Jump to content
TD-40

Why Patterson And Gimlim Were Successful That Day.

Recommended Posts

Guest Cervelo

They knew exactly what they were doing and accomplished what they set out to do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

And, what an accomplishment it was, Cervelo! :)

 

 

RogerPatterson9_zps8f5c3aef.jpg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cervelo

Indeed it was!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

It's a one-of-a-kind...whatever Patty is! :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest OntarioSquatch

They knew exactly what they were doing and accomplished what they set out to do!

 

 

I think this is something we can all agree on  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

They knew exactly what they were doing and accomplished what they set out to do!

 

What they did was a pure accident. It was a call that originated from John Green to Mrs. Patterson that made Roger Patterson aware upon his return from Mt. St. Helens three days later that tracks had shown up on BCM. So Bob and Roger set out to see these allegedly good  prints they were told about while Roger hopefully got some film of them for a future documentary he was wanting to put together one day. Because of the three additional weeks it took for Roger and Bob to finally get down to California, the once good clear prints were little more than misshapen outine's on the ground when the men arrived. Gimlin said 'they could see what looked to be where prints had been, but there was no real details readily seen', which would explain why Roger never bothered to film them. Furthermore, both men were apparently caught off-guard when they rounded that large tree root that had hidden themselves and the creature from each other. So surprised they were that Roger bent his stirrup when frantically attempting to get his foot free from it so to get his camera and possibly get some film of it before it got away as by that time the creature was already on the move. According to Gimlin, Roger was so rushed in that short time that after the film ran completely out that he wasn't even certain if he actually caught anything on film.

 

These were two average men, one with a passion for the Bigfoot mystery - the other along for some time in the great outdoors, and in the end it amounted to luck and being in the right place at the right time to which Gimlin agrees. It is that kind of happenstance that not only made the event possible, but also believable in many peoples eyes that know what really went on. Its making the event out to be more than what it was that draws unjust suspicion on what happened down there at that time. Just like with the trackway that brought those men there in the first place. It had not been uncommon for tracks to show up on construction roads over the years, but nothing was really done about it. Construction crews continued working and tracks were eventually destroyed from trucks and machinery traveling over them in order to meet contract deadlines. This is one of the reasons why the 'Ray Wallace traveled from Washington to California to fake tracks' doesn't wash with me. This was what occurred on Onion Mountain as nearly all of those prints had been destroyed before Green could drive there to see them. Ryerson made it a point not to destroy the tracks when they were discovered on Blue Creek Mountain because of what happened with the Onion Mountain tracks and Green's disappointment. Now a group was flying down to see them so a better attempt was made to preserve them.

 

And had it not been for Roger and Bob getting rained out of the Mount St. Helen's area, Gimlin would have used up his vacation time and a trip to California may not have ever happened for Patterson when it did which would mean no P/G film. It was without a doubt that luck combined with dumb-luck had a role in the getting of that film.

Edited by Bigfoothunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cervelo

If you say so ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DWA

It's common knowledge that folk on horseback see more critters. No surprise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch

Patterson and Gimlin were successful because Roger Patterson knew how to market his product.

 

First came the book, then the film, then the promotional tour and a lifetime of residuals for Patricia Patterson.

 

Seems like a well-thought out plan to me, except they were never able to explain the timeline.

 

And Bob Gimlin has no recollection of a bent stirrup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DWA

The Patterson-Gimlin film, as an economic endeavor, was one of the biggest flops of the 20th century.



Thank you.....

:)

Well if it's so obvious (and it is) that they saw a sasquatch, what's all the fuss?  I don't understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cervelo

No fuss....well known fact that people see lots of critters on horseback...ahhhh Bigfoot not so much but your entitled to your opinion :)
 

Edited by Cervelo
Remove Objectionable Material

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

Patterson and Gimlin were successful because Roger Patterson knew how to market his product.

 

First came the book, then the film, then the promotional tour and a lifetime of residuals for Patricia Patterson.

 

Seems like a well-thought out plan to me, except they were never able to explain the timeline.

 

And Bob Gimlin has no recollection of a bent stirrup.

 

How much money did Roger make off his book? 

 

The film was more John Green's and Al Hodgson's doing than Roger's ... without them he would not have had a reason to be in California. Like I stated previously, Roger and Gimlin had chose to go to Mount St. Helens.

 

Mrs. Patterson hasn't gotten wealthy from the film.

 

And who cares if Gimlin remembers the bent stirrup after all this time when Al Hodgson remembers it. Are you saying that the bent stirrup was ever mentioned after the film by Patterson or Gimlin? Do you have any data to support Gimlin ever denying that Roger bent the stirrup when trying to dismount upon seeing the creature?

If you say so ;)

 

I got my information from hours of discussing that event with Bob Gimlin for who else would know? So it can be said that Bob Gimlin says so as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

"He's entitled to his opinion".... 

Edited by WV FOOTER
Remove Objectionable Material

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

"Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but no one has a right to be wrong about the facts. Without the facts, your opinion is of no value.†Rene Dahinden, August 1999.

Edited by Bigfoothunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cervelo

Whew fascinating stuff guys....but first it might help if you can tell the difference between a fact an opinion maybe this will help

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact

Let me know if you need any help :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...