Jump to content
Bill

Think Like A Hoaxer

Recommended Posts

Patterson-Gimlin
1 hour ago, Bill said:

I don't offer any appraisal of footprint casts, but the PGF is real, and the trackway filmed is real. Any rigorous analysis will support this conclusion, to the highest certainty photographic evidence can achieve.

I understand your position of course and appreciate and admire your efforts. 

The last thing you said is exactly why only a specimen will provide absolute certainty. 

49 minutes ago, PBeaton said:

My opinion, from talkin' to Bob about it/the tracks/casts, this is Roger makin' a cast of the left foot from the film sight October 20th 1967. 

 

If you look at the ground, that dark area turns off towards the upper right, my opinion, the darkness could likely be caused by the moister in a lower in elevation. That may have been helpful in capturing a decent print, thus Roger cast it.

 

It's also my opinion, the sasquatch filmed was walkin' towards the right.

 

The tracks cast by Roger as told to me by Bob, correlate to what Richard Henry described in his diagram/map of the PGF site, as well as the photos from George Haas at the film site of John an Jim studyin' the remains of the casts/tracks.

 

Bob told me he never filmed Roger makin' a demonstration cast.  

 

I believe the casts were made just to the left of this clip.

giphy.gif

 

 

Richard Henry PGF Site, BFT 11-2004 (2).jpg

Thanks Pat for that awesome information. How do you explain only one decent track worth casting in the lomey type soil in that particular area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

See the source image

Patterson-Gimlin,

You're welcome. My guess, the next track is bein' obscured by Roger as I believe she is walkin' to the right.

Look how poor the first track shows up compared to the second track in the trackway composite.

 

Pat...

 

 

 

TrackwaycompositeWIP.jpg

Edited by PBeaton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

Also.....in the film clip shown one can see that when Roger turns toward Gimlin he is showing his unshaven face. It says that the sun and his face angle when looking down makes him appear clean shaven. Also the sun angle is lower as expected on the photos of Roger later in the day holding the casts. Again the sun angle plays a part in that it makes his "beard" look darker which, with a few more hours, of growth would also make sense.

Edited by hiflier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc
BFF Donor
10 hours ago, PBeaton said:

 

Bob told me he never filmed Roger makin' a demonstration cast.  

 

 

What are the things Bob did claim to film?   Obviously the PGF encounter segment where they come upon Patty is said to be filmed by Roger.   

 

What are the things said to have been filmed by Bob Gimlin on either reel?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

hiflier,

 

It's my understandin'/belief the images of Roger with the two casts was filmed after their return from Bluff Creek. 

 

 

Backdoc,

 

I had asked Bob about the images of Roger pourin the cast because there was speculation it was a "practice or demonstration" piece, Bob said he never filmed Roger makin' a practice/demo cast.

There are images some here have seen, that shows Roger pouring a cast into a track he made for his documentary. I've not seen the film, but I've seen stills, Roger looks to pretty much the same, but is wearin' his jacket, pourin' an showin' the cast on a rocky, grassy an hilly landscape, looks nothin' like the Bluff Creek as we've seen.

Krantz had mentioned in his book, that Roger had made a practice cast an filmed it, a few days later Roger filmed the PGF. This was incorrect, the footage of Roger makin' that cast was filmed 3-4 months prior to Bluff Creek, east of Yakima.   

 

Pat...

Edited by PBeaton
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×