Connect with us

Cryptids

The Patterson-Gimlin Film Of Bigfoot: What Skeptics Still Struggle To Explain

Published

on

The most famous of all alleged “Bigfootage” ever produced, the Patterson-Gimlin film remains an iconic artifact of the unknown.

Shot nearly five decades ago on Bluff Creek in California near the Oregon border, the minute-long scene recorded onto 16mm film by Roger Patterson accompanied by Bob Gimlin depicts a subject covered in brown hair walking upright away from the camera.
Frame # 352 captures the subject in its most memorable and revealing pose relative to the camera, an image which has since become the face of Sasquatch-related pop culture around the world.
Above: Frame 352 from the Patterson-Gimlin film of Bigfoot
In the 40+ years since the release of this alleged Bigfoot documentation dozens of brains have picked over its every detail. Some such as the late Dr. Dmitri D. Donskoy, a leading expert on human biomechanics, believed the subject to be nonhuman.
Others outright deemed it an easy-to-spot fraud, including the late “father of cryptozoology” zoologist Bernard Heuvelmans. Countless TV specials have aired the footage for the public to decide for themselves – oftentimes showing highly deteriorated copies of copies of copies.
Numerous people have come forward over the years claiming to have either manufactured a suit for the film or having been a performer in a suit in the film, providing little evidence beyond their own word and the testimony of friends and family.
Most folks with memories of the Patterson-Gimlin film recall a shaky, blurry, faded image with a brief glimpse of a hairy biped walking in the distance.
To refresh readers memories here’s a stabilized version of the Patterson-Gimlin film originally put together by amateur researcher M.K. Davis and modified by a member of the Reddit online community.
Unlike the original shaky footage captured by Patterson on foot, this clip lets viewers see the film as if it were shot on a tripod. For the first time viewers get a clear, steady glimpse of the subject walking and turning its head back toward the camera.
So what of it? Scientists think it’s fake and hoax confessions have been made, right? Yes, but the former isn’t as ubiquitous as one would think, and the latter overlap and lack any substantial proof to back them up.
The unsettling truth is that almost 50 years later, several key facts about the Patterson-Gimlin film still raise the possibility that the subject shown is not an actor in a suit, but an unidentified hominid of the American northwest.
Matching footprints were found at the site starting seven years prior to the film
Photographs and plaster casts of large footprints on or around Bluff Creek were being documented starting in 1960 and leading up to the alleged Patterson-Gimlin encounter seven years later.
Professor D. Jeffrey Meldrum of Idaho State University, an expert in primate locomotion, foot morphology, and one of the few academics willing to analyze alleged Sasquatch evidence at-length, concludes each of these footprints found near Bluff Creek match the same individual source.
Hoax theories thereby must conclude that Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin were part of a coordinated effort involving several groups of unassociated people over seven years to create a specific Bigfoot identity for the sake of backing up a brief, shaky, film.
Not impossible nor improbable, but there are holes in this theory. For one, Patterson didn’t visit Bluff Creek for the first time until 1962, two years after the first of these matching footprints were documented.
Secondly, it’s a corroborating part of the narrative neither Patterson nor anyone else involved ever mentioned when trying to persuade others of the film’s authenticity. The link between the Bluff Creek prints was first noted by Meldrum decades later. Why go to all the trouble of building up alleged evidence over years only to omit it from your story?
Several respected anatomists, anthropologists, forensics examiners, and primatologists have analyzed the Patterson-Gimlin film throughout the decades. Many, including Meldrum, firmly believe in the film’s authenticity for a number of reasons including seemingly nonhuman dimensions and gait.
Others including the aforementioned Heuvelmans have been less favorable, pointing to hairy breasts and the subject’s seemingly too-casual demeanor as signs of fraud. However, of the six so-called unfavorable analyses of the footage, five couldn’t definitively say one way or the other.
Heuvelmans was the only one to say it was absolutely fake. Most of these unfavorable findings, such as the one reached by anatomist D.W. Grieve of the Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine in London, include opinions that the film is convincing enough to bring the researchers involved to the brink of believing in its authenticity.
The overwhelming majority of alleged Sasquatch footage is blurry and shaky to the point where discerning limbs is difficult enough, let alone further details about anatomy, behavior, and locomotion.
The Patterson-Gimlin film, however, offers enough of a look at the subject that only one of two conclusions can be made: it’s a human in a suit, or an unidentified hominid.
Despite being reduced to only these two options, over 80 percent of unfavorable scientific analysis of the Patterson-Gimlin film refuses to determine one way or the other, citing many convincing characteristics. If it’s fake, it’s so good it practically fools experts in every avenue of relevant science.
World-renowned makeup artists and costume designers believe if it was a suit, it’s a masterpiece.
Similar to the scientific response to the Patterson-Gimlin film, the opinions of Hollywood’s leading effects masters are divided as to whether the creature is real, but nearly unified by uncomfortable notions of legitimacy.
With that said, two major effects artists considered the creature to be fake. One was the late Academy award-winning Stan Winston of Aliens, Jurassic Park, Predator, and Terminator fame, who felt the suit looked unimpressive but whose work depicting primates and other hairy creatures ranks among his least revered or remembered.
The other is Rick Baker, creator of the Harry and the Hendersons creature costume, whose anecdotal dismissal, citing detailed knowledge of a suit being sold to prank Patterson, was later retracted by his studio.

The majority of professional makeup artists and costume designers familiar with the Patterson-Gimlin film consider the creature a work of unprecedented art if not the real deal.

The most notable was the late John Chambers, Academy award-winning creator of the costumes used in The Planet of the Apes released one year after the alleged Patterson-Gimlin encounter. Chambers stated that if the creature were fake it was achieved with skills surpassing his own.
Top brass at Disney believed their technicians wouldn’t be able to replicate the film either, and the technicians themselves refused to believe it was something accomplished artificially.
Not exactly smoking guns proving authenticity, but arguments counting on Roger Patterson’s ability to acquire such a suit must contend with the fact the cowboy and amateur Bigfoot hunter was connectionless, poor, and uneducated despite his self-taught skillsets.
Despite a well-funded attempt, no one has ever been able to duplicate the footage successfully.
Strictly speaking the burden is not on skeptics to prove the Patterson-Gimlin film is fake. However, that hasn’t stopped people from trying. The most famous and well-funded attempt to recreate the Patterson-Gimlin film to-date was conducted in 1998 by the British Broadcasting Corporation for inclusion in a program entitled X-Creatures.
Viewers were told the Patterson-Gimlin film was to be finally debunked through identical recreation. The program promised to prove it was possible to make a suit matching the subject seen in the footage.
Over 30 years after the alleged Bigfoot encounter on Bluff Creek, this was the supposedly similarly-looking suit revealed as proof the original creature could be faked by clever costume designers.
As of 2015 no one has successfully produced a duplicated version of the Patterson-Gimlin film. That doesn’t mean it can’t be done – it just hasn’t been done in nearly half a century despite a highly-publicized effort to do so.
Roger Patterson died of cancer in 1972, vowing to the very end that what he saw on Bluff Creek was a Bigfoot.
Bob Gimlin avoided the spotlight until the turn of the 21st century, when he began appearing at Bigfoot believers’ conferences, as adamant as ever that what he saw that fall day in 1967 was something nonhuman.
By Taylor Leonard, source: theghostdiaries.com
Continue Reading

Cryptids

The story of Bigfoot, hit by a train in 1880

Published

on

By

Cryptozoologist Scott White of the International Bigfoot Society spoke to an elderly woman named Rita Swift, who told him a story told by her grandfather.

Her grandfather’s name was George Huhn, and in the late 19th century he worked as an engineer on a train that ran along the US-Canada border.

One night, while they were passing through a forest somewhere in the middle of nowhere, their train hit something on the tracks and it was something so large that it damaged the cowcatcher – a device made of metal rods that was attached to the front of the train.

Below is her story:

“My name is Rita Swift. I live in Orange Co. California. In 1945, my grandfather George Huhn told me a story about the time his train hit a large Ape creature and bent the cow catcher on his train.

“This was in the 1880’s and he was an engineer on a train that ran along the borders of the US and Canada. It was night, and all of a sudden their train hit something and they stopped the train, because the cowcatcher was dragging on the tracks.

At first they thought it was a moose, but when they all got out with their lanterns, they discovered this huge smelly Ape, hung up in the catcher. They had only lanterns for light, and they were in the forest, basically in the middle of nowhere.

“It took most of the crew to pick it up and lift it into an open flat car. They noticed it was structured differently from a Gorilla of Ape, and smelled so bad, the crew got the smell on them.

“They left it on the flat car, because it took at least 2 hours to straighten out the cow catcher. Good thing my great grandfather was also a blacksmith. They were at least 2 hours from the next water tower and station of sorts.

“The break man noticed Indians sneaking around in the forest, but thought they had disappeared. When they were ready to go, the crew checked on their smelly passenger, but he was gone.

“They looked for tracks and decided the Indians had dragged it away into the forest and across a stream. They found the tracks and pieces of hair and of course the smell. They washed up in the stream and were glad to get rid of it. The smell had even remained in the flat car.

“My great grandfather took pieces of the hair back, and gave it to a doctor he knew in Michigan. They had all decided the creature had escaped from a circus or sideshow. Great grandfather thought it was 8 feet tall and weighed at least 500 lbs.

“It took six men to carry it off the tracks. When my daughter was a student at California State University at Fullerton in 1986, I met a Professor of Anthropology. The reason I was there, was I donated Indonesian Fighting Swords to her dept.

“They were very old and had belonged to my husband. I just didn’t feel comfortable having them in my home anymore. I noticed in her office she had information on the walls about Big Foot. I told her the story and she believed it was documented.

“My grandfather said the Ape had a different face than what he remembered of a Gorilla. He said the teeth were like humans, but extremely wide and large. The body hair was thick dark brown, with light tipping and the eyes were large and dark. He said they agreed it was a male because of it’s genitalia.

“Grandfather continued as a railroad engineer on the Colorado Wyoming line until he retired in 1925. He fought off outlaws with his six shooter from the cab. I have a photo of Grandfather with the crew, stopped in Eads, Colorado, with a large cannon hole in the side of the engine.

“This was in 1898, when some outlaws on horses pulled up an old Confederate cannon along the tracks, and fired at the engine. The crew chased them away, but left the train damaged. They were on their way to Durango carrying bank money from Denver.

“Grandfather would never tell stories that were not true. He was a devout Methodist, and said his prayers so loud every night, the whole house could hear him.

“He had originally come from Amish in Mercer, Co., Pa., but left to fight for the Union in the Civil War. His father did not accept his decision, and he never returned to Mercer Co. He was born in 1845 and died in 1947, in Claremont California.”

Continue Reading

Cryptids

Moehau: New Zealand’s Bigfoot

Published

on

By

Tony Lucas’s depiction of a Moehau. Photo:Cryptidz.Fandom

The Moehau is a legendary monster in Maori mythology, originating from the central plateau region of the North Island of New Zealand. It is said to be a large, hairy, man-like creature that inhabits the dense forests of the region and is known for its fearsome roar and aggressive behavior.

Description of the Moehau

The Moehau is described in Maori legend as a large, hairy, human-like creature with a fierce appearance. It is said to have long arms that reach down to its knees, and sharp claws on its hands and feet. Its hair is described as dark and shaggy, covering its entire body, and its face is said to be savage and frightening.

The Moehau is typically depicted as being six-seven feet tall, with a powerful build and an intimidating presence. Some legends describe the creature as having a mane of hair around its neck and glowing eyes that can be seen from a distance in the darkness of the forest.

Moehau Sightings

Reports of sightings of the Moehau are rare and mainly come from the central plateau region of the North Island of New Zealand, where the creature is said to inhabit. However, these reports are largely anecdotal and lack concrete evidence.

The sightings are often described as fleeting and difficult to verify, with people claiming to have seen a large, hairy, human-like creature moving quickly through the forest or hearing its distinctive roar echoing through the trees.

The most common evidence of the Moehau is found in the form of footprints.

Rex Gilroy holds up plaster casts of possible Moehau footprints. Photo: Haunted Auckland

In 1903 some very large footprints were found in the Karangahake Gorge in the Coromandel.

In 1971 a trail of huge footprints was discovered on snow-covered ground by a park ranger in the Karangahake Gorge.

In 1983 a man hunting a deer came across fresh footprints near the Heaphy River that appeared to be far larger then a normal human’s.

In 1991 in the Cameron Mountains of the South Island some campers hastily abandoned their camp after finding some unsettlingly large footprints near their site.

Newspaper articles about the Moehau. Photo: Haunted Auckland

Several witnesses report having been attacked or chased by a Moehau. In 1970 some campers in the Coromandel abandoned their camp after a 6ft tall hairy man beast continued to screamed loudly and threw rocks at them.

Just two years later in the same area a hunter watched as a 6ft tall, ape-like creature worked its way through the bush on the other side of the gully. The hunter went to investigate and found large footprints left behind.

An undated report in New Zealand’s Sunday News told of the owner of the Lake Mahinapua Pub on the South Island’s West Coast regularly having his garden raided by a huge man-beast. The Moehau was particularly fond of his silver beet.

Killed by Moehau?

A few early account existed where people were reportedly killed by Moehau. The headless body of a prospector was found in the Martha Mine in 1882 and was blamed on a Moehau. A few years later, not far from the Martha Mine, a woman was dragged from her shack and found dead with a snapped neck a few hundred meters away.

Was the Moehau an Escaped Gorilla?

The theory that the Moehau is an escaped gorilla is a relatively recent and controversial one. It suggests that the creature may have escaped from a zoo or animal park in New Zealand and survived in the wild, leading to reports of sightings and encounters. This theory is based on the idea that the description of the Moehau as a large, hairy, man-like creature with sharp claws and a fearsome appearance is consistent with the physical characteristics of gorillas.

However, this theory is largely speculative and lacks concrete evidence. Gorillas are native to Africa and are not found in the wild in New Zealand, so it is unlikely that one could have escaped and survived in the wild there. Additionally, the forested regions of the central plateau are remote and inhospitable, making it unlikely that an escaped gorilla would be able to thrive there. The majority of experts in the field reject the idea that the Moehau is an escaped gorilla, and it remains a creature of legend and myth in Maori culture.

A video describing the Moehau, Maori Bigfoot

Have you ever seen a Moehau or something similar in your neck of the woods? Let us know in the comments!

If you enjoyed this article you may be interested in the Moehau’s cousins: Bigfoot and Batutut.

Continue Reading

Trending

Generated by Feedzy