Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot Footage: CZ’s Zapruder Film
Posted by: Loren Coleman on April 14th, 2007
The footage is to the Bigfoot branch (hominology) of cryptozoology what the Zapruder film is to the JFK assassination.Mysterious America
Without a doubt the world’s most famous Bigfoot movie…The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates
Thousands of miles of footprints. Hundreds of years of traditions. Scores and scores of close, first hand encounters. Then in 1967 the next piece of the puzzle fell into place– an actual filmed representation of what scared individuals had reported seeing . And it occurred before the era of video and digital cameras, and before the existence of consumer photo manipulation software like Photoshop….
Roger Patterson wanted to make a documentary film about Bigfoot. And to do that, he decided, in October of 1967, to follow up on reports he was hearing of new tracks being found back in the Eden of Bigfoot, Bluff Creek.
Patterson decided to make the journey there with associate, Robert (“Bob”) Gimlin, a part Native American outdoorsman.
First Patterson rented a Kodak K200 16mm cine camera from Sheppard’s Drive-In Camera Shop, in Yakima, for the trek. On October 18, 1967, the shop’s owner reported to local authorities the camera was overdue. Roger Patterson was so busy searching; he’d forgotten to return the camera on time.
As they were riding in the Six Rivers National Forest that memorable day of October 20, 1967, they filmed the trees, each other riding their horses along the trails, and other background material that would be useful in their proposed documentary.
Finally, early in the afternoon, Patterson and Gimlin rounded a bend and spotted a large upright creature on one of the creek’s sandbars. The dark, full-figured creature was covered with short hair (even on its large pendulous breasts) and possessed a sagittal crest (a bony ridge on top of its head)….Bigfoot! The True Story of Apes in America
While scientists who have examined this footage remain divided on its authenticity to date–claims about men-in-suits from Hollywood notwithstanding–no firm evidence has surfaced to cast serious doubts on the film or the events that produced it. In particular, the apparent movement of the muscle underneath the hair argues strongly against a hoax.The Field Guide to Bigfoot and Other Mystery Primates
The tantalizing curious nature of the Patterson-Gimlin footage verifies for all time the need for more evidence and future searching. After all, the footage reinforces the notion that this creature is walking away, not towards us, inviting us to follow.Bigfoot! The True Story of Apes in America
********************
A note about why you are seeing these images here, at Cryptomundo, again: The previous posting of M. K. Davis’ P-G animation (which we originally had the okay to post) was withdrawn from Cryptomundo. This was necessary after we were told by someone other that Marlon K. Davis that Davis did not want his enhancement of the footage posted here. When our attempts to directly communicate with Davis were forestalled, we took the gif down. However, due to my recent blog, M. K. Davis and I have opened a dialogue.
Anyway, a truly positive outcome is that Davis is renewing his permission for these images above to be seen by you, here. Actually, he now tells us that he “did not request that [Cryptomundo] remove the animation from your website….I had nothing to do with any of that, and in fact felt flattered that you wanted to post it.”
Examine the footage a few times. See anything new?
About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.
Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct).
Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015.
Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.
In 1998, the BBC plunked down a reportedly large sum of money to demonstrate the “ease” (my word) of duplicating the Patterson film, with laughably pathetic results. So it has been attempted at least once and possibly other times that I am not aware of. I would think the the perpetrator of a failed re-creation would tend to shy away from the publicity. “Look folks, we just spent thousands of dollars to make this big guy in an elaborate monkey suit look and act like Patty, and well, it didn’t turn out as we had hoped”.
You want to know what I think about DWA? I will tell you anyway. I think DWA makes consistently intelligent, informed comments AND from what I have seen so far, has an admirable tendency to stick to the posted subject. Just wanted to throw that in.
wildmanmarty: I mention the BBC’s shot at it above. It fell so embarrassingly short that I guess I don’t consider it serious. But I can surmise they didn’t spend chump change on it.
And thanks. At least I don’t think I’m a hoax, although I can turn my head to look over my shoulder too well to be Patty. 😀
Oh. And one more thing, while we’re on irrational scoffticism and Patty.
Could we please stop embarrassing ourselves by trying to link Ray Wallace with the Patterson film?
What does everyone know about Ray Wallace? Known hoaxer. Known embellisher. Known liar. Greatly motivated by attention, particularly with regard to Bigfoot.
What does the evidence, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, tell us to believe about his assertion, tossed off the top of his head, that the guy who stole his thunder – by coming out of the woods with the animal he thought was a joke, on film – was led there by his advice?
Another lie. Backed by, basically, no evidence.
Stop linking Wallace (and Bob Hieronymous and John Chambers and anyone else in the suit industry who just tosses off comments, while we’re on it) to Patty.
It only highlights that you have no case. And makes you look like a rube to boot.
I can believe it could be a hoax – if anyone could ever show how. You don’t even have to do it; just explain it.
No one has.
The SAS is not a “religion” for me so it matters not if people find my perspective credible or otherwise. We are discussing here a primitive creature who has the ability to appear and disappear with incredible ease. Some of you exect “earthly” explanations for the SAS. As you would expect everything to lead to a black and white conclusion neatly cataloged and explained from our library. Well believe it or not, we do not have it all figured out straight to a “dot”. There are many more things in this universe that we still do not understand nor comprehend. Keep an open mind and do not be easily beguiled.
treeclaw:
some of us say it a little, um, more forcefully than others. But our position is basically this, broken down.
1. The sas doesn’t seem to be that able to appear and disappear with incredible ease. Read sighting reports; the animal appears and disappears the way I’ve personally seen more than one jus’ plain ol’ wild critter do it.
2. Many people see them. And get about as many pictures as they do of any other animal out there, which is, for the non-dedicated non-wildlfe photog non-Patterson, none.
3. Science just doesn’t want to be bothered with it unless forensically testable evidence – which they define “live or dead sasquatch, bones, or fuhgedaboudit” – is dumped right at their lab door.
4. This seems to be translated into incredible, otherworldly powers that sighting reports just don’t substantiate.
I keep telling people who want to know what the best evidence for this animal is: READ SIGHTING REPORTS. As many as you can. It’s not the individual reports; it’s the overall pattern that suggests a species. The anecdotal evidence has virtually painted a picture of the species biology, physiology, diet and behavior patterns of the sasquatch – an occurrence that, if the animal isn’t real, beats odds longer than any lottery you ever played.
There is a testable proposition out there. Has been for like ever. It’s a critter, probably an ape. Period.
We could be wrong. It might be a shapeshifter, a wizard, a demon or the ghost of Carl Sagan. It’s just that there is no way currently available to test that kind of proposition.
What we black and whiters are saying is this. Test the currently testable propositions first. If the sas is Not Of Our World, he’ll still be there waiting when we’re done.
DWA- I just want to make it clear that I never thought of the PG footage as a hoax as I think you can tell by my past posts here! 🙂 I am very open minded in this area. In fact, I am open minded enough to see the strangness of a creature this indifferent to man that has remained undocumented. It is a connundrum in many ways for me. I know the arguments why this can be so and hold to many of them, but still find myself pondering this. Of course, there are ways that it could be avoiding us, and it is obviously an intelligent creature, but I have to bring up the hard questions sometimes. I am even known to go off on Devil’s advocate arguments to the point where I start to actually see some sense in them. That is one way that I remain a true skeptic, I like to see both sides of the coin. I am very open to the possibility of Bigfoot. However for me, there is no denying the strangeness of a creature that is so large, leisurly in the presence of humans, seen by so many people, leaving so much behind, yet not adequately documented. To me it is slightly bizarre. There are creatures that have been seen in the wild by far fewer people in far more remote areas that are well documented by both specimens and photographs and these photographs were not always easy to come by, but there they are. I am merely acknowledging the fact that although this does not mean Bigfoot does not exist, it is something that is odd and worth thinking about.
mystery_man: well, there you go. Bizarre it certainly is. When we finally document the sas, we’re gonna have a lot of explaining to do to that mirror. 😀
I have my own bugbears. No carcass and no bones and (I gotta admit) no shootings or roadkill. They most emphatically don’t disqualify the sas as real, and I’ve talked about why at great length; but they sure are problematical to explain. Most people with no experience in the outdoors or with animals simply cannot get past that; and biologists and wildlife photographers and other experts whose time in the field has yielded not a trace of a seven-foot ape have their own wall to scale.
All I can say is: there it is. You gotta engage the skeptic in you to stay focused on the likely leads. Period.
DWA- Agreed.
DWA: What I meant to say that of all the creatures known to “man” the SAS has been unusually successful in evading us. Ask any North American practicing field biologist what they think of studying SAS in their natural habitat. See the reaction that will get you. Or for that matter ask any wildlife tracking expert to help you track down a SAS. Even SAS “experts” are somewhat befuddled with SAS tracks which seem to appear and disappear without apparent source of direction. No ordinary 3rd dimensional creature is able to evade us so effectively and for so long as the SAS.
Sorry, but I have yet to see just one picture, among all of them, which appears to be the real deal. Since we already disagree on Patterson’s clip I doubt we’ll have a meeting of minds around video evidence.
Given all the frauds mixed into this already controversial topic I’d give “science” the benefit of the doubt. The SAS is not a creature which can be stalked and studied by field biologist like the rest of the animal kingdom. It’s not just bones and artifacts which we cannot produce in evidence. Outside of first hand witnesses and a few foot tracks we have nothing else to present to science. I do believe if science was able to “touch” one of these SAS it would be a discovery on the magnitude of rediscovering a living Tyrannosaurus Rex.
No there are no “powers” involved here. I do believe the SAS is a wild, prehistoric creature with about the intelligence of a chimpanzee. However I don’t think they are as smart or clever enough to elude us for this long. There has to be another explanation. Either the SAS just does not exist or they are creatures of the 4th dimension. Even the SAS may not be entirely in control of their entry/exit through this portal. The 4th dimension is not necessarily paranormal or supernatural. It’s simply a world we humans are unaware of. Think of all the weird creatures around the world people have witnessed but none could follow up on much less track it down.
I’ll make a personal prediction: We will not find any real, verifiable evidence of the SAS using conventional tool methods. I am betting it’s not going to happen for at least another 50 years and probably much more.
treeclaw: I’ll make a personal prediction of my own. Actually, two.
1. When science wants to find the sas, it will.
2. If science never wants to, it probably never will, and if it does, it will be by literally having one dumped in its lap – by, say, an 18-wheeler.
OK, free bonus prediction.
3. When #2 happens, we’ll find out it’s a critter with no more connections beyond our dimensions than we have.
WE are so powerful we make the sas appear invisible with just a snap of our ignora…sorry, fingers. 😉
Science did look at all the evidence brought to them: Which was not much in the first place. So basically you’re stating your absolute conviction in the existance of a 3rd dimension SAS. But you say it is up to Science to prove this. That’s like me saying I believe the tooth fairy is 100% real and awaiting discovery. But it is “science”‘s problem to prove it.
There have been many expeditions organized for the purpose of rooting out the SAS. They all failed miserably. Science is not about to embark on a wild goose chase after something that cannot be found.
treeclaw:
I’ve devoted many dozens of posts, and tens of thousands of words, on this board to what I’ll sum up as follows: you’re wrong, word for word.
Please don’t make me retype all of it again. Put “sasquatch evidence” in the search engine for this board, and read away.
Just look for my posts; they’ll set ya straight.
Some of us do our homework here. 😉
treeclaw2:
If that don’t suffice:
1. Go to the BFRO website and read the FAQ thoroughly.
2. Read sighting reports. (The BFRO and TBRC websites tend to have the most and the best.)
Treeclaw: I don’t get your disbelief that this is real. It’s so real to me that it can’t be anything else. You can see her muscles moving under her hair and if you look close (as in some of the DVD’s that have covered this many times) you can see a large cyst on her right upper thigh. Or what is believed to be a cyst. It moves in and out of focus with her natural gait.
Her gait is a bit more primate due to the knees moving inwards as she walks and the reason she has to move her whole body to look behind her is because her neck is short. Her conical shaped head is more common in LARGE bi-pedals based on size and weight and not because of gender. Some believe only male gorillas have conical (cone shaped) heads. It’s size related, not gender related. If mountain gorillas females got as large as their male counterparts, they would be cone shaped too.
The more North (cold weather) you go the larger animals, perhaps hominids in this case, get. Bears included.
Her gait is quite long if you do your research. Wasn’t it about 5 feet between steps? I can’t remember exactly, but many have tried to follow her steps in experiments but could only keep it up for a few steps then had to start hopping/jumping to the next one. She is only over 6 foot, but her girth is strong and large. Her movements are fluid and graceful considering her size.
I have come to find her frightened and charming at the same time. Bless her heart……..she probably has a small one she’s concerned about.
There’s some who believe there may be another “something” in the trees ahead of her. A watcher for protection maybe? But there hasn’t been any proof of that.
I believe that what you are looking at is the most wonderful video of a true Sasquatch (a hominid). I do not believe they are gigantopithicus blackii anymore.
What I see is a stick or some other item in her left hand that is dropped at some point. It almost looks like a penis in one frame, but I don’t believe it was because she is clearly female by her large breasts. (Another reason this is not a fake suit. No man would think about putting breasts on the fake suit they were going to wear.)
I see a tumor or bump or cyst on her upper right thigh (this has been scrutinized closely) and she is powerful. There was no ability to make a suit of this caliber in the late 60’s and this has been confirmed by the most talented in Hollywood at that time. If you want to see how well they made monkey suits at that time, rent Planet of the Apes. Ridiculously fake.
Her face is not primate and large hominids lived on this planet before us. She is a small gal for a Sasquatch, but she is a real gem.
I’ve read that the moving musculature of the Patty creature was created by using water bags under the fur costume. But I believe the Patty creature is a living cryptid.