Leaderboard

What do you think about his analysis?

Fascinating. In particular, the 40 consistent behavioral similarities that Grok found in reported Bigfoot sightings is mind-bending. I really, really don't think that so many different people (eye-witnesses) would even be capable of making all that up. "Neither group (skeptics or believers) is comfortable with findings that suggest the phenomenon is real, but incomprehensible within current paradigms." That has been my take on the subject now for several years. Thanks for posting that video, Norseman. It is excellent.

I remember hearing the same thing. In a video about the footage, the narrator mentioned the runner slipped (I think) and fell on one of his attempts. I'm not certain if he said "slipped", or if it was something else, but he did fall. And he was wearing running shoes that had a rubber sole with a tread.

I got out today for a spring bear hunt, got skunked, but had a very nice day in the mountains NE of Boston Bar, in the Fraser Canyon area. The only game I spotted was a few grouse, which aren't open in the spring, of course. There was some fresh bear scat on my chosen trail, but no bruins in sight. My planned loop route turned into an in 'n' out when I found a large rock slide across several hundred metres of the road about 16 km in. Still a good day in some great country, and beautiful spring weather, so I came home refreshed.

After diving into quantum physics, quantum mechanics and quantum biology, I concur with the findings. I think John Greene's data base would have been useful for this.

Credit where credit is due to Sircalum (for posting the link) and to Matt Moneymaker (for offering an alternative explanation for this film). Everyone here seems to be accepting, at face value, that this new film was shot before the P-G film and was a rehearsal for it. For those who can't (or haven't) read MM's Facebook post, he posits that the new film was shot after the P-G film and was an attempt to recreate the encounter. Why? One reason suggested by MM is that Al DeAtley wanted to have a longer film to show and - let's face it - the P-G film as originally shot is not all that good. So perhaps Al DeAtley and Roger Patterson (and Bob Gimlin, if that's him in this film) wanted to have more film to show on the movie circuit and experimented with a quickly bought (or made) costume to see if they could get something useful. If so, this would have been done within weeks of the P-G film while Roger still had the rented (and misappropriated) camera. Alternatively, Al DeAtley could have been trying to prove to himself that the P-G film wasn't a hoax by trying to recreate it. Only pointing this out because at this time, we don't know when the film was shot. We know when the film was manufactured, but we know nothing else about when it was used, or when it was processed. So if the film Capturing Bigfoot is labeling this as a "trial run" they have not, at this point, laid an adequate foundation for doing so.

#6 is a huge issue, there's just no reason for Johnson to have the original if he was asked by Roger (or DeAtley) to develop some footage. Giving back a copy rather than the original makes no sense - the other way around does make sense if he felt the need to keep a copy. You may not be aware, but the Den of Geeks podcast on YT interviewed Evans and his partner. Evans (perhaps unwittingly) drops a bombshell: Norm's brother Dave worked with Roger on hoaxes, and wore Bigfoot costumes !. Yes, Evans is accusing Roger of being a serial hoaxer from 1965 to 1972 in Yakima. Ignoring that insult, there's an obvious take from that: Dave did a post-PGF reenactment with his brother Norm in order to mimic what his friend Roger had done. And that's why Norm has the original, because its 'their' work and has nothing to do with Roger. Dave could have sensed a challenge to do what Roger did, or was jealous and thought Roger was hoaxing (and a hoaxer would love to match another hoaxer). That explains why the new footage has so much in common with the PGF. Munns feels it is just too similar to be a coincidence. So either Roger did a rehearsal and then waited 5 months to put into play all the things done in the rehearsal, or Dave Johnson studied the PGF and the following Spring tried to mimic the PGF as best he could. That explains the 'thinner' bigfoot (no ability to convincingly make a massive Bigfoot) and the head that is different than Patty (couldnt match it, did the best he could). If Gimlin is in the new footage, maybe he was so upset with Roger not taking him on tour and cutting him out of the proceeds that he went along with this reenactment. Not a wise decision in retrospect, but perfectly understandable. And if its not Gimlin (doubtful to me), then it further distances Roger from having anything to do with this new footage.

Catching up after two months of overwhelming activity caused by a move to West Virginia .... I had not given adequate attention to this little snippet before. The quote from a Reddit user (on p.1 of this thread) that "This [Roger's Ahtanum Valley film] would later be re-filmed and released as Sasquatch: The Legend of Bigfoot in 1976" implies that someone involved in the P-G film - whether it be Patricia Patterson (since Roger had passed away), Al DeAtley, or Bob Gimlin - with knowledge of the Ahtanum Valley film had helped create the movie to support the reality of the P-G film. In other words, Bob Gimlin and others were involved in an ongoing "conspiracy" to hide the fact that the P-G film was fake. Ronald D. Olson, aka Ron Olson, was an early Bigfoot researcher in Oregon who had planned in 1973 to capture Bigfoot in a steel cage and then in 1976 was using a computer to predict where Bigfoot could be found. See https://bigfootforums.com/topic/124725-oregon-1973-a-steel-cage-for-bigfoot/, https://bigfootforums.com/topic/127168-oregon-1976-a-computer-and-tranquilizer-guns-for-bigfoot/, and https://bigfootforums.com/topic/130473-oregon-1976-ron-olsen-defends-idea-of-bigfoot/#comment-1216088. Ron Olson was also the producer and one of the writers for Sasquatch: The Legend of Bigfoot. No one in the cast of the Ahtanum Valley film is mentioned in the list of actors or crew for Sasquatch: The Legend of Bigfoot on IMDb, which was filmed in Oregon, not Washington. Ron Olson likely would have had enough knowledge about Bigfoot and Sasquatch sightings and the Pacific northwest to come up with a script for a Bigfoot film without updating Roger Patterson's Ahtanum Valley film. Is it possible to prove, that Ron Olson didn't merely update Roger's film? No. But the bare assertion that Roger's film was "re-filmed and released" under a different name is wholly unsupported as well and seems to be a leap by those who want to discredit the P-G film. EDIT: I just added two newspaper articles about the film in the Historical Archive section; they can be read at

I'm confident it is and that those skeptics have another hole in their feet.

what is going on with you? you posted the same thing 2 weeks ago. this isn't the ah ha you think it is.