Featured Sponsors

Featured Post
Latest Post
Showing posts with label Roger Patterson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Roger Patterson. Show all posts

The famous Patterson-Gimlin bigfoot footage is by far the most recognized bigfoot video on the plant. It has been debated, picked over, talked about, stabilized and enhanced to no end.

But now the footage has received a pretty impressive makeover. It has been given a 4k enhancement that might reveal more detail than we have ever seen before.

I'll not babble on.....here is the footage.

Here is another historical track and casting from Bluff Creek. I'm sharing these older reports to show that there was a history of bigfoot tracks in the area long before Roger Patterson filmed his famous "Patty" footage in 1967.

The casting below was originally cast back in 1960, by a world famous big game hunter and bigfoot investigator.

Laird Meadow - Courtesy of cliffbarackman.com
This is a report that is very historic but is often overlooked or forgotten completely. This footprint was found by Pat Graves on Laird Meadow Road, near Bluff Creek, California in 1963. Pat was a Forest Service Timber Cruiser. Roger Patterson was informed about the track by Pat, himself.

Patterson would of course hurry to the area in hopes of seeing the foot tracks. He made it to the tracks, documented them and made castings.

Here is the one of the casting and more information about the tracks.


In this episode, we travel back to 1967 and follow two cowboys out on an adventure of a life time.
An unique look at the events surrounding the filming of the Patterson-Gimlin film. It's a glance back to a day that is still debated and talked about. The filming of a bigfoot!


I hope you enjoy this episode.


Of course, there are many more details and questions about that historic day but I wanted to keep the episode short an on point. 

Thanks
~Tom~

This post by Thomas Marcum, Thomas is the founder/leader of the cryptozoology and paranormal research organization known as The Crypto Crew. Over 20 years experience with research and investigation of unexplained activity, working with video and websites. A trained wild land firefighter and a published photographer, and poet.


This post sponsored in part by
(Interested in sponsoring a story? then send us an Email!)


This post by Thomas Marcum, Thomas is the founder/leader of the cryptozoology and paranormal research organization known as The Crypto Crew. Over 20 years experience with research and investigation of unexplained activity, working with video and websites. A trained wild land firefighter and a published photographer, and poet.


Willow Creek
Rated: Not Rated, Running time: 80 minutes 
Director: Bobcat Goldthwait

First let me start off with this, if you do not have an interest in Bigfoot or know a little about the history or behavior of Bigfoot, then do not even attempt to watch this movie.

This movie is about a novice Bigfoot researcher and his totally unbelieving girlfriend going to camp in the famous Bluff Creek area where Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin shot the famous Patty footage in 1967.

At first I found the film somewhat entertaining with the funny one liners and seeing all the Bigfoot related spots in the Bluff Creek area. I really liked the look of the Bigfoot Burger, I would like to try one of them. For those who don't know, the Bigfoot burger is a giant hamburger on bread that looks like a foot and let me tell ya it looked good.

There are also some interviews with people who tell about the area and sightings. During this part of the film it seems as if the subject of Bigfoot is being made fun of. It seems the opportunity was lost to really drive home the fact about Bigfoot sightings in the area. The interviewees come off as weird and slightly crazy. Oddly, the Cliff Barackman interview was left out of the movie but is offered in the bonus segment of the DVD. Barackman's interview was entertaining and informative, why it was left out of the final version of the film is beyond me. 

In about the middle of the film there is a real lull. It takes place while the young couple is inside the tent and are awaken by odd sounds. During this part of the film the audio is so low you can't hear what the couple are saying and the odd sounds are hard to hear. Later as the sounds get closer you can hear wood knocks, howls and some rocks being thrown. Sadly this as close to a Bigfoot you get in the film.

Now for the ending, as the Bigfoots stalk the two young campers out of the area, we are treated with more howls and rock throwing. Once night falls the now lost couple are sitting in the dark and scared. Then we get a glimpse of a bizarre naked female figure, possibly a local missing woman ..... I'll stop right there with the details but let me finish by just saying I found the ending weird. Director Bobcat Goldthwait has a history of weird and thought provoking films to his credit, so for some this might fall into that category.

Overall the film had some moments but in the end I was disappointed in it.

You can purchase the film on Blu-ray by Clicking Here 
Or watch it on Amazon Instant Streaming by Clicking Here

 Rating: 2 out of 5

 
Thanks
~Tom~
            








This post sponsored in part by
(Interested in sponsoring a story? then send us an Email!

John Johnsen Interview
John L. Johnsen interview
[Disclaimer: The views expressed by Mr. Johnsen does not necessarily reflect the views of The Crypto Crew or it's members.]

By TCC Team Member Dorraine Fisher
Professional Writer, a nature and wildlife enthusiast who has written for many magazines. Get Dorraine's book The Book Of Blackthorne!



[DF's Review of Hoax of the Century can be found HERE]

Bigfoot: A Skeptic’s Point of View
Interview With Videographer John L. Johnsen

Bigfoot videographer, John L. Johnsen no longer believes in Bigfoot. I spoke with him recently in length. He’s the co-creator of the documentary, The Hoax Of The Century – The Movie, that attempts to expose the Patterson-Gimlin film as a hoax. I was getting ready to review the DVD recently when it all took an interesting turn. It seems the more I learned about John Johnsen, the more intriguing his story became. John has had an interesting history with the subject of bigfoot, including associations with Dr. Jeff Meldrum and reputed hoaxer Tom Biscardi. In fact, he partnered with Biscardi in the making of this documentary. And this has caused controversy surrounding it ever since.

So John wanted to set the record straight about this film and his association with Biscardi, and give his views on the subject of Bigfoot and maybe a little glimpse into the reasons why he believes as he does now.

Dorraine: John, tell us about your work.

John: I am a retired freelance photographer and videographer with experience in chemical and digital photography and analog and digital video acquisition and editing. I lean towards nature topics and/or historical events, but have been involved in main stream filmmaking as well.

Dorraine: What started your interest in Bigfoot?

John: Bigfoot was an accidental topic for me. I was looking for a subject to "pay my dues" in as I switched gears in my retirement, going from event, corporate and product photography and videography to a more entertainment based format. So, I needed a subject that would be fun and interesting. At the time I retired the now defunct Outdoor Life Channel, a cable network, was featuring a show entitled "Mysterious Encounters" where a group of people traveled around the country following up on reports of strange events and creatures. So, using that show as a model, I decided to do a similar project with the idea that I would limit it to a single film before seeking a more serious venture. Obviously it didn’t quite work out that way as I found the topic exciting and intriguing.

Dorraine:  What are your views on the subject of the existence of Bigfoot?

John: When I started my first film I was open minded to a fault, but a general skeptic. Yet there seemed to be so much corroborating, anecdotal evidence that I was intrigued by the possibility that there was something to it all. I gradually became a believer, more or less, and that peaked when, in 2010, I had an ‘encounter" in the Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area in western Kentucky. However, close scrutiny and the aid of Dr. Jeff Meldrum made short work of that and my belief was dashed by the elaborate hoax that had been perpetrated on me. I have to say that I now am a dyed in the wool skeptic and believe that, after six years in the field with all sorts of well-meaning people, and some who were not so well-meaning; the only place Bigfoot lives is in the minds of the believers. 

Dorraine: Can you elaborate more on your association with Dr. Meldrum and the incident that seemed to clinch your skepticism?  

John: I sent the alleged casting obtained from the LBL to Dr. Meldrum in 2011. His examination confirmed what I already suspected; that the casting was a fabrication made with the palm and heal of a human hand and with human fingers substituted for the toe impressions. In other words: a fake.

Dorraine:  How did you get involved with Tom Biscardi?

John: Tom Biscardi has an internet radio show. I was listening one night because I was tipped off that he would be mentioning me in a disparaging manor, criticizing me for being an "unknown" in the genre and knowing nothing about the topic. When I heard him start in about me on the show I called him on his personal cell number and left a message. He wasn’t expecting that. He called me back afterwards and we went at it. He apologized for making the comments and said he would like to meet me in person. He was coming to Carrabelle, Florida, to look at sightings there of an alleged black panther and wanted to know if I would be interested in joining him. I accepted as the very worst that could happen was that I simply made the two hour drive for nothing. When he met me he again apologized and paid for my lodging and some of my food as well. I went along with the crew to the areas where the cat had been seen and, after finding no evidence, we returned to the base hotel where we talked some. Biscardi said he wanted to do another film, Bigfoot Lives III, from a library of footage not used in his other two films. He also needed trailers made for a couple of older projects. He offered to pay me a percentage from the sales of these films and I accepted the job. But in the long run, the relationship soured over the Hoax project and I ended up having to get my media attorney involved to get satisfaction. The details of that are private, but suffice it to say that despite winning a small victory, it cost me more money than I received from Biscardi to get that satisfaction.

Dorraine: Did you know in advance that involvement with Biscardi could be risky? And if so,
what made it worth the risk?

John: I definitely knew Biscardi’s reputation before going in. I knew about the frozen Bigfoot fiasco in Georgia and the captive Bigfoot in California from years ago. I also had heard dozens of stories from the web (they can’t put anything on the internet that isn’t true…I heard that on the internet…), internet radio shows and forums about his escapades but I am the kind of person who will not make an assumption about someone based solely on the opinions of others. So, I went into the agreement with both eyes wide open and looking for problems. The main thing I wanted to prove or disprove were the claims by others that he was a hoaxer. Some people involved with the frozen Bigfoot fiasco claimed that, once he, Biscardi, discovered that the Georgia Boys were a fake, he became the driving force behind the whole thing. Others close to that incident weren’t talking but there was an unspoken air of agreement. As to what it was that made it worth it; I really didn’t see any benefit other than a few bucks coming in and an opportunity to see what was on his archived footage.

Dorraine: Are you still involved with him? Has this caused problems for you as far as marketing
the documentary? 

John: I am no longer associated with Biscardi. I found no proof that he was involved with any hoaxes, but I did find proof, through personal experience, that he was a liar and a cheat. I terminated the relationship during the marketing phase of the project and sought the aid of my media lawyer to obtain satisfaction. I will not go into those proceedings except to say that I was, possibly, the only person to get blood from a stone.

Dorraine:  What prompted the production of this documentary? Whose idea was it and how
did it all start?

John: As Biscardi and I were discussing our other projects, the topic of the PG Film came up. Biscardi told me that he had footage of Heironimus and Philip Morris discussing their roles in the film. I proposed the project and it began in earnest as Tom went to interview Greg Long near Yakima and I went to Kentucky to interview Leroy Blevins. There was also footage from an investor in the project who gave Roger Patterson money to make the film.

Dorraine: What's your association with Greg Long, if any?

John: I have never visited with or spoken to Greg Long except to clarify certain aspects of his bio.

Dorraine: You described yourself as more of an open-minded/ skeptical believer when you started delving into the subject of bigfoot. And now you're definitely a more serious skeptic. What would you say drove your beliefs about the subject back then when you were more open to the possibility? What reasoning was behind that thinking at the time? And what drives your more serious skepticism now? What's at the core of it? What key thing changed in your mind?
 

John: The main thing that drove my on-the-fence belief was ignorance. I was ignorant of the way the so called Bigfoot Community functioned, or dysfunctioned. I had no idea where to begin so I began looking at forums. It took me months to find a forum with moderators and participants open minded enough to even talk to me. Then, the moderator at the time of the GCBRO, Bill Ribble, who is now deceased, set me up with a woman in Maydelle, Texas. She claimed to have a "clan" as she called it on her 160 acres of pine forest and creek bottoms. I arranged to visit her for the first field visit and off I went to Texas, a trip of some 1100 miles. My spirits were high all along the way. But when I arrived, a certain kind of reality set in, one that would repeat itself time after time in nearly every home visit scenario. The woman met me at a little general store in Maydelle. This place was in such poor repair that I had to literally walk around holes in the floor. We had some lunch and coffee and discussed the situation at her acreage, then I followed her to her home, a trailer set under some oak trees on a plot of land. It looked serene enough but as I approached, I saw that the trailer was dirty and in need of repair. There was yet another trailer, a single wide, which looked as if it had been dropped from the sky, its side torn open and groups of dogs and cats were moving in and out at will. There were two pit bulls chained up outside in the heat, and other dogs wandering the pasture amongst several sickly and starved looking horses. In a cage adjacent to the single wide trailer was a juvenile Turkey Vulture. In the yard was a pool of water which, as I approached, turned out to be raw sewage boiling up from an overflowing septic tank. Inside there were dirty cobwebs hanging off the ceiling every few inches, literally hundreds of them, and the furniture and carpeting looked as if someone had been mud wrestling on them.

  We had a few hours before dark so I asked her to show me around and examine the property. She led me to her Nissan pickup, which had a large dent in one fender. The interior was absolutely packed with old papers and other trash, some of which I could see were "final notices" sent by credit card companies. We started down the embankments towards the creek bottoms as she pointed out various areas of activity including a nest of some sort that was very intriguing. But after an afternoon, an evening and yet another hot, non-productive day, I decided to pack it in a day early and head over to Conroe for a conference where I would meet MK Davis for the first time. I had slept in her daughter’s old bedroom and despite sleeping fully clothed with my jeans tucked into my boots I received hundreds of flea bites. The shower in that bedroom did not work, so I used the one in the master. There was so much trash along the tub, sink and in the shower that I almost declined. Water for coffee in the morning and brushing my teeth came from bottled water kept in the fridge.

  When a friend of hers came over to discuss the film project with us I got a very rude awakening. I was told that I had to vacate the property due to the suspicion that I was a spy for the GCBRO and, because I copied my emails to Bill Ribble, I was "passing information" about the Texas folks’ plan to kill a bigfoot before the GCBRO did. Welcome to Texas, now GIT!

  That was my initiation into the wonderful world of Bigfoot, and things got worse from there. But if I lost my faith in peoples’ abilities to live in reasonable cleanliness, I still had my hopes high in finding out more about the mystery. But, in the end, I saw most of the people I went to interview, with rare exception, living in deplorable conditions and providing nothing of substance in the way of evidence. Then, in 2010, it came to a head in the Land Between the Lakes with a hoaxing and the following year in Alabama when an outside director I brought hijacked the project and ruined everyone’s experience. That was my final trip and association with bigfooters.

Dorraine:  Why do you think people in the Bigfoot community don't want to hear this information? 

John: If you were a true believer in a god, say, The Great Sam? You believed with your very soul in The Great Sam and accepted any and all things associated with The Great Sam, including personal accounts of people who claimed to have had a one on one encounter with The Great Sam. You are, by all standards, a follower of this god and would risk life and limb to defend his existence. Then, one day, you encounter a man who says that he invented The Great Sam as a hoax with the intent of cashing in on the myth. He tells you and shows you evidence of what he claims which would be very damning in a court of law. But, you refuse to believe him and call him a liar and a charlatan, even going so far as to defame him in public and in the media. This, I believe, is the trouble with believers in the PG Film. The basis for their belief in Bigfoot, in general, is rooted in their belief that the PG Film was real inasmuch as it showed a real, flesh and blood, Bigfoot creature. The PG Film has a religious quality to it and those who believe in it will not even consider the possibility that it was a fake. This amounts to a brand of fanaticism that has been demonstrated to be extremely dangerous, giving those who believe a sort of mission to squash the nay sayers. It gets VERY ugly at times around campfires and certainly in forums. Belief in something doesn’t make it real.

Dorraine: Many in the BF community reading this interview might say you were burned on a couple of bad experiences and you've allowed yourself to shut down completely to any possibility that the creature might exist. In a friendlier debate, like, say, one you'd have with me, what would you say to me if I posed that point? 

John: I would say that even the friendliest, cleanest living, most honest, kind and caring of the people I met did not produce a shred of evidence I could take to the bank, bar none.

Dorraine: Looking back on this, what would you have done differently, if anything, in regard
to this project?

John: The only changes I would have made would be in the manner with which I approached my partnership, not in the content of the film. 

Dorraine: I've looked on the internet, and can't find the documentary available anywhere significant except Tom Biscardi's website. What's the status on the DVD for you? Are you still marketing it? Is there anywhere else a person could obtain it?
 

John: I have made it my policy to make any of my films available no charge to what I consider people who are truly seeking the truth in this matter, who do not belong to organizations or clubs where the good of the organization comes before the truth, and who honestly want to see if anything I discovered can help them find the truth. So, if someone meeting those criteria comes to me and asks for a copy, I will see that they get one. However, if, in return, I hear that they have used the content of the film to make slanderous or libelous remarks about me or anyone in the films, I will put them on notice through my personal attorney and demand a very public retraction. In that respect I have been described as a Pit Bull on steroids, refusing to relinquish a hold on my quarry.

Dorraine:  What do you want people to understand about you and this documentary right now?

John: People need to put aside preconceived notions of this film that are based solely on opinions of others, and see the evidence as it really is. Greg Long has no agenda. He comes off as angry in the film but that is with good reason. He has been called a liar. Long is not a liar, he is a very well qualified investigative reporter and technical writer who had the good sense to go to Yakima and snoop around. Nobody did this…ever! Heironimus did not lie about wearing the suit. He wore it. Morris did not lie about selling the suit to Patterson. He sold the suit and the extra raw materials which Patterson used to craft the final product. Hieronimus’s mother did not lie about what she saw in the trunk of the car. Vilma Radford did not lie about giving Patterson money to invest in his film. These people told the truth. But, through the magic of hear-say and deliberate manipulation, they have all been made out to be liars. The truth is plain and simple; it was a hoax.

  As to me, I also have no agenda. But I have learned by experience over the course of more than six years of associating with the Bigfoot Community, that there is precious little truth to be found and the community shoots and eats it’s wounded. I set out on a single project that evolved into a quest for the truth and worked side by side with those in my films to find and share that truth. But, what I received instead was scorn and deception right from the very beginning.  God only knows what I would have received if I had been against them from the start.

 In closing I will reiterate what I have said before: if you truly believe that you have seen a Bigfoot, then you are in error, having mistaken some other animal or human for the creature. However, if you INSIST that it was Bigfoot, and no amount of common sense or reasoning can convince you otherwise, then you are, at best, delusional. Finally, if you are convinced that you have seen a Bigfoot and can speak telepathically with it then seek emergency psychiatric care.

Bigfoot got its start in Northern California around machinery owned by a man named Ray Wallace, and has crept into the very souls of our culture. It was a hoax, people…it was a hoax.

Dorraine: Thanks for talking to me about this, John. It’s been interesting and the film is definitely interesting, no matter what a person believes. ********DF

(John added later that he will be looking into possibly beginning sale of the DVD again on Amazon if the demand is there)

[DF's Review of Hoax of the Century can be found HERE]
 
©The Crypto Crew

 


 

This post sponsored in part by
(Interested in sponsoring a story? then send us an Email!

Patty under the gun
Roger Patterson's Film - Under the Gun
Hoax Of The Century
Review by

By TCC Team Member Dorraine Fisher
Professional Writer, a nature and wildlife enthusiast who has written for many magazines. Get Dorraine's book The Book Of Blackthorne!



[ DF's Interview with Videographer John L. Johnsen can be found HERE ]
 
Review: Hoax Of The Century – The Movie
Examining A Controversial Documentary

I’m a bigfoot believer. So when I was recently given a copy of "Hoax Of The Century – The Movie by a friend who is also a bigfoot believer, I thought seriously about NOT watching it. This movie attempts to refute the validity of the famous Patterson-Gimlin film. How ridiculous is that, I thought? Everyone knows that film is real. Right? But then I had to ask myself why I didn’t want to watch the documentary.

The Patterson-Gimlin film, the one bigfoot film that nearly everyone is familiar with, is the considered The Holy Grail of bigfoot evidence. It’s the one most in the bigfoot community believe to be the real and true film footage. It sets the standard for the appearance of this creature that nearly every bigfoot researcher uses to determine the validity of sightings reports and other video footage to this day. How many times have we heard a report and asked the storyteller, "Did it look like Patty? Did it look like the creature in the Patterson-Gimlin film?" Patty, as she is well-known, is considered the one real bigfoot that we use for our frame of reference. She’s been analyzed by National Geographic. She had to be real. Right?

This documentary, not currently available on Amazon, and now sold almost exclusively on Tom Biscardi’s website, a product of Grendel Films is about an hour long, written by Tom Biscardi, and produced by Tom Biscardi and videographer, John L. Johnsen, and goes about the task of following the investigation of Greg Long, author of The Making of Bigfoot, in a very detailed account of how they believe the film was hoaxed.

It asks the question rarely asked before. Why has so much emphasis been placed on this film and none on the maker of the film? It attacks the less-than-stellar reputation of Roger Patterson himself, a man who was described by many around him as often unemployed, often broke, and looking for ways to make a fast buck. A man who was once arrested for failing to return a camera he had borrowed from a local camera shop; a man who was known to have associated with Ray Wallace, the famous Washington State footprint hoaxer.

It claims that Patterson borrowed money from several individuals to make the film, including a lady named Vilma Radford, interviewed in the movie and now deceased, that loaned him $700.00 with the promise that profits from the film would pay her interest above and beyond that amount. Even though Radford typed up a legal contract for both parties to sign, (a document that was revealed in the documentary) and after she was warned by others not to loan Patterson the money. And incidentally, she attested to the fact that she was never repaid.

But there were a couple of things in the film that were very interesting to me personally.

A man named Bob Heironimus claims to have worn the suit that Philip Morris, a Hollywood costume designer, claimed to have designed as a gorilla suit and claimed was modified by Patterson. Heironimus claims he did the "performance" for Patterson for $1000.00, and tells his account of how the events unfolded that day in 1967. But the most interesting part of his story is his demonstration of the "Patty walk." Heironimus is seen in the documentary walking across his yard to a shed, and his normal walk is strikingly similar to Patty’s walk in the film. Striking enough to make you go "Hmmm!"

And the second thing is that I’ve always questioned why, if it was a hoax, would Patterson choose to make this creature a female? And, as the movie claims, Roger had early associations with famous pioneering researcher/author John Green from Canada. Green had collected a lot of information about bigfoot to which Patterson would have had access. This would include the very detailed, historic account of William Roe with a female bigfoot back in 1955 near Jasper, Alberta, Canada. After his encounter, Roe presented a drawing that bears an eerie resemblance to subject in the PG film. Did Patterson use Roe’s drawing to fashion a female bigfoot costume? Or was Patty real because she resembled Roe’s description? The documentary claims that Roe’s visual account could have easily been used by Patterson to refashion his gorilla suit into something more realistic.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg of what this documentary has to say. Every other argument we’ve ever made about the film being real is challenged here. Right down to the last detail. From the walk, to the elbow break, to the eye movement, etc. And it claims the PG film was embraced by the big name researchers at the time who knew that this "proof" of bigfoot could strengthen their own claims about the subject. It claims that the main motivating factor of all these key players in the bigfoot world choosing to believe Patterson’s claims was to make money.

John L. Johnsen’s collaboration with Tom Biscardi, a reputed hoaxer, would drive many to dismiss the film altogether. Could it be a complete fabrication by one accused of hoaxing himself? Absolutely. But, to be fair, it has an equal chance of being accurate and real based on the real witness interviews that are very detailed and backed up by others in Patterson’s hometown of Yakima, Washington.

But everything else aside, this documentary is well presented and thought provoking, and very thorough in the case it makes, whether you believe it or not. And it warrants a watch from any and all skeptics or anyone wanting to be well-rounded and objective about the subject of bigfoot.

And as I hesitated to watch it, and I didn’t like the story it had to tell, I knew I needed to keep some things in mind.

If the PG film was actually faked, what impact does that have on the community, and on bigfoot? What film evidence do we really have if not that? I have to admit it shook me a little to think about it. I felt for a minute like the very foundation of my beliefs was being stolen. But it’s important to remember that if the PG film is proved to be fake beyond a shadow of a doubt, that doesn’t prove in any way that bigfoot doesn’t exist. Far from it, because it doesn’t negate all the evidence that’s been collected by researchers over all these years and all their hard work in trying to find proof. All that work is completely relevant and important and it still stands up. Nothing can take that away.

But if you have a natural curiosity about this subject and you want to be very thorough in your bigfoot research, I recommend this film highly. You don’t have to like it. And you don’t have to agree with it. It’s just another side of the story. And, no matter what you end up thinking, it’s always good to hear the other side.
Rating: 5 out of 5
********DF
[ DF's Interview with Videographer John L. Johnsen can be found HERE ]





This post sponsored in part by
(Interested in sponsoring a story? then send us an Email!

Comparing bigfoot track castings.

(To view the larger photo Click Here )

I was looking around over at the Bigfoot Encounters website and ran across this comparison photo.
I find it very telling. It is clear that the fake wood track is not the same as the other castings.
Here is the close up of the Jerry Crew Track from 1958 that clearly shows this is not made with the fake wooden track by Wallace.


Now here is the close up of the Bob Titmus track also from 1958 and again clearly not made with the fake wooden Wallace track.

And last is the Roger Patterson track from 1964 and again clearly not made with the Wallace wooden track. One should also note this was about 3 years before Patterson filmed the bigfoot type creature that we call Patty.

After looking at this comparison it is clear that the Ray Wallace fake track is very different that the others. The Patterson, Crew and Titmus tracks appear to be more like a human foot track and the alignment of the toes seems much more real or believable.
This is a good example for us to study and note the differences between the tracks and the similarities.

Thanks
~Tom~



[Source:Bigfoot Encounters]
This post sponsored in part by
(Interested in sponsoring a story? then send us an Email!

The Crypto Show - Special guest is Dale Drinnon. Dale is an Anthropologist and we talked about the Patterson-Gimlin film from 1967. This was a very good show and I had fun talking to Dale. So could it have been a man in a suit? Give it a listen.
Thanks
~Tom~
 
©The Crypto Crew
 
 
 
This post sponsored in part by
(Interested in sponsoring a story? then send us an Email!
* My apologizes to MK Davis, I did not know it was him who did work on this,Part of the video we used was some of his work,I spent hours looking at many videos from various youtube accounts, Never seen MK Davis on the account or Credit would have been given at the first. I did spend countless hours going frame by frame,zooming and trying to pull out details. I compared it to many different youtube Patterson videos. I did advance it by adding in the head turn and more. Once again my apologies to MK Davis.

Patty squatted down


So You Still Don’t Think The Patterson-Gimlin Film Is A Real Sasquatch?

The Crypto Crew Offers Some Reasons To Reconsider

By TCC Team Member Dorraine Fisher


            It’s a neverending debate. Is it fact or faked?

            But after the countless scientific studies that have been conducted on the famous Patterson-Gimlin bigfoot film shot in Bluff Creek, California back in 1967, it still hasn’t been disproven. But I’m always surprised to find how many people still believe it’s a hoax. Didn’t several people confess to wearing the suit that day? Yes, and that makes it easy for some to settle for the idea of it being a hoax when they don’t know all the facts about the film. The story runs quite a bit deeper than many imagine.

            There are numerous discrepancies. As the film has been studied over and over again, many details can be found that point to it being the real deal...if one bothers to look.

Patty's Toes are seen moving,original frames - photo from Themunnsreport.com


            Up and down movement of the creature’s toes is one. This kind of movement in a costume isn’t possible. The creature’s calf muscles flex as she walks; also not possible in a suit. Many have tried to duplicate this muscle movement in a suit and not accomplished it as yet. And the open and closing motion of the mouth is not possible if it’s someone wearing a mask. But the biggest problem with the idea of it being a suit is that human proportions and ape proportions are not the same. Apes have must longer arms and a much longer upper lip making it impossible for a human to fit properly into a suit such as the one in the film. Human arms would be too short and not able to function like a creature, and the mask would not fit a human properly...and a hoaxer certainly would not be able to move its mouth in a mask as it struggled with this inconvenience.

            Bob Hieronimous was one of the guys who confessed to wearing the suit that day. But the subject in the film was found to be at least 6.5 feet tall. Other studies have showcased the possibility she was closer to 7.5 feet tall. But either way, Bob H. wasn’t tall enough to wear a suit that big.

Patty's Butt Crack


            Another thing that’s rarely discussed is a portion of the film at the very beginning when the camera was shaking. Patty was squatted down on the ground, looking for food, defecating, or drinking or eating. But with a little enhancement to the film, her butt crack can be seen pretty clearly. This is a strong detail that wasn’t being created in costumes back in the 1960s. It would have taken a lot of time and meticulous work to create such a compelling detail.

            And lastly but certainly not least, on examining the ending of the film closer, a second creature, possibly a male, can be seen moving near the creek bed. It appears to be moving its arms and then moving its head to look back at Patty. Is this another guy in a suit?  Probably not. It would be hard enough to create one suit, let alone two. The main focus has always been on the subject, Patty, so there are many other details of the film that have been overlooked. *******
DF


Check out these videos for more details:






[Helpful Sources: The Munns Report , BFRO ,MK Davis]
TCC - Once again it is proven that Bob Heironimus  was not the "guy in the suit" in the Patterson film.


Uploaded by on Feb 23, 2012
"Here we explore the difference between our walk and whomever or whatever it was walking in the Patterson Bigfoot Film."
It does make me wonder if a person running would reach the 73 degrees mark?
I do not know who ThinkerThunker is but this seems to be a new approach to looking at the Patterson film. This should also become a learning video for all researchers.
The Crypto Crew - Submit Sighting - TCC Team
Interactive Sightings Map

SPONSOR LINKS: Situs slot online terbaru
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Help Us!

Help Support
The Cyrpto Crew

[If interested in licensing any of our content,Articles or pictures contact us by Clicking Here]

.
"..you’ll be amazed when I tell you that I’m sure that they exist." - Dr. Jane Goodall during interview with NPR and asked about Bigfoot.

Fair Use Notice:
This site may contain copyrighted material and is presented in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, of US copyright laws.


Contact Form

The Crypto Crews blog is protected under the Lanham (Trademark) Act (Title 15, Chapter 22 of the United States Code)

Site Stats

Total Pageviews