If you read the latest, on Bill Munns’ Report website…(that gridbug linked to)….he has since backed-off of his finding, that the camera used a 15MM lens, and that Patty was 7′ 3″ tall. He is reviewing the photogrammetry analysis, at the moment.
But he is working on some additional ‘lines of analysis’…that he expects will prove Patty to be a real animal.
And…then there is the movement of Patty’s mouth, and eyebrows…which strongly indicate that Patty is a real, near-human being.

“With regards to Bob Heironimus, he has changed and altered his story more times than he has had hot dinners.”

And the funny thing about that is: people calling themselves “skeptical” swallow every iteration as the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth!

With regards to Bob Heironimus, he has changed and altered his story more times than he has had hot dinners. One minute the suit was a smelly dead red horse with no metal or fasteners, he was wearing waist high waders and was barefoot inside the ‘costume’……….and the next minute the suit is a fake fur Morris suit with a zipper down the back, knee high waders and he was wearing his own shoes inside the ‘costume’.

Bob Heironimus’s claims about the film site are equally impossible. Bob Heironimus claimed the creek was dry, the sand was white, that they were off the road a ways and were in a spot where nobody coming up the road could see them and Roger was filming from his horse shaking the camera.

All of Bob H’s impossible blunders can be 100% disproven by the footage itself.

In the actual footage we can see that:

1. The creek is wet and flowing.

2. That Roger Patterson was actually standing on the road when he started filming.

3. That there is a clear unobstructed view from this road right across the clearing and over to the forested hillside in the background.

4. That Roger’s camera position was low to the ground and much much lower than horseback level.

What can we prove by all of this? Simple. That Bob Heironimus was never there at Bluff Creek. His claims read like a man who gets his information by what he ‘thinks’ he can see in the footage. Unfortunately for his claim, Heironimus didn’t study the footage close enough, particularly the almost never viewed opening frames where we can see the wet creek, the road and the rocky banks of the creek that Patterson quite clearly negotiated on foot.

“Do you know what’s even more fascinating that the prospect of an 8 foot tall 700 pound hairy guy walking around in the woods with his family? A topic that has so much data and so called “experts” that devote their lives to these things, but no one can prove they even exist.”

This is a frequent, and very severe, overstatement of the time and money – the only two ingredients that count – devoted to this “search.”

There have been two, count ‘em two, cryptid expeditions in history that had a chance of doing anything toward confirmation.

One got us this film.

Read about the other.

Two. That’s it.

And a bunch of inconsequential field trips.

Nobody’s ever been involved in this on a full-time basis, or anywhere near, in the field, where the proof lies if it’s anywhere.

And that’s gotten what everyone should expect.

The clincher was Bill Munns study which overlaid a human form over the Patty. None of the joint locations (IM index) matched up at all. If the hip joints were matched the knee joint locations were off, if the knees were matched up the hip joints were off. How does one explain this. It is impossible to fabricate joint placement. Let’s hear the skeptics perspective on this !

The image of Patty on that footage stayed with me for years, and I think, I was so scared because the image conflicted with my idea of how “animals” should look. It looked human, but moved like an animal. That swagger with those long arms and how it turns, just creeped me out.

Back then, the film was a key part of any program on the subject in the media.

I think the film’s effect on the social psyche was profound. As Loren pointed out, there were many events that were important, and in some cases, politically more important, yet do not reappear in our media and social conscience in the same way, The Patty film does.

I have always felt that if people want to write it off as a hoax, they have to prove that it could, in fact, be hoaxed. No one has effectively proven that it could be, as far as I’m concerned. It doesn’t mean no one will, but it seems at this point unlikely. If you want to prove it’s a hoax, you need more than just someone claiming to have done the job. You need physical proof, or at least a definitive, inarguable description of exactly how you could do it, and show me that it does accord with what we see in the film. In short — I want the suit, or at least a design for a suit that could have been made in 1967 for something less than a major military project. The history and social impact behind the film deserves that kind respect.

With all that said, imagine being the Patterson family over the years. The film has drawn all sorts of attention, some of it good, and some of it frustratingly bad. The entire legacy must be socially stress full and emotionally upsetting to the family. From comments in the past, it is obvious, the families have found it tiresome and they’ve wanted to step away from this part of history. Correct me if I’m wrong but some of these folks claiming they’ve worn the suit have been family friends? I’m not sure on this. But I can easily imagine, in order too protect the family members that perhaps they came up with ways to step away from the Bigfoot community and the fame of the films. What a better way than create rumors of it being fake. In the end, it is a legacy to embrace, rather than deny or be embarrassed by, which would explain why Patterson’s Widow eventually allowed the analysis of the original film.

Which bring me to the s

What in the world is going to happen when the 50th year anniversary of this “film” occurs? Look for dozens of books, documentaries, conferences, celebrations and more during that milestone 12 month period!!

The Vietnam War, hippies, and the Patterson-Gimlin evidence will merge in the memories. Few recall that the day after the P-G footage was recorded, the big news of October 21st was the tens of thousands of people that marched on Washington D.C. in protest of the Vietnam War. The Year 1967 was quite a 12 months: The Doors, Fairport Convention, Beatles, and Monterey Pop were the talk of the music world. The Six-Day War happened. The Boston Strangler went to prison. Che was killed. Evel Knievel crashed when attempting to jump the Caesars Palace Fountains in Las Vegas.

It could be an intriguing time of 50th year anniversary remembrances in 2017.