New Film Shown at South by South West "Capturing Bigfoot"

[Trogluddite]

And here we go w/a quick review of Evidence v. Egos.  All times are from the YouTube transcript; all comments are made by Eric from Hairy Man Road.  He managed to squeeze 3 minutes of specific information into 12 minutes this time, so his signal to noise ration is at least improving a little. 

 

1:00 Patricia Patterson "admits that the 67 footage is a hoax."  Who calls the P-G film "the 67 footage?"  Is he referring to the new footage, which he mistakenly referred to as being shot in 1967 in his first video?

 

Starting at 6:41, the narrator states that Jeff Meldrum (RIP) agreed that it was a dry run.  In the last video he has Dr. Meldrum saying "it looks like a dry run."  That's not an insignificant difference, and had a follow-up question been asked, it would clarify if Dr. Meldrum would have been able to offer a more complete answer.  He might have, and that answer might be on the cutting room floor.

 

The narrator then states that Patricia Patterson admitted that it was Bob Gimlin in the film.  That's like claiming as a shocking development "that Japan once attacked U.S. forces in Hawaii."  I think everyone with some actual knowledge of this matter knows that there was an earlier attempt at making a commercial film.  

 

Then at 6:51 the narrator declares that Bill Munns is only defending the film because he (Mssr. Munns) has a financial stake in the P-G film being real.  If that's the case, Eric from Hairy Man Road has no credibility on anything he says because he has a financial stake in pushing his YouTube channel.  He also claims that Bill Munns is about to release another book on the P-G film.  "Everybody's saying that ..."  

 

Actually, there's only about 2 minutes of specific information that's even worth mentioning in this 12-minute clip.

 

 

 

 

[xspider1]

Honestly, this whole thing seems like hearsay to me at this point, which is almost always considered to be weak 'evidence'.  Bob G. himself could tell me in person that the PGf was a hoax (I really don't think he would) but, I would still doubt that.  The PGf rehearsal being touted (as I understand), will need to be very convincing in order to sway my opinion.  And, I would bet you a dollar that it isn't.  If the PGf subject were or, if it even could be realistically replicated with, a costume, that would have been done many times by now.