Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Pgf Vs. Any Other Footage

Recommended Posts

Guest

The godfather of all bigfoot videos has been analyzed, scrutinized, combed thru, and discected beyond belief. We also know the vast majority of people in the community have a very strong feeling on the video regardless of whether you believe in its authenticity or not. My question I have for you all is.....why, when 99% of the videos or photos that have come out in the last 10 years are immediately shot down, scrutinized, or called an all out hoax...and many of the same people so quick to call BS on these videos/images are the same ones that swear to the authenticity of the PGF, is the PGF so highly regarded as the most impactful visual we have to date? Why is the this film held to such a high standard compared to any other, when at the end of the day any video out there has lead to zero impact on proving bigfoot exists.

I love the PGF and all the mystery and hoopla around it. I have always just pondered as to why this video is so highly debated and why this film brings out so much passion in people. Maybe not the best analogy...but it's like the argument of whether the Beatles were really that great of a rock band, or were they just amazingly lucky with timing. Being the first of a new generation. ( for the record, I think the Beatles were great).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DWA

The PGF is the only bigfoot film that has been analyzed by people in directly relevant fields who vouch for its authenticity.  Simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockape

The PGF has several things going for it.

 

It was the first, so having been around so long made it more famous.

 

Even though it's shaky, you actually get a good look at the subject and that subject looks like what we expect a bigfoot to look like.

 

Even though there is reason to doubt, there is no real smoking gun that shows it to be 100% fake.

 

It was done well before CGI and for my money Patty looks better than any sci-fi effort of that time. Therefore even if it is fake it holds equal fascination for me, because if they faked it I'd like to know how they did it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The PGF has several things going for it.

 

It was the first, so having been around so long made it more famous.

 

Even though it's shaky, you actually get a good look at the subject and that subject looks like what we expect a bigfoot to look like.

 

Even though there is reason to doubt, there is no real smoking gun that shows it to be 100% fake.

 

It was done well before CGI and for my money Patty looks better than any sci-fi effort of that time. Therefore even if it is fake it holds equal fascination for me, because if they faked it I'd like to know how they did it.

 

Well said

 

and I can't argue with any of that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

The PGF is the only bigfoot film that has been analyzed by people in directly relevant fields who vouch for its authenticity.  Simple as that.

Didn't some experts vouch for the Freeman video and the Marx video as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I think there is a problem with the experts. Patty is a cow ( a Cash cow that is). Its hard to trust the findings of a scientist who's livelihood and/or reputation depends on the continued assumption that the film is genuine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DWA

I don't think there is anyone in the world whose livelihood depends upon their position on this topic.  Boy, there better not be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch

Maybe not livelihood, but there are definitely several people who stake their reputations around the pgf.

 

And maybe just a little bit of their livelihood as well.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MIB

Didn't some experts vouch for the Freeman video and the Marx video as well?

 

At least regarding the Freeman footage, I've been unable to see what the so called experts have a problem with.  Seems their eyesight or imagination is a lot better than mine.  I've never been convinced he was hoaxing.   That requires accepting unsupported innuendo as truth.   The tracks that seem to be cited most as proof of hoaxing mimic exactly what I do in a particular situation that is relevant, the only difference is I'm wearing boots.   

 

The ironic thing is I watched the Freeman footage to see the hoax I'd been told about.  Instead, I came away thinking the hoax-claimers are the hoaxers and that Paul was probably on the up and up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xion Comrade

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM_oVOg3hBk

 

That is the only video I have ever seen that was pertaining to Bigfoot, not a obvious hoax, and still clear enough to be able to see the figure. That one is my #1, #2 is the PGF, and #3 is Scott Herriot's video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockape

^ You're kidding, right? It doesn't get more ambiguous than that Timbergiant video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xion Comrade

^ You're kidding, right? It doesn't get more ambiguous than that Timbergiant video.

 

The only way that video could be any better is if it was shooting the creatures face the entire time....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockape

Or if you could see something that doesn't look like a dust mop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Xion Comrade

Or if you could see something that doesn't look like a dust mop.

 

You're kidding, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockape

Nope. Absolutely serious. It's a totally worthless piece of video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...