Capturing Bigfoot

[Sircalum]

2 minutes ago, OntarioSquatch said:

Meldrum was just repeating Joe’s line where he explores what he thinks is a possibility.
 

The only arguments presented here by skeptics are that people close to Patterson claim it’s a hoax. Meanwhile Patty herself has characteristics that aren’t repeatable with costumes.

 

 

There’s also an unseen early film from the same location with the first trial costume?

[norseman]

56 minutes ago, Sircalum said:

There’s also an unseen early film from the same location with the first trial costume?

I’ve seen Heronimous in a costume….. I won’t hold my breath.

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Sircalum said:

Don’t kill the messenger it was Roger’s son Clint and Patricia Patterson. Clint explained the entire thing the only hope is that it was fake AI but I don’t see anyone questioning that on the News report in the link I posted above. Tune in Thursday after we watch it to go over the content.

I am not killing the messenger.
 

You were cherry picking some “gotcha moment” Rogan video short against Meldrum. Which is a crock. It doesn’t even remotely represent what Meldrum said in the full interview let alone years of conferences and his BOOK!? Really? Have you read it?

 

So hence forth I will be scrutinizing you based on this slanderous event you perpetrated on this forum. Sorry. 

[Incorrigible1]

6 minutes ago, norseman said:

I am not killing the messenger.
 

You were cherry picking some “gotcha moment” Rogan video short against Meldrum. Which is a crock. It doesn’t even remotely represent what Meldrum said in the full interview let alone years of conferences and his BOOK!? Really? Have you read it?

 

So hence forth I will be scrutinizing you based on this slanderous event you perpetrated on this forum. Sorry. 

 

Such surely brings into question any conclusions our new member draws.

[OntarioSquatch]

It’s 2026 and people are still desperately trying to discredit the film. So far all attempts have failed as none of them address the issues that exist with replicating the film subject with 1960’s costume technology.

[Explorer]

 

[norseman]

2 minutes ago, OntarioSquatch said:

It’s 2026 and people are still desperately trying to discredit the film. So far all attempts have failed as none of them address the issues that exist with replicating the film subject with 1960’s costume technology.

For me personally? Its authenticity has no bearing on things I have seen in the woods. And I am very sure that is true of others as well.

 

And it also has no bearing going forward on proof of a new species. That requires a body.

 

I will listen to new evidence. But as you say, everything thus far has been abysmal.

[Sircalum]

41 minutes ago, norseman said:

I will listen to new evidence. But as you say, everything thus far has been abysmal.

https://people.com/famous-1967-bigfoot-film-was-staged-says-director-of-new-doc-11926085
It’s damning if you read the breakdown here that said I haven’t seen it myself yet.

[Incorrigible1]

53 minutes ago, Explorer said:

 

 

Mentions methods that could conceivably add perceived muscle movement to suits, yet fails to demonstrate any such effects on the various suits that have been put forth, over the years. None of those proposed suits have even approached the biological movements seen in the PGF.

 

I predict the Capturing Bigfoot expose will be less than satisfying.

[CelticKevin]

Okay, so my long winded two cents is this:
 

If this was a hoax, where is the costume? If it was that good and undoubtedly revolutionary in design and realism, then why would they destroy it or let it be lost? Any good con man would keep such an article around to keep milking the public. Cripes, look at Fraud Standing and his abysmal fakes. Everyone with half a brain cell can see his evidence is as phony as a football bat but that doesn't keep him from parading it out for whatever publicity he can get. By all accounts Patterson was an opportunist. So why didn't he keep that suit working for more such amazing film and press? You can't tell me something as good as that would be allowed to be lost or disposed of out of fear. 

 

As for Meldrum saying something big was coming, perhaps he was NOT talking about it being proven a hoax, but rather this film would stir up a detrimental controversy and set BF research back several years. Maybe he knew the powers that be would be working to suppress evidence or muddy up the waters. 

What about Gimlin? Has anyone gotten his reaction to this yet? I'd be real interested to see his reaction to it and what his response would be. I can't honestly think anyone involved would be worried about legal repercussions as we've seen hoaxes before and nothing of substance has happened to the hoaxers. Hell, if it was a hoax, they could make even more money writing books and making appearances talking about how they pulled it off over so many years. 

 

Could this be people just tired of dealing with it and deciding the best way to get bigfooters off their backs and make a little cash is to **** in everybody's punchbowl and call it a hoax? Or even simpler, it is just a way to get a bit of money and be sensationalistic to feed the machine? Because....why now? Why now are they choosing to make this revelation at this time? Why not 5 years ago or 10? It seems over 10 years ago I read a book, forget the title, about it being a hoax and people who knew Patterson at the time talked about seeing the suit in a box in a trunk and how they all knew what was up but had reasons for keeping quiet. I didn't let it eat at me. But you are forced to keep a open mind to the possibility. And after reading Munns book, and others, I leaned further into it being legit. 
 

I agree that too many people have seen and heard Sasquatches and collected enough evidence that they more than likely exist. I also know that until we have at least two bodies, the mystery will always be with us. I've always felt the footage was real. But I will admit, now there is that kernel of doubt. And that is sad. It's akin to seeing your dad stuff your stocking at Christmas when you're a kid. 

[Sircalum]

It’s over for Patty but there was Bigfoot before and after so Bigfoot is not dead. 

[Incorrigible1]

Just now, Sircalum said:

It’s over for Patty but there was Bigfoot before and after so Bigfoot is not dead. 

 

You sure do seem to place lots of store into this "influencer's" opinion. 

[langfordbc]

On 3/16/2026 at 1:40 PM, Sircalum said:

https://people.com/famous-1967-bigfoot-film-was-staged-says-director-of-new-doc-11926085
 

The PGF is now a proven hoax.

 

 

On 3/16/2026 at 6:44 PM, Sircalum said:

https://people.com/famous-1967-bigfoot-film-was-staged-says-director-of-new-doc-11926085
It’s damning if you read the breakdown here that said I haven’t seen it myself yet.

 

The only thing that's been proven in this thread is that you are a fool.

[VAfooter]

Locking this thread temporarily in case we we merge topics.