Patterson Film Stabilized

I said this years back that I had a person who worked for me for 4+ years and he personally knew one of the families, not sure today which one, but he grew up close to them in Yakima County WA. What he told me was that the actual family laughs when BF is mentioned and is surprised people still think it might all be real. So you all might say, OK Xtrozero who cares about your point of view, you are just a guy on the Internet, but for me, it's enough to convince me it was a hoax since I find the person to be very credible.

Living in Washington in the so-called BF area it also surprises me they went to northern CA looking for BF when right in their own backyard are Mt Adams and Mt St Helene which are like the mecca areas for BF. The true tell tell for me is that Patterson was highly interested in BF long before the film and was already working on a documentary of BF and then BAM! he gets the holy grail of BF.

In 1967? Bob Hieronymus mentioned, but I dont know if that was possible 1967; at least, not in such an authentic and believeable manner as seen in P-G film..a reply to: Xtrozero

Thank you, Sir!

So, What I'd like to know is, are the methods used by this Yutuber, Thinker Thunker sound, scientifcally in this vid (btw, hes got alot of other Bigfoot vids that are really cool as well)?. I mean, the whole degree of knee/calf bending analysis?
I, for one, would like to know how, exactly, he obtained those measurements from the video, and furthermore, are the measurments accurate? Finally, do ALL Humans really have this 52 degree bend that he states whereas other hominids somewhere around 20 deg. more?
a reply to: Quintilian

Good point, but weren't there , like, a slew of sightings in the northern CA area that P-G went during that time? I feel like in the late 50's-60's , northern CA was the Bigfoot hot spot far exceeding all others (could be wrong, of course). a reply to: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Adirman
Good point, but weren't there , like, a slew of sightings in the northern CA area that P-G went during that time? I feel like in the late 50's-60's , northern CA was the Bigfoot hot spot far exceeding all others (could be wrong, of course). a reply to: Xtrozero

I find it fishy that he was working on a BF documentary and this happened. Might be pure luck too if he was there BECAUSE he was highly interested in BF.

I still believe my friend and workmate in the end about his experiences in this case.

Yes, that does seem a bit suspicious; bothers me, too. a reply to: Xtrozero

What bothers me about supposed hoax admissions and deathbed confessions about this stuff, is that they never come from the people who actually made the stuff famous. The guy who claims to be in the suit is neither patterson nor Gimlin. The guy who claimed the Surgeons photo was a fake, wasn't the surgeon etc.

Why do you take the word of a person claiming hoax as fact when that could be just as easily hoaxed?

originally posted by: misfitsquid
What bothers me about supposed hoax admissions and deathbed confessions about this stuff, is that they never come from the people who actually made the stuff famous. The guy who claims to be in the suit is neither patterson nor Gimlin. The guy who claimed the Surgeons photo was a fake, wasn't the surgeon etc.

Why do you take the word of a person claiming hoax as fact when that could be just as easily hoaxed?

1000%

Somebody claims hoax and everybody wipes their hands of it. The burden of proof should work both ways. "Framework" is what concerns me with PG. They went looking for a Sasquatch and not only did they find one, it acted out of character and walked a literal catwalk for them instead of hastily making its way into the foliage. No, it made sure to get caught on film. And where is the film of it crashing into that foliage? And why didn't they pursue it? They went looking for one...wouldn't they have pursued it at least a little farther, or wasn't that in the script?

Yeah, but MAN...that was one hell of an authentic ape suit if faked! Everytime I watch that footage I am in awe as to its realism. I mean, forget the fact that it was shot in '67 - even now, itd be a hell of a realistic ape suit!! a reply to: BiffTannen

originally posted by: Adirman
Yeah, but MAN...that was one hell of an authentic ape suit if faked! Everytime I watch that footage I am in awe as to its realism. I mean, forget the fact that it was shot in '67 - even now, itd be a hell of a realistic ape suit!! a reply to: BiffTannen

Agreed. My scepticism aside, I never tire of the PG film. I absolutely love it.