JDL Posted November 26, 2015 Posted November 26, 2015 Even the most ardent bigfoot proponent is often very critical of new media and claims related to bigfoot. So what are the things that you consider to be dead giveaways that what you are looking at is a hoax? For me, one of the things that causes me to immediately reject a video is if the subject is looking down at the ground when it walks, as if it can't see where it is putting its feet and has to be careful in doing so. I don't usually look at the ground when I walk around in my natural environment, I can't think of any animals that habitually do so, and I don't see how a bigfoot could effectively live if it has to walk around with its head down. The only time I have really done this as a matter of course is when I have been wearing a chem-bio protective mask and overgarment (MOPP gear). When wearing a gas mask, you have limited peripheral vision, your hearing is impaired, and the boots are prone to get caught on tent pegs and other obstacles. Not to mention the heat load and greater effort to breathe while wearing the outfit. I believe the same would be true for a man in a bigfoot suit. Realistically we are able to walk around with our heads up because our peripheral vision complements our gait, so we have a general sense of the area around us, and because we are naturally accustomed to the coordination, movement and balance of our own bodies. So when I see a video with a bigfoot walking along looking at the ground and stepping carefully, I conclude that the subject is a human in a suit. One unfamiliar with the environment in which it is walking, one whose tactile sense of the ground is inhibited by oversized footwear, or one whose peripheral vision is restricted by a headpiece making it necessary for them to look down to see where they are walking, and one who is unaccustomed to the change in coordination, movement and balance due to the suit. Add to that a level of discomfort due to heat load from the suit and impaired access to fresh air. When a bigfoot moves or walks around it should do so with a natural degree of coordination and apparent comfort to be credible to me. 2
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 26, 2015 Posted November 26, 2015 ^^Maybe this is why Patterson chose to make his film in the open in daylight on a sandbar that was not heavily littered with debris through enough of it to allow the suit mime to move with a reasonable degree of freedom. If bigfoot is the master of the forest able to evade any and all comers you can bet it should be able navigate it's environment as well as a bird navigates the sky.
Guest Posted November 26, 2015 Posted November 26, 2015 Maybe also he built a time machine, hired Andy Sirkis between his Gollum gigs, put him on human growth hormone to get a foot taller, and put him in the suit whipped up from horsehide in an afternoon.... I'll admit it's really unlikely, but skeptics seem to believe in the most illogical things.
Guest Posted November 26, 2015 Posted November 26, 2015 was not heavily littered with debris LoL! The area was heavily littered with branches and stuff from a recent flood. Thats why they caught her, the area was cleared of the normal heavy foliage. Total rainforest now. Also in soft sand. Bla bla bla. Anything that promises to "git the foots" is suspicious. At this point in time everything is suspect instantly, as BF is a hot social topic. There are too many moronic male egos involved with this topic, theys alls wants to finds the foots, and git them some re cog ni tion. This done be a problemo for truth and honesty, and plus there have been a dozen well known hoaxes, misinformational nonsense, and bugaboos that done make anyones story suspicious. If Olympic Project or some other credible group comes up with something that may be different, but as we have seen from a popular Blogtalk that sensationalized BF encounters, the BS is flying out of the monkeyshack at a high rate of speed.
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 26, 2015 Posted November 26, 2015 was not heavily littered with debris LoL! The area was heavily littered with branches and stuff from a recent flood. Thats why they caught her, the area was cleared of the normal heavy foliage. Total rainforest now. Also in soft sand. Bla bla bla. Anything that promises to "git the foots" is suspicious. At this point in time everything is suspect instantly, as BF is a hot social topic. There are too many moronic male egos involved with this topic, theys alls wants to finds the foots, and git them some re cog ni tion. This done be a problemo for truth and honesty, and plus there have been a dozen well known hoaxes, misinformational nonsense, and bugaboos that done make anyones story suspicious. If Olympic Project or some other credible group comes up with something that may be different, but as we have seen from a popular Blogtalk that sensationalized BF encounters, the BS is flying out of the monkeyshack at a high rate of speed. was not heavily littered with debris LoL! The area was heavily littered with branches and stuff from a recent flood. Thats why they caught her, the area was cleared of the normal heavy foliage. Total rainforest now. Also in soft sand. Bla bla bla. Anything that promises to "git the foots" is suspicious. At this point in time everything is suspect instantly, as BF is a hot social topic. There are too many moronic male egos involved with this topic, theys alls wants to finds the foots, and git them some re cog ni tion. This done be a problemo for truth and honesty, and plus there have been a dozen well known hoaxes, misinformational nonsense, and bugaboos that done make anyones story suspicious. If Olympic Project or some other credible group comes up with something that may be different, but as we have seen from a popular Blogtalk that sensationalized BF encounters, the BS is flying out of the monkeyshack at a high rate of speed. Yup That's exactly what I sad. The sandbar while it had clumps of debris as we all can see was largely open. This is evident by this photo that John Green took of the site . It was most certainly not a tangle of undergrowth. It was open and flat. How bout that, open and flat and well lit. Maybe also he built a time machine, hired Andy Sirkis between his Gollum gigs, put him on human growth hormone to get a foot taller, and put him in the suit whipped up from horsehide in an afternoon.... I'll admit it's really unlikely, but skeptics seem to believe in the most illogical things. Time machine is a far more likely possibility than a really really real bigfoot. And trust me a time machine is about as unlikely as unlikely gets.
Guest Posted November 26, 2015 Posted November 26, 2015 (edited) Hmmm, Well, Paulides Hoopla project had one description of a BF as a ''Patty'' type, but some of the others were way more human looking. That Reservation is a few miles from the Patty film. Well, for a skeptic, your making some good points, however, she has been anatomically analyzed and shown that no human could walk like her, and have muscle movement like we see in the FILM, not video etc etc etc, so yea, it WAS (most likely) a perfect storm. Notice they DIDN"T use ''forest cover to try to cover up the ''monkey suit''. Duh. Slap that baby back at you!!!! totally out in the open, no fear of being found out as fake, where they could have made the monkey suit in and out of forest cover, still made a film, but not exposed themselves to good, no perfect level of scrutiny. Etc..... bla bla Bla!!! And there in lies the problem for current BF stalkers, and why stalking BF is a waste of time, FOREST COVER!!!! (See Florida Skunk Ape from Coast to Coast website) http://www.coasttocoastam.com/pages/bigfoot-footage-from-lettuce-lake-park-fl The odds are ALREADY way way way...against you finding some, then you have to deal with the dense forest cover, making good capture in the millions against one odds.(Still waiting for the Olympic Project night video, so 2 videos in 5 years if Bobo was correct about this info) Waste of your life and time, but hey, I'm only friggin' WAG, what the hey do I know, I need to be looking for some more suspected Squatch - Poop, as its near Christmas time and R/A is running low! (That being said, I have stated before, and Bobo, on Coast to Coast recently also stated, there ARE people who DO have EXCELLENT film, video of real BF's, but CHOOSE NOT TO PUBLISH IT!! ) I will not publish mine, it will be kept, well, don't know where, but it aint going out online, or on a disc in the mail to the few people I might show it to, if and when... ) They are already messing with time-machines, they can do some weird stuff with quantum physics already, and we are basicly mentally retarded monkeys, this is IQ stuff of around 180 or less, even 160, which is retarded compared to where we will be in 100 years with genetic engineering. Probably only be able to go forward though, backward would mess the universe up really bad.) Edited November 26, 2015 by Wag
Old Dog Posted November 26, 2015 Posted November 26, 2015 ^^Maybe this is why Patterson chose to make his film in the open in daylight on a sandbar that was not heavily littered with debris through enough of it to allow the suit mime to move with a reasonable degree of freedom. If bigfoot is the master of the forest able to evade any and all comers you can bet it should be able navigate it's environment as well as a bird navigates the sky. Absolutely, because every one knows that when you walk, you ALWAYS chose the path with the most crap in your way. Why would you want to walk in a clear area when you have all kind of debris and branches that you could walk through instead? I imagine that Bigfoot would chose a path that is just as congested as we would.
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 26, 2015 Posted November 26, 2015 Hmmm, Well, Paulides Hoopla project had one description of a BF as a ''Patty'' type, but some of the others were way more human looking. That Reservation is a few miles from the Patty film. Well, for a skeptic, your making some good points, however, she has been anatomically analyzed and shown that no human could walk like her, and have muscle movement like we see in the FILM, not video etc etc etc, so yea, it WAS (most likely) a perfect storm. Notice they DIDN"T use ''forest cover to try to cover up the ''monkey suit''. Duh. Slap that baby back at you!!!! totally out in the open, no fear of being found out as fake, where they could have made the monkey suit in and out of forest cover, still made a film, but not exposed themselves to good, no perfect level of scrutiny. Etc..... bla bla Bla!!! And there in lies the problem for current BF stalkers, and why stalking BF is a waste of time, FOREST COVER!!!! (See Florida Skunk Ape from Coast to Coast website) http://www.coasttocoastam.com/pages/bigfoot-footage-from-lettuce-lake-park-fl The odds are ALREADY way way way...against you finding some, then you have to deal with the dense forest cover, making good capture in the millions against one odds.(Still waiting for the Olympic Project night video, so 2 videos in 5 years if Bobo was correct about this info) Waste of your life and time, but hey, I'm only friggin' WAG, what the hey do I know, I need to be looking for some more suspected Squatch - Poop, as its near Christmas time and R/A is running low! (That being said, I have stated before, and Bobo, on Coast to Coast recently also stated, there ARE people who DO have EXCELLENT film, video of real BF's, but CHOOSE NOT TO PUBLISH IT!! ) I will not publish mine, it will be kept, well, don't know where, but it aint going out online, or on a disc in the mail to the few people I might show it to, if and when... ) They are already messing with time-machines, they can do some weird stuff with quantum physics already, and we are basicly mentally retarded monkeys, this is IQ stuff of around 180 or less, even 160, which is retarded compared to where we will be in 100 years with genetic engineering. Probably only be able to go forward though, backward would mess the universe up really bad.) They kept the film short, they kept the camera in motion, they kept the subject a safe distance from the camera to prevent the camera from picking up too much detail. Then to ice the cake they played the living bejesus out of the camera master before proper copies could be made so there isn't even an unmarred version of the film to draw detail from.
Guest Posted November 27, 2015 Posted November 27, 2015 (edited) Subject was 100 or so feet from camera, footage is longest of any BF, over 1 minute, 10 or so seconds, camera was in bag, he had to turn it ON, get it out of BAG, focus it and shoot the footage, and still got over 1 minute. Then, it was IN THE OPENED, as you mentioned, defeating your own argument, because it would have been much safer to shoot it in the woods. defying any logic if this was meant to be a fake. Also, this is 1968, was not defined as a FEMALE for 3 years later, silicone was NOT in use at the time, wwhere is all the great info on fake BOOBS??? Why did they wait 3 years????? As usual, there will be no answers to these old ancient million times asked questions. Really, who would be STUPID enough, as you put it, to FILM IN BROAD DAYLIGHT, A FAKE BIGFOOT SUIT!!??????? I guess Gimlin should thank you for FOREVER showing that if this was a FAKE, they DID EVERYTHING WRONG!! You have been WAGGED!!! Edited November 27, 2015 by Wag
JDL Posted November 27, 2015 Author Posted November 27, 2015 As Wag has mentioned, the modern forensic analysis of the Patterson film done by National Geographic concluded that the subject of the film could not be human. I'm also amazed at the level of credit some folks impute to Roger Patterson. I'm sure he was an intelligent guy, but he has been elevated to mastermind genius in order to explain away as many aspects of the film and conditions surrounding it as possible. The Freeman film always looked fake to me because of the way the subject moves, looking down at the ground and carefully placing its feet.
Yuchi1 Posted November 27, 2015 Posted November 27, 2015 Wonder if Crowlogic is a hunter or outdoorsperson? Game animals (deer, etc.) will take the path of least resistance the vast majority of the time. Debris can be arranged (along established game trails) so as to funnel their movement to a more conducive kill shot, et. al..
ShadowBorn Posted November 27, 2015 Moderator Posted November 27, 2015 Dead giveaways Well for myself they would be the obvious things that are in front of you while in the field. Like those tree formations that are easy to find, or the foot prints that one finds right away. I mean if you are on a trail and all of sudden come up on a print that is on a trail well you have to conclude that it was placed there to be found on purpose. The same goes with the tree formations that one finds all of a sudden and just seems way to odd. I just do not give into them until you can further investigate them. We have to assume that every thing has human intervention until furthered investigated. I can honestly say that yes people do strange things out in the wilderness. Not all of us are in the mind of what we find or hear, what we can is further investigate the strangeness. The truth is out there we just need to look for it.
MarkGlasgow Posted November 28, 2015 Posted November 28, 2015 ^^Maybe this is why Patterson chose to make his film in the open in daylight on a sandbar that was not heavily littered with debris through enough of it to allow the suit mime to move with a reasonable degree of freedom. If bigfoot is the master of the forest able to evade any and all comers you can bet it should be able navigate it's environment as well as a bird navigates the sky. So your previously held belief that Patterson captured one of the last BF alive on film has shifted somewhat? Looks like someone may have been brainwashed by the critical thinking crowd over the last 6 months.
Guest Crowlogic Posted November 28, 2015 Posted November 28, 2015 (edited) No no brainwashing at at all The state of bigfoot culture and bigfoot media is all that is needed to see it for what it is. The brain washing is when the proponents layer up excuses on top of excuses for why the beast remains ever elusive. You know them already I'm sure , they can sense game cameras, they post infallible lookouts, they are masters of stealth, they have fool proof ways of disposing of their dead and not a single one has ever run afoul of anything we humans do that might kill one. You know like a car or a train or a truck. So go right ahead live the adventure, tell yourself anything and everything except the truth. My days dawn without bigfoot being in the world and I don't have to make excuses for why it isn't. What does your world dawn like? Wonder if Crowlogic is a hunter or outdoorsperson? Game animals (deer, etc.) will take the path of least resistance the vast majority of the time. Debris can be arranged (along established game trails) so as to funnel their movement to a more conducive kill shot, et. al.. Yes I have hunted, I was also an archer. I'm a lifelong hiker and camper as well. John Green's photo shows a rather pleasant topography for the filmsite in the era of the PGF. All one needs to do is watch the PGF and it's as plain as the bright early afternoon sunshine that the mime walked easily across that sandbar. Edited November 28, 2015 by Crowlogic
Recommended Posts