All Activity

if your using youtube or google transcript those can be a little wonky. this is a somewhat accurate run down but Patricia DOES make the claim at some point in the production that it was a hoax and she knew it. her introduction stated it was a curse. Judy stopped the team from interviewing Bob more than he just didn't show up for a interview. mind you it was an ambush style interview and Judy is very protective of Bob. as for why now since they were making money? either the money isn't going as far as it used to Patricia is nearing end of life as well and has no need for it. is the only thing I can guess. copy that.

^^ I know. Didn't think it was you. I'm throwing bricks at the claims made by the film and filmmaker. Sorry for the confusion.

"Yes, Bob saw the new footage and gives a very compelling answer to it. People will need to use their own judgment on what and when he knew." That was a direct quote from the Director, and not me speaking on opinion.

We are way beyond that. We have knowers on this very forum.

"Aliens Are Real" New Revelations -What Secret About Aliens Would Makes a Man Cry For 3 Days?View the full article

Part of being fooled is wanting to believe the thing one is being fooled by. If a person has 100% belief there are no such thing as any life on other planets, they probably have a 0% chance of being fooled by a hoaxed lying saucer photo or story. If a person is 100% convinced Martians are visiting earth, they are more likely to believe stories about UFO's and the like and thus increase their chance to be fooled by any hoax of such a topic. This is why people who are die hard bigfoot skeptics will ignore all the holes in Bob Hieronimus story and be convinced he was the man a Patty suit. When it comes to this new film (and I have not watched it) we have two main forces at work: 1) those who produce it as a work product will craft the story and film in any way which helps sell a smoking gun. 2) those who wish to believe it will dismiss things which hurt the narrative and elevate anything which they can stretch to fit the narrative. Being fooled by something is easier if the person is already convinced before the fooling begins.

Okay, I looked at the transcript of this video because it's a typical podcast or webshow which crams 4 minutes of information into 30 minutes.... Clint Patterson, the "witness" in the new film is 66-years old. That makes him 7 years old when the P-G film was made and probably 12 years old when his father passed away. Clint Patterson never states that his father admitted the hoax to him. Clint Patterson claims that his mother stated that Bob Heironimus wore the P-G film suit. Patricia Patterson is in this film (Edited to Add: According to this reviewer, she does not say "The P-G film was a hoax." She does call it a curse, which is not inaccurate, I'm sure.) Clint P states that she "disowned him" after he stated that he was going to discredit the P-G film, but reading through this reviewer's comments, it sounds like Clint P was on the outs with his family long before that. Clint P apparently hadn't seen his mother "in quite a long time." This film apparently relies on Greg Long's taped interviews of people used for his book. The film also shows clips from Greg Long's speaking tour discrediting the P-G film. Clint Patterson supposedly didn't report "the truth" sooner because Patricia Patterson was making money off the P-G film. (Then why would he discredit the film now?) The "telling" reaction from Bob Gimlin appears to be that he stated at a 2024 Bigfoot conference that he was "ready to tell the truth," but never did the follow-up interview that he agreed to make. This falls short of being a confession that he was in on a hoax in the P-G film. It sounds like the key test for most people will be how close the Patterson Ahtanum Film shot man in a suit is to the Patty suit. Notwithstanding Bill Munns' great work on the film, I think it still might be possible that Roger Patterson was such a bad filmmaker that even a film expert could be fooled.

If Bob Gimlin confessed that the P-G film was a hoax, the director would have most likely said that up front. If he said that he participated in an attempt to make a homemade movie about a Bigfoot, that is an NS2 moment for people who are immersed in the P-G film history and facts. I'm not one of those people and even I know that there are stills from the earlier homemade film showing a bunch of cowboys and their trusty Indian guide (Bob Gimlin, who is part Native American, but who wore a costume) who were going to capture Bigfoot. Adding to the interest in the breast thing, allegedly one of the pre-P-G- film magazine articles had an artists concept of how a female Bigfoot would look and it pretty much matches the Patty look-back moment. While the text of that article can be found online, I haven't found one that includes the picture. I hope to track down a copy of the magazine in the next month or two.

Of course the BF world blows up when I'm in the middle of some real world concerns. So as I go through this thread I'll probably find that many of these things have been asked and answered. While it is irrelevant who a witness (or victim) is, their reputation for honesty or lack thereof and past examples of dishonest behavior can be used to demonstrate that their claim in a specific instance cannot be credited. A very long time ago, DAs almost never prosecuted alleged rapists if the victim was a known prostitute - who the victim was personally should have been irrelevant to the alleged crime. And a convicted embezzler can be the victim of embezzlement. However, his past convictions could be relevant to demonstrate that his claims that he was a victim should not be credited. His past actions would go to the weight the jury would give to the testimony. Unfortunately, Roger Patterson's past actions (misappropriating the camera he used, repeated dishonorable failure to repay debts) do give a reason to trust his statements about what happened at Bluff Creek less. BUT, his statements are only one item of evidence. Bingo. Unfortunately, those who are not deep in the weeds won't know that this supposedly new adverse information was known and addressed. What Meldrum said is that "there's several possibilities ... the first one is its bullshit ..." Cutting off the other possibilities and claiming that Meldrum "stated that the P-G film is bullshit" is affirmatively misleading. Hopefully, this is due to an innocent error on the poster's part and was not an intentional manipulation of Jeff Meldrum's statement.

No lollipops while driving? These rumored Washington state laws may not be true Tacoma News TribuneView the full article

In this episode, we delve into the extraordinary experiences of Tater from Sandy, Oregon, who has had encounters with something unknown stretching from childhood into adulthood. Growing up near the forested areas around Wildcat Mountain Road, Tater shares how it all began with strange knocking outside his home, moments where the woods would fall completely silent, and discoveries that left his family searching for answers. As the years went on, the activity didn’t fade. It built into something far more intense, leading to a moment that brought him face-to-face with a massive presence just outside his window on a summer night. Alongside his own experiences, Tater reveals stories passed down through his family, pointing to a long history of unexplained activity tied to the same land. From physical evidence to sounds that defy explanation, this episode offers a grounded and deeply personal look at what may be happening in this part of Oregon. Join us as we explore Tater’s journey and the lingering mystery surrounding the forests of Sandy. 🗣️ Share Your Story Had a Bigfoot encounter or strange experience? Send it to bigfootsociety@gmail.com – your story might be featured on the show! 🎥 Watch & Subscribe on YouTube 🔴 Subscribe here → Bigfoot Society YouTube 💬 Leave a comment & let us know your thoughts! 📞 Leave a voicemail with your story → Speakpipe (Use multiple voicemails if needed) 👥 Share this episode → Watch & Share 🎧 More episodes → Podcast Playlist 🌲 Recommended: New Jersey Bigfoot Encounters 💥 Support the Show & Get Perks ✅ Join the community on Supercast – Become a Member ✅ Listen ad-free & early on YouTube – Join Here 📱 Let’s Connect Instagram: @bigfootsocietyTwitter: @bigfoot_societyTikTok: @bigfoot.society🧰 Tools & Partners I Use (Affiliate Links) These help support the show at no extra cost to you: Beam (Better Sleep): Try BeamWildgrain (Better Bread): Join HereSeed (Probiotics): Get SeedMedi-Share (Healthcare): Learn MoreLMNT (Electrolytes) Free Sample Pack with your first purchase! : Get LMNTOrganic and non-GMO groceries delivered for less http://thrv.me/uarEhS🎙️ Podcasting Tools: Repurpose.io: Try ItDescript: Sign UpStreamyard: Start RecordingRiverside.fm: Try Riverside🎧 My Audio Interface: View on Amazon ☕ Buy Me a Coffee – Support Here 🛍️ Grab Some Merch – Shop on Etsy 📬 Mailing Address: Bigfoot Society 125 E 1st St. #233 Earlham, IA 50072Listen to the Podcast

Yes it does. Most Bigfoot videos including this “gotcha” video we haven't the foggiest idea where the film site is. Yes McClarin and Patty may be misaligned by a few feet. Albeit the sticks and stumps are lining up close. But a few feet? Yah. McClarin is walking pattys track way. Its still visible. But John Green and Roger Patterson almost assuredly are not standing in the exact spot. But close. Thats ALOT better metric than a flat ZERO. Where is Todd Standings filmsites? We don't know. Go take a pick from X Y or Z off the youtubes. The PGF is the most studied Bigfoot film-site in the world. 99.9 percent of them? We have no idea where they were filmed. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. As Bill Munns would tell you? There is value in that. 100 percent. Nothing takes the place of a body of course. And Bob H. is 6’2” tall. It’s not Patty’s height that impresses me. It’s her bulk and muscle movement. And it always has.

Bartell's Backroads: Sasquatch The Legend krem.comView the full article

Patty's height is only an issue for two reasons: 1) If the height was so extreme as to be out of human range no human could fit in any suit. Say Patty is 8 foot tall (she isn't), Patty would NOT be a man in a suit. 2) If some person of a known height such as Bob Heironimus claimed to be Patty, they must match Patt's height. If Patty was 6'6" and Bob H was 6'1'' it's pretty hard for Bob H to be Patty. Jim McClarin could be tall enough at 6'5''. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ HEIGHT: We must put 1960's heights in perspective: NBA Heightrs Form the 1960s to Today The height of NBA players has evolved significantly from the 1960s to the present day. Here's a brief overview of the trends: 1960s: The average NBA player was around 6'3" tall, with guards being shorter and forwards taller. Sure Bill Russell was tall (6'10") but people in general were NOT as tall in the 1960's as they are now. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ WEIGHT: Patty's issue is not so much the height as being massive in size. You can still be average height for a tall guy and still be really big: [ A ] Animals Gorillas are the largest primates, and their size and weight can vary significantly by species and gender. Western Lowland Gorillas: Adult males typically weigh between 300 to 500 pounds (136 to 227 kg) and stand about 4 to 5 feet tall (1.2 to 1.5 meters). Eastern Lowland Gorillas: Adult males can weigh up to 484 pounds (217 kg) and stand about 5 feet 7 inches tall (1.7 meters). Mountain Gorillas: Adult males can weigh up to 220 kg (484 lbs) and stand about 5 feet 7 inches tall (1.7 meters). [ B ] People Football player size. 6'4'' 315lbs The "Blind Side" is one inch shorter than Jim McClarin ! Here is HOF defensive player John Randle. He looks Massive at just 6'1' 290. Compare this man just 6'1'' tall to the taller 1960's Jim McClarin. One seems massive wouldn't you say? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In summary, the issue with the PGF walking subject of Patty is not the height measured by a tape measure but the MASSIVE nature of Patty. Just like the Gorilla under 6 feet tall, the massive body speaks for itself: Give people a chance and they will show you who they are. Sad.

Yesterday I read comments on the Sasquatch Odyssey video I posted just above. Wow, some brutal, hurtful comments toward Mr. Munns, including some from "Hairy Man Road," whose video also appears in this thread, dismissing PGF as a hoax. What a jerk he's proven himself. Bill calmly, respectfully, logically, and with knowledgeable expertise puts forth his views on the new/old footage, even providing the documentary producers with information about the film that they didn't previously know. "Hairy Man Road" proceeds to insult Bill thru comments on a third-party's video. Real class.

I haven't seen the film. I'm betting there will be enough clues pointing to an obvious post-PGF filming. Which came first? Star Wars 1977 Family Guy Star Wars Episode 2007 In order to try to sell the hoax the film makers MUST have their film/ smoking gun occur BEFORE the PGF. 1 film discovered after mean nothing. 20 films discovered after mean nothing. It just would represent a curious oddity no more than the fake Gimlin should he ever appear. If he did, it wouldn't detract from the real Gimlin.

Mayhaps the creators of the Capturing Sasquatch documentary know that hyping the film up a month prior to its release to the general public is good way to create interest and therefore create a bigger box office for it? Whats happening right now, the discourse about Capturing Sasquatch and the authenticity of the 1967 PGF is intentional on their part. I'm saying this prior to seeing the Capturing Sasquatch documentary, its entirely possible some people are trying to make money off a man who died 50+ years ago. It's one final shot to see if someone can make money off the 1967 PGF.

Still doesnt mean anything with regards to how tall Patty is/was. The 6'6" bruh could be a few feet further back to scale in this photo. If he was further back and he was scooched up a few feet, he might be as tall as Patty or even taller. Wasn't Bob H around 6'4"? point is that the point your making is compelling arguments for how tall Patty May be, nothing is still definitive for how tall Patty is/was

The fatal logic of any Gimlin Confession: Anyone peddling any confession has the inconvenience Gimlin still happens to be alive. If there is some out-of-context statement by Gimlin used to strain a 'confession' from Gimlin he still gets the final say. Gimlin has never backed down from what he has said. He might be less sharp than the old days, but he can answer a basic Q and shown the willingness to do so.

They are doing a fantastic job collectively and Nathan in particular. Excellent commentary and advice throughout by everyone. They really have it dialed in. Keep up the great work you're doing!!

There is declination marker at the bottom of topo maps. The problem with that is it is very small and when taking a reading in bad weather you can easily be off by a few degrees. Over 500' it wouldn't matter much but over a mile it could mean life or death. It is always much easier to spread a map out in the warmth and comfort of home and draw the magnetic lines. You can also do it on the computer with mapping software and and then zero im on the particular area you are going. That way, the parallel lines are printed on the map itself.

In this episode, we delve into the unforgettable experience of Vanessa from Oregon, who shares a chilling encounter that took place deep within the forests near Bagby Hot Springs in Mount Hood National Forest. What began as a simple camping trip with her young son quickly turned into something she still struggles to explain. As night settled in, the familiar sounds of the forest gave way to something far more deliberate. Strange knocking echoed through the trees, carrying in a way that felt unnatural, followed by a moment that would stay with her forever. Vanessa recounts what she and her son witnessed just beyond their camp, describing details that continue to raise questions long after they left the area. The following morning brought another discovery that added a new layer to the experience, leaving her to reconsider everything she thought she understood about the wilderness. Vanessa’s story is grounded, emotional, and deeply personal, offering a firsthand account from someone who had no expectations of encountering the unknown. Join us as we explore her experience in one of the most active regions in Oregon and consider what might be waiting just beyond the edge of the firelight. 🗣️ Share Your Story Had a Bigfoot encounter or strange experience? Send it to bigfootsociety@gmail.com – your story might be featured on the show! 🎥 Watch & Subscribe on YouTube 🔴 Subscribe here → Bigfoot Society YouTube 💬 Leave a comment & let us know your thoughts! 📞 Leave a voicemail with your story → Speakpipe (Use multiple voicemails if needed) 👥 Share this episode → Watch & Share 🎧 More episodes → Podcast Playlist 🌲 Recommended: New Jersey Bigfoot Encounters 💥 Support the Show & Get Perks ✅ Join the community on Supercast – Become a Member ✅ Listen ad-free & early on YouTube – Join Here 📱 Let’s Connect Instagram: @bigfootsocietyTwitter: @bigfoot_societyTikTok: @bigfoot.society🧰 Tools & Partners I Use (Affiliate Links) These help support the show at no extra cost to you: Beam (Better Sleep): Try BeamWildgrain (Better Bread): Join HereSeed (Probiotics): Get SeedMedi-Share (Healthcare): Learn MoreLMNT (Electrolytes) Free Sample Pack with your first purchase! : Get LMNTOrganic and non-GMO groceries delivered for less http://thrv.me/uarEhS🎙️ Podcasting Tools: Repurpose.io: Try ItDescript: Sign UpStreamyard: Start RecordingRiverside.fm: Try Riverside🎧 My Audio Interface: View on Amazon ☕ Buy Me a Coffee – Support Here 🛍️ Grab Some Merch – Shop on Etsy 📬 Mailing Address: Bigfoot Society 125 E 1st St. #233 Earlham, IA 50072 Listen to the Podcast

Don't make too much of the 1966 mfg date. Per Bill, this new footage is obviously shot AFTER the 1967 PGF.

It gets better and better. Here's yet another Bill Munns interview, with further explanation and speculation by Mr. Munns. At 12:50, Bill discusses that the newly "discovered" film is either a rehearsal or, in his opinion, more likely a recreation of the actual PGF, after the event. In the new footage is a man on horseback with a rifle, pretending to be Bob Gimlin. There's someone in a "modestly halfway decent suit, nothing spectacular" walks thru the woods "virtually duplicating to the nth degree the PGF." Bill points out that in this film the Patty subject raises the foot straight up and down and you see the whole bottom of the foot. "And it's pure white exactly like Cibachrome print #72 of the PGF, and it's virtually identical." The producers of the documentary asked Bill's opinion of the footage and he said "A, it's obviously a man in a suit. The suit isn't anything spectacular. It's not like an off the rack Halloween costume that Phillip Morris would sell. It was custom made for this filming, but it's not Rick Baker, Stan Winston, John Chambers Hollywood quality. It's not anywhere near that. I'd say it's a medium grade proficiency making the suit." Bill actually held the "new" film, and he gave them details they didn't have before. It was 1966 mfg (but the shooting/exposure date is unknown. The fact the costume has white feet is telling, as it matches the overexposure seen in reproduced prints. Per Bill, no serious costume would utilize white feet. I'm half ways thru, I've more to see, but wanted to share this additional interview with you.

just my prediction from the hype machine…. You know, when “found footage” is hyped to the public with some great reveal.