Jump to content
Guest parnassus

Why Did Patterson And Gimlin Abruptly Pull Out Of Bluff Creek On Oct. 21?

Recommended Posts

Guest parnassus

If they truly believed that had filmed a live Bigfoot do you really find it strange that they'd want to miss the first showing and be there when the film was processed to take some credit and answer questions? How excited would Roger Patterson have been about getting that footage? I'm not actually convinced that the film is authentic but accepting their story for the sake of perspective I could still understand them scrubbing any previous plans they might have had once they'd had time to think about the days events and where the next events were likely to unfold.

If anything this thread actually makes me more inclined to believe their story. I think that you have to be prepared to let yourself imagine that their story might be true, no matter how much it is against your beliefs for just long enough to understand how they might have felt.

Dr.

I think that I am considering both alternatives here in this thread, aren't I, Dr.? hoax or real, doesn't matter with what I have presented.

Can you show where I haven't considered both? I have tried to be careful about that. So please show me where I may have slipped up.

To recap, they had no plan to leave as of the middle of the night on Friday. Publicizing/validating the site of the sighting/filming was Patterson's plan. There was no plan for a first showing on Sunday (you don't have any evidence that there was, do you?). Patterson was planning to be at Bluff Creek. The "first showing" idea came about when Patterson decided to leave the area and take the visitors with him to Yakima. Patterson himself said they were leaving because of the weather.

So I can't buy into your idea, because the evidence for it doesn't exist, and it disagrees with the evidence, common sense and what Patterson said.

p.

Did you actually check what was said on the radio in regards to the weather? Could you post that link please? I don't mean what the weather actually was, I mean what the local forecasters where actually saying on the radio, because we all know how reliable that is,but unfortunately, we do have to go according to whats predicted sometimes. Not that I doubt you, but if anyone else made such a claim, you would certainly ask.

I raise the radio as just one way that they might well have known the weather forecast. Let's assume for the moment that Patterson and Gimlin drove all the way to Eureka before or after they spoke with Hodgson and McCoy in Willow Creek. That would be several hours on the road. I have no way of knowing what was actually said on the radio, though I think someone could at some point try to get a copy of a Eureka paper to see what the forecast was. Patterson could have seen a paper there, not an unusual thing to do after being in the woods for a week or more. They could have also been alerted, had a big storm been coming, when they spent all that time with Hodgson and McCoy, some of which time was planning the festivities for the visitors who were being invited for the weekend show. Certainly it would be expected that McCoy in his position would be keeping track of the weather. And of course, they spoke with a newspaper reporter later in the evening as well, and voiced their plans at that time, and it could be expected that if any big weather was rolling in, that might have come up when Patterson discussed his plans for the weekend.

My point is that if a big storm were rolling in, they would have likely heard about it from any one of a number of sources. In fact, we have not a single reason to believe that they thought a flood-causing rain was coming. There was, by our best information, a small rain, in a heavily forested area. All we have is Patterson referring to "bad weather," without an explanation of what he meant by that, and why it affected the plan so drastically.

p.

Edited by parnassus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tontar

To recap, they had no plan to leave as of the middle of the night on Friday. Publicizing/validating the site of the sighting/filming was Patterson's plan. There was no plan for a first showing on Sunday (you don't have any evidence that there was, do you?). Patterson was planning to be at Bluff Creek. The "first showing" idea came about when Patterson decided to leave the area and take the visitors with him to Yakima. Patterson himself said they were leaving because of the weather.

So I can't buy into your idea, because the evidence for it doesn't exist, and it disagrees with the evidence, common sense and what Patterson said.

p.

In the absence of cell phones, and all the cool shipping and communicating ease we have now, I don't see how when they dropped off the film Friday to ship to DeAtley, they would have even known that the film could be developed in time for a Sunday showing. How could they? They would have had to have prior arrangements in place in the event they got a film, and needed to rush development, to have an idea that they even could get rush development. If the idea is that they got the film Friday, went into town and called DeAtley, he somehow had some contact already on the tip of his tongue that he could muster up? Why not say "cool, you got film, beat feet back up here and we'll get it developed ASAP." How doe sit go to "cool, you have film, ship it to me, I have a guy standing by that I can enlist and get it developed by Sunday, get home by then and we can have a showing". How would they have known that the film would be developed fast enough to show Sunday? Were they hanging out at the Willow Creek store while DeAtley made his calls, got things in order, then called them back and said send it away rush? And we can have it done by Sunday, so if you decide to leave, it'll be ready to go?

So the call to DeAtley to get set up for a showing on Sunday would have been after they decided to leave, according to the straight story. They would have been leaving Bluff Creek because of the rain, not because they had already made plans for a showing on Sunday. When would they have been able to figure out whether the film was even going to be ready for a Sunday showing, when they shipped it off, or when they called home after already packing out of camp? Is there a straight story on how that supposedly went down?

I don't know. I would have waited and tried to get another look at the beast(s). One peek would never be enough!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Tontar wrote:

I don't see how when they dropped off the film Friday to ship to DeAtley, they would have even known that the film could be developed in time for a Sunday showing.

How could they?

From experience. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tontar

From experience. :)

Care to elaborate? They have experience sending film from Bluff Creek to DeAtley, so they know "from experience" that they can get that sort of film developed in a rush over the weekend in Seattle? Care to elaborate, or is that simply a knee jerk response without possible elaboration? I'm curious to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I understand that Parn, and I appreciate your answer,but his reference to bad weather makes me wonder, I know we can track what the actual weather was,but without being able to verify that they had not mistakenly called for bad weather in a forecast,it could be a factor not being correctly considered.If I plan to take my boat out for a cruise on a Saturday, and the weather calls for bad weather, I cancel, and more than once,Saturday turned out to be not a bad day at all. When your out in the wilderness,hauling stuff,its best not to roll the dice,especially if you have something to be excited and in a hurry about anyway.

I will take a look and see if I can find any archived newspapers with a weather report for a day or two ahead of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dr. Boogie

Dr.

I think that I am considering both alternatives here in this thread, aren't I, Dr.? hoax or real, doesn't matter with what I have presented.

Can you show where I haven't considered both? I have tried to be careful about that. So please show me where I may have slipped up.

To recap, they had no plan to leave as of the middle of the night on Friday. Publicizing/validating the site of the sighting/filming was Patterson's plan. There was no plan for a first showing on Sunday (you don't have any evidence that there was, do you?). Patterson was planning to be at Bluff Creek. The "first showing" idea came about when Patterson decided to leave the area and take the visitors with him to Yakima. Patterson himself said they were leaving because of the weather.

So I can't buy into your idea, because the evidence for it doesn't exist, and it disagrees with the evidence, common sense and what Patterson said.

p.

Well in that case I'm left wondering 1. What is the deeper meaning you wished to present by starting this thread? If it's simply "I think it's strange that they changed their minds when they did" then my answer is that I don't think it's strange at all (for reasons I've already explained). It just depends upon how much you are prepared to accept their story, at least hypothetically, for the sake of perspective.

2. If, on the other hand you were actually implying that this change of mind in some way throws doubt upon the credibility of the rest of their story I'd say that I don't see it that way.

Which is it 1 or 2 ?

Edited by Dr. Boogie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

parnassus:

Above, where you said:

"and it disagrees with the evidence, common sense and what Patterson said."

It seems that you consider the evidence, common sense and what Patterson said, to be a cohesive group on one side of the argument.

Does this imply that you think Roger Patterson is truthful and sensable.

You seem to rely on what Patterson said, and when one relies on the word of another, there is an implied endorsement that the word of that other person is honest or truthful, thus reliable.

Just curious if you think Roger is telling the truth?

Thank you in advance for clearing this up, if you can.

Bill

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

If they truly believed that had filmed a live Bigfoot do you really find it strange that they'd want to miss the first showing and be there when the film was processed to take some credit and answer questions? How excited would Roger Patterson have been about getting that footage? I'm not actually convinced that the film is authentic but accepting their story for the sake of perspective I could still understand them scrubbing any previous plans they might have had once they'd had time to think about the days events and where the next events were likely to unfold.

If anything this thread actually makes me more inclined to believe their story. I think that you have to be prepared to let yourself imagine that their story might be true, no matter how much it is against your beliefs for just long enough to understand how they might have felt.

I can buy this reasoning...after years of searching, Roger got his film and now he wants to get back and see if it comes out. Imagine Roger talking in the truck:

Roger: "this is it Bob,it'll be worth a million dollars if the film turns out - we're RICH RICH RICH. Al has it set up for Sunday. We're all gonna' be RICH!"

( repeat 100's of times during the drive home )

finally in Yakima:

Roger: "Bob, meet me at Al's after lunch. That film has to be good...We're RICH"

Bob: "You go ahead Roger, I think I'll skip it...let me know how it turns out"

Now that's weird,(IMO) Gimlin didn't go to the first showing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

The only plan change that came that I am aware of was the heavy rains that came into the area in the middle of the night which caused them to barely get out of a flood plane by morning. Until then, Roger wanted to track the animal, and with a dog if possible. Roger had asked Bob to give them a few more days so to try and carry out this task, but Bob who had everything to lose had had enough. Roger then asked Bob if he'd come back for him if he stayed another week on his own and Bob declined for he didn't wish to make the long trip back. In the end, Roger left with Bob for Yakima.

I'm sorry, would this be like three weeks enough, or one week enough. Which is it, please?

Also, you are ignoring Gimlin's testimony and what he actually did. Getting back to work was not that much of a priority after Bigfoot was allegedly encountered, but rather before when according to him, they had three weeks of nothing (not nothing if you ask Gimlin's friend Thom Cantrall). Hot roofing was set aside for going to Hollywood and setting up contracts and going off and barnstorming the PGF until being edged out and replaced with an impostor to get greater profits for Roger and Al.

As far as the film developement went ... the film box with the information that so many would like to know was sitting on the table for anyone at the showing to pick up and didn't think to do it. It appeared that Roger wasn't concerned about the timing of the film developement.

Oh no, however could you come up with an extra one of these?...

BigkodachromeII.jpg

That could easily cost you as high as $2.65. I don't think Roger an Al could afford such exorbitances. Oh wait, maybe Roger could have subtracted that from the S75,000 Al gave him and that his own brother Glen witnessed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

The only plan change that came that I am aware of was the heavy rains that came into the area in the middle of the night which caused them to barely get out of a flood plane by morning.

"By the time they arrived, bad weather was closing-in. By about midnight, it was raining heavily[/b].

(snip)

Back at the campsite, weather conditions had gone from bad to worse. Fearing a possible landslide on the Bluff Creek road, Patterson and Gimlin decided to get out of the area. They packed up and left for Yakima at about 4:00 a.m., October 21, 1967. They experienced great difficulties getting out of the area. The Bluff Creek road had caved away so they had to take the Onion Mountain route."

1. The weather changed drastically, dangerously so.

Barely get out... flood plane... bad to worse... road caved in... weather changed drastically... dangerously so...

Harrowing escape? Torrential downpour that went from bad to worse? Road destroyed by flood?

Yes, that sound like it might be a problem for 12 - 16 tracks made in * wet * sand! *

339494c21a56020ce7.jpg

Bluff Creek Road destroyed by flooding. Bluff Creek Bigfoot tracks in wet sand, no, those are fine.

0ce23b7aeedb0e37fcdfa28d4a9dc37914e617ca_m.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tontar

Bluff Creek Road destroyed by flooding. Bluff Creek Bigfoot tracks in wet sand, no, those are fine.

Beautifully said!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Z,

well, good, I think the rain had some effect, but I'm not sure that there was enough to make them pull out if we are just talking about slippery roads, and certainly not there should have been no concern about flooding with 0.5 inches of rain. I hope that someone can provide any more information about the weather, but it doesn't seem to me that the rain, if it was 0.5 inch, would have lasted that long. I mean, it started in the wee hours, so to have even lasted til daylight it would have had to have been a pretty slow drizzle.

why would they not just sit it out until the roads dry out? Why wouldn't they drive 25 miles from Orleans to Willow Creek to hoist a beer with the boys and go back in the next day? What's a few hours, a day? I must say, for me that would have been the most reasonable option if you have something important scheduled. 0.5 inches of rain wouldn't even postpone a baseball game. I have sat in more than one tent and vehicle for hours to days waiting for rain to stop. And I was just waiting to do some recreation, not do something as important as verifying the site of the most important zoological discovery of the century and potentially become a rich man. Instead, Patterson seems to have just bolted in the face of a seemingly minor delay.

And, it was a double barreled loss for him: not only did the experts not verify his site, he would have to answer the issues of the improbable film shipping/ development timeline.

p.

I was looking at topo maps of the area and that terrain is nasty, and with all that massive damage only 3 years earlier, I highly doubt those roads were in the best shape to say the least.

You have to remember that it was 45 years ago, those vehicles did not handle like they do today, your talking drum brakes that hate slick surfaces,no power steering, solid axles,and pulling horses on narrow, mountain roads. He didn't have any money, so it probably was an older truck from late 50's or early 60's, it was a different time back then.

The weather report i found was 50 miles away, after seeing the terrain, you could have totally different weather at bluff creek than from the shore. I live in PA and our mountains are mole hills compared to yours, not even 20 miles away it could be pouring and would only have sprinkles where I live. Mountains cause updrafts that cause more violent down pours.

as far those guys leaving, people are unique and behave differently when stressed or excited, he could not have been thinking to clearly due to all that happened and really didn't read into the big picture on how it could effect everything.

People have done crazier deeds with no stress so, who knows ?

@ kitakaze

If you took the time to read a little you can find out why the tracks were ok.

Edited by zigoapex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Primate

In a recent trip to the area I was being hailed on while looking at the sunshine warm a mountain up about 6 to 8 miles away . The weather there can be quite unpredictable and dramatic in the fall and winter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Care to elaborate? They have experience sending film from Bluff Creek to DeAtley, so they know "from experience" that they can get that sort of film developed in a rush over the weekend in Seattle? Care to elaborate, or is that simply a knee jerk response without possible elaboration? I'm curious to know.

Roger had experience having movie film developed....so, he may have simply used his 'regular' developer, who had been developing his film...and who may have developed the film for him in a rush.

Oh...don't forget to ask Sweet Susi about her sighting of Bigfoot...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest LAL

There was also their belief there might have been a mate nearby. He didn't want to be left alone while Bob tracked her after the filming. Perhaps in a dark night with a rainstorm discretion was the better part of valor on that account as well.

"Said Gimlin, 'Then when the creature did disappear up a little draw, why I wanted to follow it. Of course Roger didn’t want to follow it because he was on foot and he didn’t want to be left there. We thought there was the possibility there were the two others around . . . we didn’t know at the time whether that was one of the ones that had made the tracks up above the scene or not. Roger was a little bit upset about that so he wanted to catch his horse and get some more film in the camera. It took quite a while to catch the horse and to catch the packhorse as well and tie them up. Then we rode on in pursuit of the creature.'â€

Meldrum, Jeff (2010). Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science (Kindle Locations 2464-2469). Forge Books. Kindle Edition.

Also, Gimlin's truck was a "...two-wheel-drive one-ton and he felt they needed to get moving. The rain virtually eliminated any prospects of using the tracking dogs, even if they could get to the site and pick up the trail into the mountains. Now Gimlin’s concern was getting his rig out of the mountains. The rain didn’t let up and the low road was blocked by a flowing mudslide several feet deep. Trees were sliding down off Onion Mountain. They nearly backed their vehicle into the creek trying to turn around. The windshield wipers couldn’t keep ahead of the torrent and visibility was poor. It took nearly all day to get back to the main highway. They drove all night to get back to Yakima. Eventually, Gimlin relived the experience by viewing the developed film footage. Of this he said, “I was kinda disappointed with the original film, because I thought it should have gotten a lot more than that, but with Roger running part of the time and trying to relocate part of the time and these things happened so rapidly—it was just happening in heartbeats . . . "

Meldrum, Jeff (2010). Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science (Kindle Locations 2510-2518). Forge Books. Kindle Edition.

Roger's brother told Chris Murphy they went to Bluff Creek later with 11 horses. Whether that's true or not, Roger was at Bossburg in '69. He invested the film money in an expedition with intent to get a Yeti supposedly held in a monastery in Tibet. It turned out to be a hoax.

Roger didn't just shoot his film and then get out of the "business" after the tour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...