Forums

Al DeAtley was Roger Patterson's brother-in-law; their wives were sisters.  He was also a successful construction/concrete mogul in Yakima (I think).  He was extremely wealthy compared to Roger and, probably not wanting his wife's sister to want for things, gave Roger a lot of money.  Once the P-G film was developed, DeAtley was the brains behind marketing it and making a profit off of it.  In his execrable book, The Making of Bigfoot, Greg Long interviews Al DeAtley.  Long makes it sound likes he's going in to interview the Godfather and has doubts about whether he'll be swimming with the fishes if he makes the wrong move while talking to DeAtley.  Long's book is more about making Greg Long look like a heroic journalist tha       He's posted 30 videos over 2-4 years.  I'll defer for a final answer to others, but I don't believe he has any real credibility as a Bigfoot/Sasquatch researcher.  Had he not made this set of videos, I don't think anyone on the forums would know his name.  And there's a large dose of hypocrisy when he castigates Bill Munns for defending the P-G film "to make money" when this guy blocks some of his videos unless you're supporting him on Patreon so - wait for it - he can make money.   

^^ Old Mort, I agree with you on the source of the still - it's from the P-G film.  For some reason, the 1970 article which used that frame jazzed the green up to St. Patrick's Day levels of green.  So what the Capturing Bigfoot film is using is a print made specifically for publication in a magazine rather than a still from the original P-G film.

Frustrating. I bought the 360 camera to avoid this. Mystery fur shot again. 

That image is a PGF frame that comes right after 352. It captures some actual greenery which confuses the viewer into thinking that it is a different location and season. Full frame is below.      

^^^     Always good to get the facts wherever we may find them.    This whole PGF Hype issue is starting to remind me of the 1980's POW MIA issue: At the end of the Vietnam war the North Vietnamese may (or may not) have kept some American POWs.    Movies like Uncommon Valor, and Rambo II were based on tins concept.   (While I think it is remotely possible, we need evidence).     Great claims need proof.  I remember back then the news reported a bombshell photo said to have shown 3 US soldiers now older and run down being kept by the North Vietnamese.   As you can see the reported and hyped photo at the top (below) and the actual source photo below it.  It actually comes from Soviet Farmers years before.   The evidence -at least in this case of MIA POWS -didn't live up to the hype.               I have all the sympathy for those involved in this issue and they deserve to have honest answers.   However, with any controversy there are always going to be people who will take advantage based on their motivations to cheat or sell an agenda.   (And yes, I know in the case of my POWs example we can even imagine our own government might be motivated to hide such evidence)     I highly expect this new PGF film controversy "Evidence" will go in a similar direction --->   Lots of hype but not much else.  Wanting something to be true is not the same as actually being true.