supposedly, Bill Munns has seen it, but I do not know that to be a fact. I am very interested in his opinion of this.

Yea like he supposedly said he could have been hoaxed by Roger in the X CREAURES bigfoot show. But actually, watching the program Gimlin makes no such statement saying he was hoaxed.

I’m hearing Bob Gimlin confesses to a hoax in this documentary. If that’s true it’s over for the Patterson, Gimlin film.