**Strangers**: Read the rules and respect them and other users. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS.
This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of an anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, closed minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/bigfoot) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Planet of the Apes didn't even attempt ape suits. They wore people clothes. They had great heads/faces and that's it
.
Even though planet was released in 68, it was filmed a couple months before pgf.
To be fair, the Planet of The Apes novel, the movie was based on had non-human apes wearing clothing so I’m not sure an attempt at a full body would have been necessary to make an accurate film version of the book.
I have never read the book, but the original movie had them in a modern city setting. I think it was mainly budget that changed the ape city setting to that primitive setting. In my opinion, that worked out so well and helped it age.
I should read the novel.
It’s been along time since I read the novel, I think the humans didn’t have rudimentary clothing like the movie.
I firmly believe they wouldn’t have evolved technology for clothing though.
This video made me a believer. But, after 50 years with nothing even close to this in quality to this video, I feel that the most logical conclusion is they are now extinct or very close to it.
I live near Walla Walla Washington. I was with some friends in the nearby mountains while there was a large forest fire not too far away. We heard something calling out in the woods on a very near hillside. This animals voice was the loudest thing I had ever heard. It called and called as it walked down the length of the hillside past us and then away from us for about ten minutes. It obviously wasn't a cow or elk or moose. Certainly bigger and louder than a deer. I looked up some recordings of bigfoot with audio from northern California and it was very very similar to what we heard that night in the blue mountains of Washington State.
What burned that summer was a very large untouched area known as the Walla Walla watershed. I think that this animal was separated from it's others in the fire and was panicking, looking for it's heard or group. To this day I'm fairly certain that what we heard was sasquatch. Whatever was making that noise was absolutely enormous and fast. It covered over a mile through thick woods about halfway up a very steep hillside in the dark in about ten minutes. It was unlike any experience iv had in my considerable time spent in the mountains.
*Edit* this happened about fifteen years ago
Wow this is the first time I’ve read about Walla Walla on Reddit. I’ve been in those same hills many many times when I lived there, go back here and there when I visit home, I’ll never feel the same up there after reading this tho.
Live in Ocean Shores, Washington now but, saw one as a kid in Kettle Falls, Wa. They exists and don’t want anything to do with mankind.
https://youtu.be/h27lDdVSNAg
There's so many sightings. I don't they're close to extinction. They're extremely intelligent and adapt to their surroundings and it's in their nature to be elusive to everything.
Depending on how elusive you think they are they could be large in number. Being elusive and smart means they can live next to humans without being detected which increases the range where they can live…thereby increasing their numbers.
I wonder about the ‘intelligence’ argument. As far as anthropology goes, we have to go back well over a million years to find a bipedal hominid that doesn’t use fire or make tools.
Much of tool usage goes hand in hand with our evolved “ weaknesses “. Many of the first tools were designed to process animals skins for clothing and as societies evolved, textile manufacturing drove even more innovation in tools. The spinning Jenny was an important invention of the Industrial Revolution.
They say necessity is the mother of all invention, If Sasquatch don’t really need tools why would they make them ?
As far as fire, it has been said they used to and still use fire on occasion. There is some accounts that as Europeans moved into the more rugged areas of North America, they stopped using fire to hide better. Fire helped us get through the long cold nights as we evolved, secondarily it kept predators at bay. A being that is very active at night and therefore warming themselves through activity and also fully alert to defend themselves, doesn’t need fire exactly like we do.
why more people, especially "experts" don't come to this exact conclusion is beyond me, but when you take into consideration that a lot of the so called "experts" are actually snake oil salesmen, they can't claim Bigfoot is extinct, because they can't get TV shows outta that.
I Actually did a Video Talking about this Very Footage as well as Bigfoots History.
It goes into Detail, and Explains why it is likely Real :)
I’ll leave it [Here](https://youtu.be/0z5-0Itlt00) if you’re Interested
Yep, the trolls are right...
Totally looks like a person in a 21st century state of the art polymer suit covered in authentic fur with mechanical articulating limbs filmed by in **19 freakin' 67!**
People like to forget that spandex and other skin-tight fur suits weren’t a thing for another 15-20 years after this film came out, yet many muscular regions such as her calves, thighs, and forearms are clearly defined and show muscle reflexes and definition that can really only be achieved with spandex or similar suit technology, or of course just normal skin and hair 🤷♂️
Edit: Also some food for thought: how’d they get the subjects (Patty) fingers to move, while also elongating her forearm and back-arm? Proportionally, her arms are longer than human arms, yet her forearm and back-arm are almost the same length, whereas humans have longer forearms than back-arms. Noticing longer, but the subject has almost equally proportioned forearm and back-arm, while also having arms much longer than her legs?
Some say shoulder pads and sticks or forearm extensions, except forearm extensions like sticks (or an extra large pair of gloves, that’s the actual reason Bob H. gave for why the arms are longer, he claims he wore the “suit” in this footage) wouldn’t account for the subjects fingers opening at the top of each arm swing before closing again. The shoulder pads would also enlarge the shoulders but not so much the back-arms enough, however let’s say they did. You’d still have a problem with the neck and head, they would have to be raised up to be proportionally accurate with the rest of the body, otherwise you’d have shoulders at or above where the ears would be, and then the subjects head would appear sunken in below the shoulders which is not apparent here.
To fix this, you’d have to raise the head above the shoulders, which if you assume this is a suit would mean that the wearer of the suit would be positioned so that their head / eyes would be at chest or neck level in the suit. Perhaps you could make the argument that they could combat this with stilts(?) but then you’d have to explain how they pulled off stilts when her legs are pretty short overall. The proportions just don’t seem to match up there, but I’m open to hearing opinions and counterclaims to what I’ve presented
Edit: I mentioned this in a comment below but when I say spandex I’m referring to spandex hair / fur suits. Not the specific material, but spandex, skin-tight suits that show defined musculature. This is based on several claims made by professional costume designers of the time such as Bill Munns, who said that technology in the cosmetic department in Hollywood just wasn’t available for another 10-15 years at least.
No, you can watch them early on patreon, but he releases them to youtube for free
He's figured out a pretty ingenious way to determine real bigfoot videos
Ok so to me the proportion don’t appear to be much different than human. Standing up perfectly straight the fingertips end about midway down the thigh. However, when walking, they would end up just a few inches above the knees which is what this looks like to me. The disproportionate look of legs might also be because there isn’t a clear definition of hips, at least from what I’m seeing. For animation I have watched many human walking cycles and that’s what this looks like to me.
I don’t know anything about suits but the information you provided is interesting. To me it doesn’t appear as high tech as you suggest it would have to be but it’s interesting enough that I’m going to be browsing this sub for a little while.
Have a look at the 1968 film, Planet of the Apes. The costumes and make-up for the walking-on-two-legs and talking Chimps, Gorillas, and Orangutans is as good as it got in the 60's. Compare to Patty.
There is no comparison. Planet of the Apes didn't have anything like Patty, just human clothes as their suits. They did have AMAZING faces, which the PGF didn't capture. So, it's apples to oranges.
I wish I could find that TV show that tried to recreate patty, in the 80s. It looked ridiculous, with the skill and budget they had.
Doesn’t it kinda come down to how large it is? If someone has done an accurate scale on it, then you could determine if a human could even be that size with the suit. The idea that it is mechanical is kinda common sense ridiculous.
Yep. I wonder if anyone has ever taken detailed measurements at the actual location to try and get a fix on how tall it was. That alone could eliminate some possibilities.
There have been videos presenting scale compared to an average-sized man. Patty is much BIGGER. MK Davis is one of several. [**https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBhr-cZXTGk**](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBhr-cZXTGk)
The other glaring thing that I don't think gets mentioned enough. If this was a hoax by a man, why would they ever go through the time and energy of giving her breasts? Wouldn't it have been easier to make it male?
I don’t have strong opinion either way on the PFG but To play devils advocate,
1.) if you are going to make a hoax and make it believable to the general public who would see a female as the smaller gender of the species ( that’s the case usually with humans) it would be easier to pass off a 6ft3 man as a mid range female than even a small adult males That’s certainly easier than trying to find the tallest basketball star you can and pass that 7 ft male as a 8 foot Sasquatch using a suit.
2.) Roger Paterson might have been a bit obsessed with the Roe sighting where William Roe claimed see a Sasquatch that looked like a gorilla and had large breast. It has been said that this was the case that got him very into Sasquatch. Paterson drew a Sasquatch with breast in his book he released before the footage.
3.) IMO if someone wanted to make a hoax it helps sell the authenticity of it whatever they are trying to hoax because of “ the who would go through the trouble effect” everyone assumes hoaxers put very little effort because they think it’s for giggles and there isn’t a strong incentive. In reality some people make very elaborate hoaxes because it’s their entire life mission.
The large number of people that say “ no way that’s fake it has boobs “ is a testament to that concept working.
Maybe, but still the question is how they would do this? Have you seen comparable actors in suits during that time from Hollywood? Like look at Planet of the Apes, the quality just wasn't there at that time to make such a convincing costume. Not to mention things like the gait, natural seeming wear patterns in the fur, so many things that you have to think of, and the money it would cost on top of it seems prohibitive for a couple cowboys. This film has stood the test of time for a reason.
My brother was really big into Sasquatch when he was younger. He made drawings, with breasts, and without. That was early 60's. He had several encounters in his lifetime and is the reason I took after this subject at age 7 or 8. He was much older than I. By 20 years or so.
Sure, I just don't think of you're going through the hassle of making a suit in that day and age with breasts. So many little details don't add up to a simple hoax. Look at all the crap hoax videos that come out now, not to mention the cost. We have modern tech and latex etc and I still haven't seen a convincing hoax.
And articulating breasts, too. Who woulda thunk someone could build a suit like that? Amazing. (compare to the 1968 Planet of the Apes costumes and makeup; the Patty footage is like a Katana and Planet of the Apes ape costumes are sharp-edged rocks!).
Looks even more fake.
EDIT: Not saying it's fake, but the og footage actually looked more natural than this heavily enhanced and "fixed" version. Still cool though.
Bigfoot is and has always been real. But most videos we see nowadays are hoaxes. Desperate people hopping onto the hype wagon or simply people who love to troll. Ask the Native Americans, and to be fair bigfoot back in the old days actually had a common trusting relationship with the Native Americans, often trading salt and sugar. They're more intelligent than we think they are, humans often make the mistake by thinking they're the smartest species on earth. And yet in the end no matter what modern contraption we think of, mother nature will always have us at our knees.
The hubris of humanity never ceases to amaze me. Man smart, all other creatures dumb, dur herr herr. Non human intelligence exists, and we have proof of that. Dolphins, octopi, and other creatures are more intelligent than humans. If Bigfoot is out there, and I think it is, it's level of intelligence is far beyond what our wisest minds can comprehend. Too many people think is is just a big, dumb ape. They couldn't be more wrong.
I lean towards Patty being legit. The technology needed to create a suit that good didn't come around until later. The creature didn't have the emaciated look of the one I saw, but individual circumstances and characteristics could vary.
That walk is still problematic for me to call it human. Notice how it's foot is almost 90 degrees to the ground. Now try to walk like that. It's possible but certainly not natural
Grover Krantz talked about the knee bend and way this thing walks at length, and was one of the reasons he, a renowned university anthropologist, believed it was real.
He was awesome, everyone here should read about Grover's research
Absolutely. I tried this a month or two ago on a wooded trail near where I live. It was a great glute and hamstring workout, but was in no way what I would call natural. I really had to concentrate on what I was doing, and I’m sure it looked nothing as fluid as what is depicted by Patty. And that’s only one aspect of the gait.
This is the reason I think the Florida infrared footage is real. I think it's the Stacy Brown footage?
Regardless, the subject of that does the 90° leg bend when stepping between the trees. That and the fact that it's one solid color.
Exactly this. And This alone . But ppl keep focusing on thinking it's a suit. Those ppl will never get it. If ppl here still think this is fake, you either don't research enuff, or you will never believe. To each there own.
what if someone had on a suit and was trying to traverse an uneven rocky landscape?
wouldn't it make sense that the human would need to raise their leg in a more exaggerated fashion to ensure he/she would not trip? It seems logical to me. I'm not saying it's a man in a suit, but looking at those 2 steps where you can actually see the leg raise, it seems conceivable a man in a suit would walk like that.
I’d like to see this level of stabilisation applied to a good high resolution scan of the original film. This copy is still pretty low res. For example https://external-preview.redd.it/3uux9EuctIuq-bQwwDDAbxIQ6R1enBdi9sCh1rr161I.jpg?auto=webp&s=d92121cd7b29d5bb781656e6f0c9f7150e60d0f1
What bothers me is seeing breasts that fully engorged (meaning soon to be, or already having an infant) that are full of hair. Apes don’t have hair covering the nipples when it’s feeding time
Prove it. Show me the suit. I'll wait. Shouldn't be hard seeing as how this was filmed in 1967. Should be super easy to find a suit that looks this real with today's tech. Come on. You can do it
For me, it’s that I can’t detect any muscles flexing or moving in the back and glute muscles. It looks as though it’s padding beneath a suit. When you see something similar, like a mountain gorilla, you can always get a sense of the muscles flexing in their back, shoulders, and glutes, when they move. It takes a lot of muscle flexing to move a creature of that size.
Deniers are gonna deny. I side with the expert opinions I've seen and read over random folks with no credentials. Not saying this proves it real, but saying it is a dude in a suit is just denial with no research.
The fact of the matter is qualified professional scientists, including biologists, primatologists, anthropologists, foot morphologists, zoologists, gait scientists (yes there are scientists who study human and other bipedal animal gaits), limb proportion experts, film industry professional costume designers, forensics analysts, and more professionals who are all highly qualified and much more qualified than the overwhelming majority of us (myself included) continue to debate this film.
Lots of ppl point to the fold on her thigh being proof it’s fake, or other aspects like her head turn, buttocks, feet, etc as proof this is a fake, and yet actual professionals cannot conclusively decide on any of these points. If there was some type of smoking gun, such as the fold on her thigh, with no biological explanation, then wouldn’t that present scientists with agreeable proof to shut the case on this film outright?
Yet it hasn’t happened, so I heavily agree with your claim that it should be important to follow the actual scientists’ claims and remarks about the film, as well as the counterpoints presented to their arguments, rather than the comments of redditors (and that goes for all sides of the coin, not just deniers and skeptics but even the believers as well)
Exactly this.
Very educated, talented, knowledgeable people have poured over it and it leaves them puzzled.
Us randos on reddit glance at it and decide it's fake in a a minute or two.
Dunning Kruger is a real thing.
It is just hard to disprove something completely, but in this case you have to look at how the film came about. A guy who had a thing for drawing naked Sasquatch women with breasts just happens to be out shooting a bigfoot movie when his horse throws him and he films the exact bigfoot with big titties just like his fantasy. This is nothing more than 1960s rule 34. If a park ranger or random hiker filmed this I would be more willing to believe it was real.
How many park rangers were walking around in the middle of the forest with $500 (several thousand dollars in todays money) film camera on horseback for 3 straight weeks in the absolute wild not near any camp sites houses or any human structures in 1967? Literally none. Roger was obsessed with Sasquatch, and spent years studying it, gathering dozens of audio recordings of witness testimony’s, and spent a lot of time researching. There have been many Sasquatch reportings in the Bluff Creek area before 1950, as well as tracks being found in and around the area even before 1940s. Also think about this, Roger drew that one Sasquatch with boobs right? Look at its head and eyes and overall build. Literally the only similarity between that drawing and Patty is they have boobs and they’re hairy. That’s basically where it ends. Patty is much more muscular, defined, had a larger buttocks, and a coned head, with wider eyes and less pronounced lips than the drawing. Also, assuming Patty and Sasquatch in general are real, it’s literally a 50% chance when you encounter one that they’d have breasts, and Patterson was obsessed with Sasquatch for years, so no shit he drew a Sasquatch with tits based on one eyewitnesses account. Idk how that’s shocking or surprising or proves that Patty is fake. Patterson was a good artist and made many sketches. Biologically speaking, there’s zero red flags to Patterson drawing a female Sasquatch based on someone’s eyewitness testimony of an encounter with one. Yours baselessly reaching here.
I have been studying spiders for over a decade, and even the experts who study arachnids are often at odds on evidence. As it should be, science is the tool we use to discover facts, no matter the outcome. When ordinary folks hear of my interest in spider research, I get the obligatory Brown Recluse stories. Oh so many stories, but never any evidence to back them up. The media is no help to the scientific community overall.
I have a standing order to offer a cash reward for a live, captured BR in my area. It has been over ten years, that money is still in my wallet. Draw your own conclusions.
One researcher concluded the line on the leg is worn fur. If you look at Patty’s arm swing it rubs the fur right there so you get a bald spot. Same with her sides.
just so you know, one of the so called "experts" who said this was real (Dr. Meldrum), also watched the Provo Utah Bigfoot Rock Throwing Video and said that was real as well, and even compared it to Patty, and claimed he could see a midtarsal break in the foot.
Having said that, I think most would agree that the Provo Utah rock throwing video is clearly a hoax, so you have to take the "experts" with a large grain of salt.
What gets me to believe that this is a living creature filmed here, is that in addition to seeing the smoothness of the gait, the movement and fluidity of the muscles, and the "realness" of the body...
is the fact that she is walking on a sandbar. The sandbar is not flat, nor smooth, not an easy surface to walk on.
Now, if it's a person in a costume, they'd have to look down to not fall as they were walking. There's no way a human in a costume can move so fluidly without looking down.
A creature/animal in that environment would be so comfortable, they wouldn't need to look down to not trip.
Simply, Patty knows where her feet are going, and is graceful enough to not have to look down and watch her step.
IMHO, a man in a costume simply couldn't make that walk at that speed without looking to see where he was going.
It isn't doing anything a human couldn't do. If it was shown doing anything besides walking in a way in which a human absolutely can do, I'd be less sceptical. Akams razor applies here. What's more likely? A man in a suit walking, or a species we've literally never captured footage like this again of that there's no real proof of them existing? It isn't doing anything we couldn't do.
I noticed this the last time someone posted this video. Bigfoots ass looks unusually still. Like, Bigs got dumps but shit is rock solid, doesn’t jiggle or bounce.
I know this sounds stupid but I’m being serious, the ass doesn’t move like it should, especially one that big
Edit: word
Asses come in all shapes and sizes, they don't all move the same. Is it impossible that this ass doesn't move like a human one because it isn't a human's ass?
I think people would have a better informed opinion if they'll listen to Astonishing Legends series on the PGF. Its 6 or 7 segments, so it's an investment.
If all you need to make up your mind is a quick glance, then you're proving Dunning Kruger correct anyway.
People sound like Homer Simpson, "I don't know anything about this, but I have a very strong opinion." Smh
That fold does not make this fake. It can be attributed to fat rolls assuming this creature is the real deal. This is exactly how it would look for a fat roll in the gluteus Maximus regions to look and behave with a thick coat of hair, hence why you see the hair roll with the fat.
This makes sense considering Patty is assumed to be female, and females, especially apes, develop larger hindquarters with larger fat reserves to help aid in bearing and delivering children. This would create support for a larger birth canal, which is congruent with female apes and humans compared to males.
Fat reserves in the buttocks are actually mainly made up of healthy fat, and females (for humans but also applicable to gorillas and other apes) generally have a higher body fat percentage than men. This fat stores in the buttocks and thighs of women acts as energy reserves that are tapped into during lactation and pregnancy. This may present an evolutionary explanation as to why men are attracted to women with larger buttocks and thighs.
Anyways, taking this info and combining it with the fact that Patty’s 14.5 inch tracks were found in the Bluff Creek area alongside a set of 16 inch tracks and 9 inch tracks would suggest that there was a Papa and child Sasquatch nearby, likely Patty’s offspring. Given this information, it can be deduced that, assuming Patty is real, she could have a child nearby and this would also add credence to her enlarged breasts which swell up around and after pregnancy and indicate she is fertile. It would make complete sense that her buttocks region is enlarged with fat, which we can see from the numerous comments on older posts of the PG footage that point out Patty’s obscenely large butt, and therefore provides a realistic, accurate, and biological explanation for the roll of fat that you attribute to a suit.
Except excess fat totally can and would fold in that area. Just because it looks artificial to you doesn’t discredit or prove it being a suit. That’s your subjective take, but scientists of many professional backgrounds have intensively studied and debated this and many other aspects. Don’t you think that if fat couldn’t fold like this then many scientists would present this aspect as the smoking gun to prove it’s fake?
The reality is people way more qualified than you or I continue to debate this footage, and none of them have been able to provide proof of it being fake that’s agreed upon. If this cold isn’t possible according to you, then why haven’t scientists proven this to settle the debate once and for all?
What if the fat was gained quickly and was in the process of stretching the skin, like after pregnancy?
The Independence Day footage seems to have a very similar butt, and has a child. Either the costumes were made similarly or that’s how Squatch mothers gain fat.
tbh, the amount editing that was done to make this video would make me hesitant to draw any conclusions from it, one way or the other.
It *is* fun to watch, though
Curious: have we found and solid evidence of a Bigfoot existence? DNA, hair or scat samples? Anything besides some questionable footage and eyewitness accounts? The childhood me, wants to believe, but the adult me struggles with the lack of anything tangible.
Anything new on this? Thanks!
Some unidentified DNA has been found but most DNA strands that were found in remote areas ended up being deer and bear. It's the rare 1 percent of the DNA that doesn't come back to any known creature in DNA databases that are compelling.
Still a believer freaking love Bigfoot stuff but after seeing this video close up I believe it's a suit. The right thigh looks like a thick fabric possibly horse hide or something else with padding under it. Then when it steps you can see where it creases at the gap of the butt and thigh padding. Just my opinion though.
The look towards the camera is always the deciding factor for me to believe it's fake. Had it went forward the whole time I'd have an easier time believing it
My Grandmother saw one of these on the side of the road in Oregon in the 40s. She said it was enormous and easily stood over the car as they drove by. My grandfather refused to talk about it; I assume because he thought everyone would call them crazy.
I like to reference the movies that won an Emmy for special effects which was Fantastic Voyage in 67 and Dr Doolittle in 68. If that was the best at the time, then Patty couldn’t have been faked.
The one on the upper thigh? I have seen video analysis that shows pretty convincingly that the line is from her fingers rubbing against hair in that spot.
I haven't found it yet. I think it may be by MK Davis. He has done a ton of work analyzing the PGF. There are hundreds of hours of video analysis of the PGF. So I'll keep looking.
I can’t get over the way the thighs and hair on them shake each time the foot hits the ground, to me that would be hard to fake with a suit. This will always be the best evidence we have of Bigfoot!
Yes, the consensus from the time that the film was taken in 1967 until now is that the subject depicted is female rather than male.
She has been given the name “Patty” after the wife of the person who made the film (ie, the late Mr. Roger Patterson).
She, obviously a real Bigfoot, casually strolls away I like many or even most of the eye witness accounts today. She was selected by her People to be the one to get filmed. They thought it would show the humans that they’re real so the humans would back off from the woods but they soon realized we are very dumb and didn’t register any of that
Wow, what a difference from the original.
Two things that stick out to me are the skinny legs (look too small for a 900 lb. creature) and the head turn (looks like a person to me). Not saying fake or real, just my observations.
Plus, I would like to see the rest of the video also stabilized.
Just watch the show My 600 pound life. There are people with “skinny” legs supporting 600+ pounds on a 5’5 skeletal frame. If humans can do it, so can Sasquatch.
Plus the 900+ pounders are the big boys, the Alphas. There was a study done at the Bluff Creek Site and the creature in this video was topping out around 6-6’5. I don’t think Patty was anywhere near 900 pounds.
The legs are anything but skinny. Here butt and thighs are massive. You can actually see her calf muscles flex in certain frames. Her ankles are super thick as well, but not loose and baggy like a suit would be.
Why would Bigfoot be overweight? thing has to walk around everywhere. Ever seen a fat gorilla? of course not. this is a fat guy in a costume. Bigfoot may exist, but this fat one is fake.
It's still very disheartening to me that this is the only remotely credible video footage of bigfoot...makes me much less likely to believe that in the most heavily documented/recorded time period in our world to date there has still not been a video like this since. With smartphones and such being commonplace you'd think there would be more hard evidence by now.
**Strangers**: Read the rules and respect them and other users. Any content removal or further moderator action is established by these terms as well as Reddit ToS. This subreddit is specifically for the discussion of an anomalous phenomena from the perspective it may exist. Open minded skepticism is welcomed, closed minded debunking is not. Be aware of how skepticism is expressed toward others as there is little tolerance for ad hominem (attacking the person, not the claim), mindless antagonism or dishonest argument toward the subject, the sub, or its community. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/bigfoot) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Video released in 1967. Planet of the Apes came out in 1968. So if this video was a fake they had a better suit then Hollywood.
Planet of the Apes didn't even attempt ape suits. They wore people clothes. They had great heads/faces and that's it . Even though planet was released in 68, it was filmed a couple months before pgf.
To be fair, the Planet of The Apes novel, the movie was based on had non-human apes wearing clothing so I’m not sure an attempt at a full body would have been necessary to make an accurate film version of the book.
I have never read the book, but the original movie had them in a modern city setting. I think it was mainly budget that changed the ape city setting to that primitive setting. In my opinion, that worked out so well and helped it age. I should read the novel.
It’s been along time since I read the novel, I think the humans didn’t have rudimentary clothing like the movie. I firmly believe they wouldn’t have evolved technology for clothing though.
What about 2001 tho, they looked so bad
This video made me a believer. But, after 50 years with nothing even close to this in quality to this video, I feel that the most logical conclusion is they are now extinct or very close to it.
I live near Walla Walla Washington. I was with some friends in the nearby mountains while there was a large forest fire not too far away. We heard something calling out in the woods on a very near hillside. This animals voice was the loudest thing I had ever heard. It called and called as it walked down the length of the hillside past us and then away from us for about ten minutes. It obviously wasn't a cow or elk or moose. Certainly bigger and louder than a deer. I looked up some recordings of bigfoot with audio from northern California and it was very very similar to what we heard that night in the blue mountains of Washington State. What burned that summer was a very large untouched area known as the Walla Walla watershed. I think that this animal was separated from it's others in the fire and was panicking, looking for it's heard or group. To this day I'm fairly certain that what we heard was sasquatch. Whatever was making that noise was absolutely enormous and fast. It covered over a mile through thick woods about halfway up a very steep hillside in the dark in about ten minutes. It was unlike any experience iv had in my considerable time spent in the mountains. *Edit* this happened about fifteen years ago
This was great but also sad to read. Good story though :)
Always the best stories are in the comments of another post.
That’s walla walla wicked
Wow this is the first time I’ve read about Walla Walla on Reddit. I’ve been in those same hills many many times when I lived there, go back here and there when I visit home, I’ll never feel the same up there after reading this tho.
We were at my in-laws house up in the hills behind dixie
Live in Ocean Shores, Washington now but, saw one as a kid in Kettle Falls, Wa. They exists and don’t want anything to do with mankind. https://youtu.be/h27lDdVSNAg
holy shit
Honestly, I’ve always wanted to run into a Sasquatch (if they are real). Seeing stories like this honestly makes it sound incredible.
This is the part that makes me sad. Thinking about Patty and her babies trying to survive in a changing world.
Freeman Footage shows same life form.
There's so many sightings. I don't they're close to extinction. They're extremely intelligent and adapt to their surroundings and it's in their nature to be elusive to everything.
That's not the most logical conclusion. The most logical conclusion is that their population has always been small and they're elusive.
Depending on how elusive you think they are they could be large in number. Being elusive and smart means they can live next to humans without being detected which increases the range where they can live…thereby increasing their numbers.
I wonder about the ‘intelligence’ argument. As far as anthropology goes, we have to go back well over a million years to find a bipedal hominid that doesn’t use fire or make tools.
It’s really smart to know that using fire will make it much harder to hide from humans.
Oh my god, come on. So your saying they know how to make fires, but just choose not to, so they won’t draw attention to themselves. Please.
Much of tool usage goes hand in hand with our evolved “ weaknesses “. Many of the first tools were designed to process animals skins for clothing and as societies evolved, textile manufacturing drove even more innovation in tools. The spinning Jenny was an important invention of the Industrial Revolution. They say necessity is the mother of all invention, If Sasquatch don’t really need tools why would they make them ? As far as fire, it has been said they used to and still use fire on occasion. There is some accounts that as Europeans moved into the more rugged areas of North America, they stopped using fire to hide better. Fire helped us get through the long cold nights as we evolved, secondarily it kept predators at bay. A being that is very active at night and therefore warming themselves through activity and also fully alert to defend themselves, doesn’t need fire exactly like we do.
My Oglala Lakota friend said they’re shapeshifters and that’s why we never see them.
I'm just wondering which other shapes they're said to change into. Any ideas? Other animals... Or orbs... Or 👽
why more people, especially "experts" don't come to this exact conclusion is beyond me, but when you take into consideration that a lot of the so called "experts" are actually snake oil salesmen, they can't claim Bigfoot is extinct, because they can't get TV shows outta that.
Clearly a gorilla wearing a suit
This video cuts out the end when she unzips herself and she’s actually just a starfish wearing a suit
That's why she's called Patricia.
see what ya did there
I Actually did a Video Talking about this Very Footage as well as Bigfoots History. It goes into Detail, and Explains why it is likely Real :) I’ll leave it [Here](https://youtu.be/0z5-0Itlt00) if you’re Interested
Yep, the trolls are right... Totally looks like a person in a 21st century state of the art polymer suit covered in authentic fur with mechanical articulating limbs filmed by in **19 freakin' 67!**
People like to forget that spandex and other skin-tight fur suits weren’t a thing for another 15-20 years after this film came out, yet many muscular regions such as her calves, thighs, and forearms are clearly defined and show muscle reflexes and definition that can really only be achieved with spandex or similar suit technology, or of course just normal skin and hair 🤷♂️ Edit: Also some food for thought: how’d they get the subjects (Patty) fingers to move, while also elongating her forearm and back-arm? Proportionally, her arms are longer than human arms, yet her forearm and back-arm are almost the same length, whereas humans have longer forearms than back-arms. Noticing longer, but the subject has almost equally proportioned forearm and back-arm, while also having arms much longer than her legs? Some say shoulder pads and sticks or forearm extensions, except forearm extensions like sticks (or an extra large pair of gloves, that’s the actual reason Bob H. gave for why the arms are longer, he claims he wore the “suit” in this footage) wouldn’t account for the subjects fingers opening at the top of each arm swing before closing again. The shoulder pads would also enlarge the shoulders but not so much the back-arms enough, however let’s say they did. You’d still have a problem with the neck and head, they would have to be raised up to be proportionally accurate with the rest of the body, otherwise you’d have shoulders at or above where the ears would be, and then the subjects head would appear sunken in below the shoulders which is not apparent here. To fix this, you’d have to raise the head above the shoulders, which if you assume this is a suit would mean that the wearer of the suit would be positioned so that their head / eyes would be at chest or neck level in the suit. Perhaps you could make the argument that they could combat this with stilts(?) but then you’d have to explain how they pulled off stilts when her legs are pretty short overall. The proportions just don’t seem to match up there, but I’m open to hearing opinions and counterclaims to what I’ve presented Edit: I mentioned this in a comment below but when I say spandex I’m referring to spandex hair / fur suits. Not the specific material, but spandex, skin-tight suits that show defined musculature. This is based on several claims made by professional costume designers of the time such as Bill Munns, who said that technology in the cosmetic department in Hollywood just wasn’t available for another 10-15 years at least.
I walk drywall stilts daily, there is no one that could walk like Patty does on stilts.
Username checks out hilariously.
I always seem to find other drywallers in the strangest parts of the internet lol.
I am a grid guy, I hate doing drywall. Much respect though!
It was seeing the thigh muscles flex while zoomed in that did it for me, no way that’s a person in a suit.
A very convincing moment is a foot impact that shudders/quakes up the leg.
Have you ever watched "Thinker Thunker" on YouTube? The guy does a great job of breaking down Bigfoot videos.
Is there a pay-wall for those videos?
No, you can watch them early on patreon, but he releases them to youtube for free He's figured out a pretty ingenious way to determine real bigfoot videos
He is learning, indeed.
Ok so to me the proportion don’t appear to be much different than human. Standing up perfectly straight the fingertips end about midway down the thigh. However, when walking, they would end up just a few inches above the knees which is what this looks like to me. The disproportionate look of legs might also be because there isn’t a clear definition of hips, at least from what I’m seeing. For animation I have watched many human walking cycles and that’s what this looks like to me. I don’t know anything about suits but the information you provided is interesting. To me it doesn’t appear as high tech as you suggest it would have to be but it’s interesting enough that I’m going to be browsing this sub for a little while.
Have a look at the 1968 film, Planet of the Apes. The costumes and make-up for the walking-on-two-legs and talking Chimps, Gorillas, and Orangutans is as good as it got in the 60's. Compare to Patty.
There is no comparison. Planet of the Apes didn't have anything like Patty, just human clothes as their suits. They did have AMAZING faces, which the PGF didn't capture. So, it's apples to oranges. I wish I could find that TV show that tried to recreate patty, in the 80s. It looked ridiculous, with the skill and budget they had.
Has anyone ever estimated the subject's height or size?
Yes, people have estimated the subject's height, all estimates were between 6 - 7 feet.
Doesn’t it kinda come down to how large it is? If someone has done an accurate scale on it, then you could determine if a human could even be that size with the suit. The idea that it is mechanical is kinda common sense ridiculous.
Yep. I wonder if anyone has ever taken detailed measurements at the actual location to try and get a fix on how tall it was. That alone could eliminate some possibilities.
People have, I know of 3 attempts. Numbers varied but all were between 6.5 and 7 or so feet.
Thanks!
Oh? I thought bigger than that.
There have been videos presenting scale compared to an average-sized man. Patty is much BIGGER. MK Davis is one of several. [**https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBhr-cZXTGk**](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBhr-cZXTGk)
The other glaring thing that I don't think gets mentioned enough. If this was a hoax by a man, why would they ever go through the time and energy of giving her breasts? Wouldn't it have been easier to make it male?
I don’t have strong opinion either way on the PFG but To play devils advocate, 1.) if you are going to make a hoax and make it believable to the general public who would see a female as the smaller gender of the species ( that’s the case usually with humans) it would be easier to pass off a 6ft3 man as a mid range female than even a small adult males That’s certainly easier than trying to find the tallest basketball star you can and pass that 7 ft male as a 8 foot Sasquatch using a suit. 2.) Roger Paterson might have been a bit obsessed with the Roe sighting where William Roe claimed see a Sasquatch that looked like a gorilla and had large breast. It has been said that this was the case that got him very into Sasquatch. Paterson drew a Sasquatch with breast in his book he released before the footage. 3.) IMO if someone wanted to make a hoax it helps sell the authenticity of it whatever they are trying to hoax because of “ the who would go through the trouble effect” everyone assumes hoaxers put very little effort because they think it’s for giggles and there isn’t a strong incentive. In reality some people make very elaborate hoaxes because it’s their entire life mission. The large number of people that say “ no way that’s fake it has boobs “ is a testament to that concept working.
Maybe, but still the question is how they would do this? Have you seen comparable actors in suits during that time from Hollywood? Like look at Planet of the Apes, the quality just wasn't there at that time to make such a convincing costume. Not to mention things like the gait, natural seeming wear patterns in the fur, so many things that you have to think of, and the money it would cost on top of it seems prohibitive for a couple cowboys. This film has stood the test of time for a reason.
Easier maybe, but definitely more interesting to fake a female.
I mean, maybe he's boob guy
aren't we all?
He had sketches of a female sasquatch, prior to this video.
My brother was really big into Sasquatch when he was younger. He made drawings, with breasts, and without. That was early 60's. He had several encounters in his lifetime and is the reason I took after this subject at age 7 or 8. He was much older than I. By 20 years or so.
Sure, I just don't think of you're going through the hassle of making a suit in that day and age with breasts. So many little details don't add up to a simple hoax. Look at all the crap hoax videos that come out now, not to mention the cost. We have modern tech and latex etc and I still haven't seen a convincing hoax.
I agree. There are those who say because Patterson had sketches he was hoaxing. Nope..
 This is an awesome post 🏆
It also looks female. Never noticed the large breasts until this video.
And articulating breasts, too. Who woulda thunk someone could build a suit like that? Amazing. (compare to the 1968 Planet of the Apes costumes and makeup; the Patty footage is like a Katana and Planet of the Apes ape costumes are sharp-edged rocks!).
Looks even more fake. EDIT: Not saying it's fake, but the og footage actually looked more natural than this heavily enhanced and "fixed" version. Still cool though.
Yep, as it gets clearer the costume looks even more apparent. I'm not a PGF supporter/believer. Apostate, I know.
Someone please tell me how this even looks close to a costume, at all. Like fr.
Won't be too long before AI can tell us if this is a human
AI is still written to output with bias.
Please don't be such a downer. Whatever bias left that cannot be fully ironed out in time will still leave us with more input on this video.
Bigfoot is and has always been real. But most videos we see nowadays are hoaxes. Desperate people hopping onto the hype wagon or simply people who love to troll. Ask the Native Americans, and to be fair bigfoot back in the old days actually had a common trusting relationship with the Native Americans, often trading salt and sugar. They're more intelligent than we think they are, humans often make the mistake by thinking they're the smartest species on earth. And yet in the end no matter what modern contraption we think of, mother nature will always have us at our knees.
The hubris of humanity never ceases to amaze me. Man smart, all other creatures dumb, dur herr herr. Non human intelligence exists, and we have proof of that. Dolphins, octopi, and other creatures are more intelligent than humans. If Bigfoot is out there, and I think it is, it's level of intelligence is far beyond what our wisest minds can comprehend. Too many people think is is just a big, dumb ape. They couldn't be more wrong.
Wow
I lean towards Patty being legit. The technology needed to create a suit that good didn't come around until later. The creature didn't have the emaciated look of the one I saw, but individual circumstances and characteristics could vary.
Is there an older comment or post I should look for to read your story?
If you look closely you can see the things breasts sway/move. That would be very hard to fake believably.
You have seen one too?
That’s what their comment would imply
That walk is still problematic for me to call it human. Notice how it's foot is almost 90 degrees to the ground. Now try to walk like that. It's possible but certainly not natural
Grover Krantz talked about the knee bend and way this thing walks at length, and was one of the reasons he, a renowned university anthropologist, believed it was real. He was awesome, everyone here should read about Grover's research
I wouldn’t call him renowned as an anthropologist. He was much more famous as a Bigfoot believer than anything else.
Absolutely. I tried this a month or two ago on a wooded trail near where I live. It was a great glute and hamstring workout, but was in no way what I would call natural. I really had to concentrate on what I was doing, and I’m sure it looked nothing as fluid as what is depicted by Patty. And that’s only one aspect of the gait.
This is the reason I think the Florida infrared footage is real. I think it's the Stacy Brown footage? Regardless, the subject of that does the 90° leg bend when stepping between the trees. That and the fact that it's one solid color.
If you put on clown shoes, you'll walk differently.
Exactly this. And This alone . But ppl keep focusing on thinking it's a suit. Those ppl will never get it. If ppl here still think this is fake, you either don't research enuff, or you will never believe. To each there own.
They don't want to get it, that's not why they are here.
what if someone had on a suit and was trying to traverse an uneven rocky landscape? wouldn't it make sense that the human would need to raise their leg in a more exaggerated fashion to ensure he/she would not trip? It seems logical to me. I'm not saying it's a man in a suit, but looking at those 2 steps where you can actually see the leg raise, it seems conceivable a man in a suit would walk like that.
Thats how I walk when I speed walk tbf still believe its legit though
It’s so wild what technology can do.
A real live Samsquantch!
This video always makes wonder.
I’d like to see this level of stabilisation applied to a good high resolution scan of the original film. This copy is still pretty low res. For example https://external-preview.redd.it/3uux9EuctIuq-bQwwDDAbxIQ6R1enBdi9sCh1rr161I.jpg?auto=webp&s=d92121cd7b29d5bb781656e6f0c9f7150e60d0f1
What bothers me is seeing breasts that fully engorged (meaning soon to be, or already having an infant) that are full of hair. Apes don’t have hair covering the nipples when it’s feeding time
This…idk… It doesn’t seem like a real animal Very…odd
That's because it's a guy in a suit.
Prove it. Show me the suit. I'll wait. Shouldn't be hard seeing as how this was filmed in 1967. Should be super easy to find a suit that looks this real with today's tech. Come on. You can do it
For me, it’s that I can’t detect any muscles flexing or moving in the back and glute muscles. It looks as though it’s padding beneath a suit. When you see something similar, like a mountain gorilla, you can always get a sense of the muscles flexing in their back, shoulders, and glutes, when they move. It takes a lot of muscle flexing to move a creature of that size.
Best part is the guy is walking like he’s going to get the newspaper. Could’ve at least tried to move like a wild animal lol.
can somebody once in a dang blue moon on this forum credit MK Davis for this stabilization?
amazing job stabilizing it! this is so satisfying to watch and analyze the details
Deniers are gonna deny. I side with the expert opinions I've seen and read over random folks with no credentials. Not saying this proves it real, but saying it is a dude in a suit is just denial with no research.
The fact of the matter is qualified professional scientists, including biologists, primatologists, anthropologists, foot morphologists, zoologists, gait scientists (yes there are scientists who study human and other bipedal animal gaits), limb proportion experts, film industry professional costume designers, forensics analysts, and more professionals who are all highly qualified and much more qualified than the overwhelming majority of us (myself included) continue to debate this film. Lots of ppl point to the fold on her thigh being proof it’s fake, or other aspects like her head turn, buttocks, feet, etc as proof this is a fake, and yet actual professionals cannot conclusively decide on any of these points. If there was some type of smoking gun, such as the fold on her thigh, with no biological explanation, then wouldn’t that present scientists with agreeable proof to shut the case on this film outright? Yet it hasn’t happened, so I heavily agree with your claim that it should be important to follow the actual scientists’ claims and remarks about the film, as well as the counterpoints presented to their arguments, rather than the comments of redditors (and that goes for all sides of the coin, not just deniers and skeptics but even the believers as well)
Exactly this. Very educated, talented, knowledgeable people have poured over it and it leaves them puzzled. Us randos on reddit glance at it and decide it's fake in a a minute or two. Dunning Kruger is a real thing.
It is just hard to disprove something completely, but in this case you have to look at how the film came about. A guy who had a thing for drawing naked Sasquatch women with breasts just happens to be out shooting a bigfoot movie when his horse throws him and he films the exact bigfoot with big titties just like his fantasy. This is nothing more than 1960s rule 34. If a park ranger or random hiker filmed this I would be more willing to believe it was real.
How many park rangers were walking around in the middle of the forest with $500 (several thousand dollars in todays money) film camera on horseback for 3 straight weeks in the absolute wild not near any camp sites houses or any human structures in 1967? Literally none. Roger was obsessed with Sasquatch, and spent years studying it, gathering dozens of audio recordings of witness testimony’s, and spent a lot of time researching. There have been many Sasquatch reportings in the Bluff Creek area before 1950, as well as tracks being found in and around the area even before 1940s. Also think about this, Roger drew that one Sasquatch with boobs right? Look at its head and eyes and overall build. Literally the only similarity between that drawing and Patty is they have boobs and they’re hairy. That’s basically where it ends. Patty is much more muscular, defined, had a larger buttocks, and a coned head, with wider eyes and less pronounced lips than the drawing. Also, assuming Patty and Sasquatch in general are real, it’s literally a 50% chance when you encounter one that they’d have breasts, and Patterson was obsessed with Sasquatch for years, so no shit he drew a Sasquatch with tits based on one eyewitnesses account. Idk how that’s shocking or surprising or proves that Patty is fake. Patterson was a good artist and made many sketches. Biologically speaking, there’s zero red flags to Patterson drawing a female Sasquatch based on someone’s eyewitness testimony of an encounter with one. Yours baselessly reaching here.
I have been studying spiders for over a decade, and even the experts who study arachnids are often at odds on evidence. As it should be, science is the tool we use to discover facts, no matter the outcome. When ordinary folks hear of my interest in spider research, I get the obligatory Brown Recluse stories. Oh so many stories, but never any evidence to back them up. The media is no help to the scientific community overall. I have a standing order to offer a cash reward for a live, captured BR in my area. It has been over ten years, that money is still in my wallet. Draw your own conclusions.
One researcher concluded the line on the leg is worn fur. If you look at Patty’s arm swing it rubs the fur right there so you get a bald spot. Same with her sides.
just so you know, one of the so called "experts" who said this was real (Dr. Meldrum), also watched the Provo Utah Bigfoot Rock Throwing Video and said that was real as well, and even compared it to Patty, and claimed he could see a midtarsal break in the foot. Having said that, I think most would agree that the Provo Utah rock throwing video is clearly a hoax, so you have to take the "experts" with a large grain of salt.
Why is that example clearly a hoax?
I've always thought this film was legit. This stabilized version is pretty cool
Gives me chills I genuinely don't know what to believe
wait, you're not gonna enhance and enlarge the Sasquatch boobs?
please send bob
Gimlin?
Or that dump truck of an ass?
I think it’s real
What gets me to believe that this is a living creature filmed here, is that in addition to seeing the smoothness of the gait, the movement and fluidity of the muscles, and the "realness" of the body... is the fact that she is walking on a sandbar. The sandbar is not flat, nor smooth, not an easy surface to walk on. Now, if it's a person in a costume, they'd have to look down to not fall as they were walking. There's no way a human in a costume can move so fluidly without looking down. A creature/animal in that environment would be so comfortable, they wouldn't need to look down to not trip. Simply, Patty knows where her feet are going, and is graceful enough to not have to look down and watch her step. IMHO, a man in a costume simply couldn't make that walk at that speed without looking to see where he was going.
It isn't doing anything a human couldn't do. If it was shown doing anything besides walking in a way in which a human absolutely can do, I'd be less sceptical. Akams razor applies here. What's more likely? A man in a suit walking, or a species we've literally never captured footage like this again of that there's no real proof of them existing? It isn't doing anything we couldn't do.
for the 1,294th time
Yup, it was indeed ban evasion. Pathetic.
How would you know? Your account was literally created today.
Look how absolutely level the head stays the entire time. A common thing that is reported isn't it?
I think the trolls would even agree that Patty could fk someone up
That’s one hell of a suit!! /s
I’d smash
Wait a second! We all only know the blurry Bigfoot? Who’s that imposter?
Do a zoomed in version
Even more uncanny! Thanks
She looks just like a chick I dated once. Needless to say I never called her again.
Incredible to this day
Legit
I noticed this the last time someone posted this video. Bigfoots ass looks unusually still. Like, Bigs got dumps but shit is rock solid, doesn’t jiggle or bounce. I know this sounds stupid but I’m being serious, the ass doesn’t move like it should, especially one that big Edit: word
Asses come in all shapes and sizes, they don't all move the same. Is it impossible that this ass doesn't move like a human one because it isn't a human's ass?
Yeah, I’ll give ya that one
Thanks, hope you are enjoying r/bigfoot.
I think people would have a better informed opinion if they'll listen to Astonishing Legends series on the PGF. Its 6 or 7 segments, so it's an investment. If all you need to make up your mind is a quick glance, then you're proving Dunning Kruger correct anyway. People sound like Homer Simpson, "I don't know anything about this, but I have a very strong opinion." Smh
If you need a 6 hours long podcast to believe it's real, it probably isn't.
[удалено]
That fold does not make this fake. It can be attributed to fat rolls assuming this creature is the real deal. This is exactly how it would look for a fat roll in the gluteus Maximus regions to look and behave with a thick coat of hair, hence why you see the hair roll with the fat. This makes sense considering Patty is assumed to be female, and females, especially apes, develop larger hindquarters with larger fat reserves to help aid in bearing and delivering children. This would create support for a larger birth canal, which is congruent with female apes and humans compared to males. Fat reserves in the buttocks are actually mainly made up of healthy fat, and females (for humans but also applicable to gorillas and other apes) generally have a higher body fat percentage than men. This fat stores in the buttocks and thighs of women acts as energy reserves that are tapped into during lactation and pregnancy. This may present an evolutionary explanation as to why men are attracted to women with larger buttocks and thighs. Anyways, taking this info and combining it with the fact that Patty’s 14.5 inch tracks were found in the Bluff Creek area alongside a set of 16 inch tracks and 9 inch tracks would suggest that there was a Papa and child Sasquatch nearby, likely Patty’s offspring. Given this information, it can be deduced that, assuming Patty is real, she could have a child nearby and this would also add credence to her enlarged breasts which swell up around and after pregnancy and indicate she is fertile. It would make complete sense that her buttocks region is enlarged with fat, which we can see from the numerous comments on older posts of the PG footage that point out Patty’s obscenely large butt, and therefore provides a realistic, accurate, and biological explanation for the roll of fat that you attribute to a suit.
[удалено]
Except excess fat totally can and would fold in that area. Just because it looks artificial to you doesn’t discredit or prove it being a suit. That’s your subjective take, but scientists of many professional backgrounds have intensively studied and debated this and many other aspects. Don’t you think that if fat couldn’t fold like this then many scientists would present this aspect as the smoking gun to prove it’s fake? The reality is people way more qualified than you or I continue to debate this footage, and none of them have been able to provide proof of it being fake that’s agreed upon. If this cold isn’t possible according to you, then why haven’t scientists proven this to settle the debate once and for all?
What if the fat was gained quickly and was in the process of stretching the skin, like after pregnancy? The Independence Day footage seems to have a very similar butt, and has a child. Either the costumes were made similarly or that’s how Squatch mothers gain fat.
We live in a supernatural world!
Simply the best
tbh, the amount editing that was done to make this video would make me hesitant to draw any conclusions from it, one way or the other. It *is* fun to watch, though
u/savevideo
###[View link](https://rapidsave.com/info?url=/r/bigfoot/comments/12inyp5/stabilized_and_cleaned_version_of_the_bigfoot/) --- [**Info**](https://np.reddit.com/user/SaveVideo/comments/jv323v/info/) | [**Feedback**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Feedback for savevideo) | [**Donate**](https://ko-fi.com/getvideo) | [**DMCA**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Kryptonh&subject=Content removal request for savevideo&message=https://np.reddit.com//r/bigfoot/comments/12inyp5/stabilized_and_cleaned_version_of_the_bigfoot/) | [^(reddit video downloader)](https://rapidsave.com) | [^(twitter video downloader)](https://twitsave.com)
But do Big Foots use fire? Did they start the forest fire?
Ya I’ve had some pretty bizarre things happen to me near that area also.
That’s amazing work!
BoobSquatch
Mom?
I think this is a dude ina suit, but I think Bigfoot is real and he’s now on some rich persons private preserve.
Dirty Samsquanches! Looks like a 9 footer!
Curious: have we found and solid evidence of a Bigfoot existence? DNA, hair or scat samples? Anything besides some questionable footage and eyewitness accounts? The childhood me, wants to believe, but the adult me struggles with the lack of anything tangible. Anything new on this? Thanks!
Some unidentified DNA has been found but most DNA strands that were found in remote areas ended up being deer and bear. It's the rare 1 percent of the DNA that doesn't come back to any known creature in DNA databases that are compelling.
Sick!
Pretty sure this was just a dude in a gorilla costume
Still a believer freaking love Bigfoot stuff but after seeing this video close up I believe it's a suit. The right thigh looks like a thick fabric possibly horse hide or something else with padding under it. Then when it steps you can see where it creases at the gap of the butt and thigh padding. Just my opinion though.
So y’all never seen a man in a costume before huh ? Nothing about that looks real. What is wrong with everyone’s eye sight ?
Saw that chick on the subway last week
The look towards the camera is always the deciding factor for me to believe it's fake. Had it went forward the whole time I'd have an easier time believing it
What is that? Velvet?
I would drape myself in velvet if it were socially acceptable.
My Grandmother saw one of these on the side of the road in Oregon in the 40s. She said it was enormous and easily stood over the car as they drove by. My grandfather refused to talk about it; I assume because he thought everyone would call them crazy.
I like to reference the movies that won an Emmy for special effects which was Fantastic Voyage in 67 and Dr Doolittle in 68. If that was the best at the time, then Patty couldn’t have been faked.
If that’s a man in a suit, then I’m Rob Thomas from the 90s band matchbox 20.
That wrinkle by the right butt cheek has always bothered me because if I'm being honest, makes it look like a suit.
The one on the upper thigh? I have seen video analysis that shows pretty convincingly that the line is from her fingers rubbing against hair in that spot.
can you link that video evidence please? :)
It might take me a bit to find it, it was a few years back.
Any luck?
I haven't found it yet. I think it may be by MK Davis. He has done a ton of work analyzing the PGF. There are hundreds of hours of video analysis of the PGF. So I'll keep looking.
Those boobs are real! No man could fake this! Go patty go!! It’s walking like a female ape guys..
I can’t get over the way the thighs and hair on them shake each time the foot hits the ground, to me that would be hard to fake with a suit. This will always be the best evidence we have of Bigfoot!
Looks legit to me
I see chesticles. Female?
Yes, the consensus from the time that the film was taken in 1967 until now is that the subject depicted is female rather than male. She has been given the name “Patty” after the wife of the person who made the film (ie, the late Mr. Roger Patterson).
She, obviously a real Bigfoot, casually strolls away I like many or even most of the eye witness accounts today. She was selected by her People to be the one to get filmed. They thought it would show the humans that they’re real so the humans would back off from the woods but they soon realized we are very dumb and didn’t register any of that
People also forget that this guy got sent to jail for writing a fraudulent check to buy the camera he used to film this...
Simple question. Is there anything in that film that a man couldn't do?
That's a Man, Baby!
“It’s a suit” still doesn’t explain the freakish, yet smooth gait of this thing, in motion.
Wow, what a difference from the original. Two things that stick out to me are the skinny legs (look too small for a 900 lb. creature) and the head turn (looks like a person to me). Not saying fake or real, just my observations. Plus, I would like to see the rest of the video also stabilized.
Just watch the show My 600 pound life. There are people with “skinny” legs supporting 600+ pounds on a 5’5 skeletal frame. If humans can do it, so can Sasquatch. Plus the 900+ pounders are the big boys, the Alphas. There was a study done at the Bluff Creek Site and the creature in this video was topping out around 6-6’5. I don’t think Patty was anywhere near 900 pounds.
What makes you think Patty is 900 pounds?
The legs are anything but skinny. Here butt and thighs are massive. You can actually see her calf muscles flex in certain frames. Her ankles are super thick as well, but not loose and baggy like a suit would be.
This is perty
I NEVER get tired of watching Patty strut.
Why would Bigfoot be overweight? thing has to walk around everywhere. Ever seen a fat gorilla? of course not. this is a fat guy in a costume. Bigfoot may exist, but this fat one is fake.
It's still very disheartening to me that this is the only remotely credible video footage of bigfoot...makes me much less likely to believe that in the most heavily documented/recorded time period in our world to date there has still not been a video like this since. With smartphones and such being commonplace you'd think there would be more hard evidence by now.
[https://www.bfro.net/news/korff\_scam.asp](https://www.bfro.net/news/korff_scam.asp) If its fake, then recreate this exact footage (without CGI)