Lazy Cowboy's PGF Recreations

[Backdoc]

I'm sure a lot of you already know about Lazy Cowboy's Bigfoot YouTube videos.  

 

 

If not, they are a MUST SEE.   Lazy Cowboy does an excellent job taking the data from the PGF and creating a CGI recreations  better than anything I have ever seen.

 

  Specifically, I recommend:

 

1) Bigfoot- Recreating Bluff Creek

 

2) Bigfoot- Recreating Bluff Creek Part 2  The Patteson Gimlin Film Route.   <--- This is the best one.  Outstanding.

 

We can see points of view from any angle, through Roger's camera, through Patty's POV and so on.  The terrain comes to life.  

 

For some already aware of the Lazy Cowboy videos, this is not news.  Still, I would like to hear your thoughts on it and anywhere you might think Lazy Cowboy might get it wrong here or there.  

 

If you haven't seen these, don't walk, RUN to your computer and watch these Especially .  Bigfoot- Recreating Bluff Creek Part 2  The Patteson Gimlin Film Route.  They are amazing.   The PGF site makes sense so much more sense to me now.  

 

One area I am uncertain about is his use of the shadows indicating the PGF was filmed at 3pm timeline not the 1 or 1:30pm.   

 

Give these a view.   

 

 

[NorCalWitness]

post a link

[norseman]

 

[Backdoc]

And HERE is part 1:

 

 

[Backdoc]

For those tech people out there, here is an interview and discussion with Lazy Cowboy on how he made these videos and what he based it on.   Maybe not for everyone but for tech people it is long but impressive.  

 

 

[Backdoc]

15 hours ago, norseman said:

 

 

 

Interesting @8:25 in the video Lazy Cowboy indicated the shadows indicate a 3pm PGF event filming time.  He doesn't base this just on the shadows but Gimlin stating, @ 8:40 "We left camp about 1:30 in the afternoon"    That camp was about 4 miles away putting then in the PGF film site at about 3pm.   

 

 

[Trogluddite]

Unfortunately, Bob Gimlin is an unreliable witness (which does not mean I think he's lying).  With regards to this issue, he has said that the film site was:

 

• two miles from the campsite - see Webster's interview of Roger & Bob in 1967
• four miles from the campsite - see John Green's interview of Bob in 1992 and a CBS47 2019 interview of Bob
• Roger Patterson gave both those estimates and added 3 miles in an interview by Stan Peters Interview of Roger Patterson

 

As to the time they left camp, Bob has said:

• midday (which could be 1:30 during the summer, I suppose, but not in October) - see Robert Morgan's interview of Bob
• "right after lunch" (which could be anywhere from 11:00 AM if they were up early to 1:00ish) - Les Stroud's interview with Bob 
• and this 1:30 time, which I believe came from a CBS47 2019 interview of Bob - If I understand correctly, The Lazy Cowboy is using other people's interviews, not his own.

 

And leaving camp about 1:30 contradicts times Bob Gimlin has given for the encounter itself, which include:

• “about midday, perhaps a little bit after noon time” - again from John Green's interview of Bob in 1992
• "Early afternoon" - attributed to John Green's questionnaire in Bigfoot at Bluff Creek by Danny (Daniel) Perez (2003)
• about 2:00 PM - Finding Bigfoot Legend (2018)

 

All of this because early interviewers asked both Roger and Bob to tell them a story, but did not conduct the kind of interview necessary to determine as precisely as possible the facts. 

 

Also, I don't believe that The Lazy Cowboy (or anyone else) cherry-picked a certain interview because it better fits a narrative; instead, it seems a lot of of people are unfamiliar with (or unwilling to admit) the inconsistencies surrounding the P-G film. 

[OldMort]

Gimlin stated in a "Coast to Coast" interview a few years back, that they were planning to "go in" about 35 or 40 miles that day and stay overnight.

 

Seems like a bit of a late start if they didn't leave till sometime after lunch and (according to Gimlin) it starts getting dark around 4 there.

 

 

[Sircalum]

https://youtu.be/LlRatn60rVo
 

This is a real eye opener!

[Backdoc]

2 hours ago, Trogluddite said:

 

 

Also, I don't believe that The Lazy Cowboy (or anyone else) cherry-picked a certain interview because it better fits a narrative; instead, it seems a lot of of people are unfamiliar with (or unwilling to admit) the inconsistencies surrounding the P-G film. 

 

 

The most objective timecard HAS TO BE the shadows.   The sun is the sun each day every Oct 20th.

 

If he can match the lay of the land and tree shadows accurately to his model, then we know the time give or take.

 

If it is 3 pm then it is. The Q comes down to how much they could accomplish with a 3 pm encounter vs a 1:30 pm encounter.  Finally, it comes down to how accurately the estimate of Lazy Cowboy is.  If his model is right AND if his model can measure the shadow length accurately then it must be pretty close.  

[Trogluddite]

2 hours ago, OldMort said:

Gimlin stated in a "Coast to Coast" interview a few years back, that they were planning to "go in" about 35 or 40 miles that day and stay overnight.

 

Seems like a bit of a late start if they didn't leave till sometime after lunch and (according to Gimlin) it starts getting dark around 4 there.

 

Very good point, although the "gets dark around 4[:00 PM] there" part varies as well.  In 2020, Bob G told Les Stroud that it gets dark around 5:00 in that area.  I'm actually not too bothered by that because the encounter (purportedly) took place on 20 October 1967 and the US switches to Daylight Savings Time in the end of the October, so if one is talking casually, one might not factor in whether the clocks had fallen back yet.  In any event, according to Naval Observatory data for that day the sun set at 5:30 and there was still enough daylight to see/work by at almost 6:00 PM.  I will agree that being down on the valley floor, it probably got darker sooner rather than later.

 

However the bigger problem is whether "it was good and dark" when Roger and Bob got to Al Hodgson's store (Green interview of BG) or still daylight when they arrived (Bill Miller interview of Al Hodgson). 

 

 

1 hour ago, Backdoc said:

The most objective timecard HAS TO BE the shadows.   The sun is the sun each day every Oct 20th.

 

If he can match the lay of the land and tree shadows accurately to his model, then we know the time give or take.

 

If it is 3 pm then it is. The Q comes down to how much they could accomplish with a 3 pm encounter vs a 1:30 pm encounter.  Finally, it comes down to how accurately the estimate of Lazy Cowboy is.  If his model is right AND if his model can measure the shadow length accurately then it must be pretty close.  

 

At this point, that is absolutely correct. 

[MIB]

On 11/5/2025 at 1:15 PM, Backdoc said:

The most objective timecard HAS TO BE the shadows.   The sun is the sun each day every Oct 20th.

 

I think that is true, however, judging the shadows is tricky because slight differences in position of the observer can change the perception of angle a great deal with no real way to remove the error that introduces.    An analogy from algebra .. this is a situation of two variables, one equation.    To get a precise answer you have to nail one of the variables down so it's a constant.    To do that, you have to locate the observer's position precisely, within inches, else the ground slope, etc create uncertainty which means you cannot nail the time down precisely even if you know where the shadow is and what direction, relative to the observer (photo) it seems to be pointing.

 

The timing does matter .. an hour and a half difference matters regarding whether all of the things reported could have occurred in daylight vs dark, how much time was available to get the film to wherever it was flown out of, and so on.    BUT .. and "but" matters a lot, none of that changes what is on the film.   What matters ultimately is whether or not the PGF shows a living creature, some sort of phantasm, or a man in a suit.   The accuracy of the timeline is totally irrelevant to that.    The timeline is merely something for people to talk about when they can't address the content in any meaningful way.

[Trogluddite]

^^^

Don't disagree with any of this.  And based on Bill Munns' work, I have a pretty high degree of confidence that Roger Patterson did indeed film a Bigfoot, not a man in a suit.  However, "curing" the timeline issues would have the benefit of taking that topic away from those who argue that Roger and Bob were two hoaxers and part of the proof that they are lying about everything is that they can't keep they're story straight.  At least, that's why I puzzle over it.