BigfootWeekend September Expedition

Friday, July 6, 2012

M.K. Davis Enhanced View Of Patterson-Gimlin Film, Will Make You Feel Like You Were There


While most of us were enjoying the 4th of July with our families, M.K. Davis was busy working on an enhanced HD panoramic view of the P/G film. What Davis did was he added Patty's stabilized walking frames and overlayed on "a very high quality" frame from the original film as the background. According to Davis, this kind of gives the viewer the feel for being there.

Watch below:

223 comments:

  1. Very nice work!

    I take it Mr. Davis will not be purchasing Tom Biscardi's new tell-all DVD about how this is a hoax? 'Cause nothin says trustworthy more than Biscardi.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes Mr. Davis, I apreciate your hard work.

      Delete
    2. Amazing work..now it looks even MORE apparent that it is just Bob Heironimous in a suit, walking away knowing that no one will pull a trigger, the quality and distance will make it difficult to identify the hoax, etc. Here we are 5 decades later...trying to pin all bigfoot hopes on an obviously questionable clip that has/will never be reproduced...only one Bob H, only one horse-hair suit to ditch in a million acres of dense forest.

      Delete
  2. Replies
    1. Just leave if you don't believe.

      Delete
    2. "Belief" is NOT a REQUIREMENT. That's something a communist would expect.

      Delete
    3. Is a blogger account required now to comment from a pc? I can only get on from an iPad, not from a Mac with safari or Firefox as browser..thanks in advance to anyone who responds

      Delete
    4. No blogger account required. Its probably your browser prohibiting yo from a PC.

      Delete
    5. Thanks, that's it. the comment window does not open on any blogs hosted by blogger..need to update safari

      Delete
    6. Actually Jeff I do believe. I meant here we go again, the same ol' Patty debate :)

      Delete
  3. The producer of the Biscardi video is MK's old partner, Grendel Films. They were supposed to put out a "Massacre" movie, but ditched it after it was basically finished. Weird. I wonder what turned Mr. JJ into a PGF non-believer?

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is old work by MK. It shows that he CAN do very good work, if one disregards his more odd theories. Check out his blog here:
    http://thedavisreport.wordpress.com/
    You can find a much higher quality version of this walk-across animation there, and you can download it, too.

    ReplyDelete
  5. HEY GUYS IM FURY GIANT AND I DEMAND EVERYONE BELOW ME TO SAY HI TO ME BEFORE THEY POST A COMMENT BELOW, THANKS FOR YOUR COOPERATION :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hows that working out for ya? But I will say BUH BYE!

      Delete
  6. HERE: http://thedavisreport.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/358/

    ReplyDelete
  7. HERE:

    http://thedavisreport.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/earlywalk16fpspanoramalarge.gif

    and here...

    http://thedavisreport.wordpress.com/2011/09/08/the-davis-report-walk-across-walk-sequence-one/

    ReplyDelete
  8. PEOPLE THIS IS NOT FAKE, IT IS THE REAL DEAL, just look at the muscle movement on the right leg when the female BF steps forward, look at the back of the arm, look at the shoulder blade move underneath all that hair and muscle, it was 1967 folks don't be stupid, just think, nobody could make such a perfect looking suit for a 7+ foot tall giant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not to sure about that anymore, it may be an effect due to the cuff being attached to the shoe; when heel is planted and toes are up, material is not as close to calf but then when toes pivot toward ground the material gets pressed against the calf. Was of the opinion the calf muscle was the most convincing part, but again, not sure anymore.

      Delete
    2. Obviously they could, because there is no bigfoot, no other films like this, etc...this was a classic HOAX

      Delete
  9. nothing perfect about it, shoulder pads, helmet, bigfoot suit , 100+ feet away in bright light with a grainy 16 mm camera = easy hoax.

    the blownup images give it away, shoulder join location is wrong, the spot on the thigh that subducts is obviously not flesh, the diaper butt.

    nobody has ever satisfactorily answered these issues with Patty being real.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice trolling job there Timmy. On the contrary Timmy, they've all been addressed and answered probably hundreds of times by now. Shoulder join location is wrong? How the hell would you know. LOL No shoulder pads (too wide) no helmet (couldn't reach) no suit (could't make/industry lacking species info). If it's so easy try it yourself and see how it's not, your bad suit would be spotted in seconds for having no anatomical features or correct species proportion. Yes we know how the sasqautches look because we've seen them in real life and on film - like this. Not like all the fakes. Give it up trolls it's no hoax.

      Delete
    2. no they haven't!!!!

      Everyone who isn't a bleever , and works in the movie makeup bidness laughs at the obvious hoax. Only mediocre movie man Munns thinks it's real.

      Tube, a resident at the JREF, has proven it's a hoax using multiple examples of the wrongisms pushed by the bleever crowd.

      it's a fake, you've been fooled by an avid con man. deal with loser

      Delete
    3. Nada. We laugh at the Randi trolls.

      Delete
    4. anon@1:26

      yer a smelly pirate hooker!

      Delete
    5. you laugh because you are too stupid to understand. The JREF is probably the most intelligent group on any public forum . PHD's, Dr's, actual working scientists.

      the avg Bigfoot forum is populated with schizophrenic weirdos and delusional losers, hoping to gain notoriety via the big feller.

      Delete
    6. You got to be kidding me.They're nothing but a bunch of egotistical fat heads.Bunch of CORK SOAKERS with ball scars on their chins.Just look at their almighty leader Randi.I've seen him without his beard and its a horrible sight.MAJOR BALL SCARS!!!!!

      Delete
    7. The losing Randis are probably the dumbest most ignorant sorry ass lot you'd never want to meet just like most fan clubs, egocentric flat earth fanatics basically.

      Delete
    8. Pffffft, conman (well known) Patterson drew the exact creature a year prior. Conman Patterson was broke and trying to create a documentary (money shot).

      There are horizontal lines at both hips due to the suit scrunching up. The ass (this is supposedly a naked creature here) never flexes the entire time, hell, it doesn't even move, period, at least not in the way you'd expect a bare hominoid ass to do while walking. What it (the whole ass section) does do near the infamous 352 frame is "shift" just like you'd expect padding to do as the human underneath turns.

      Hoax hoax hoax. A conman and a liar filmed the only decent footage of a mythical beast? Haha, yeah boy. What you see here is Jerry Romney in a monkey suit.

      Delete
    9. Anon 2:15 has no credibility! Don't believe a word he says. I'm not sure where he is getting his info, but there is not a lick of evidence he is sourcing or providing except an amature couch patato view!

      Delete
    10. LMFAO Anon2:38,


      No source you say? How about 2 different people who worked at ANE at the time Patterson did for your sources who are named Clyde Reinke and Harry Kemball?

      Are you suggesting conman Patterson didn't draw a female Sasquatch with the same pancake tits a year earlier? That's common knowledge. Its also common knowledge he was filming a documentary and was out of money. Are you saying he wasn't a conman to boot? He was a proven conman, even the most firm believers will acknowledge that.

      There's no one thing i said that isnt backed by "sources", not one.

      I've crushed your dream, deal with it.

      Delete
    11. And just because I didn't provide a link to what i said in my original post doesn't mean "I" made it up. This information is widely available to anyone willing to look past the suit and into the history. You obviously don't even know the history of this footage well enough to even comment, that is to comment and not look like a clueless ass anyway. Anyone who does know it well enough will also know that what I've stated has come from "known sources". You need to do some homework, obviously, anon 2:38.

      Delete
    12. The people you say that faked the Bigfoot have been proven to be liars. Again it's not common knowledge liar! There is people on sites that also say we didn't go to the moon and our govt was behind 911. The film has been scrutinized by many many experts in muscle movement and gate. Impossible to hoax. IMPOSSIBLE! You can always look up info from yahoos that claim a bunch of stuff just to get their face on tv. I believe experts before some idiots claiming they were there faking!

      Delete
    13. Patterson was also loaned $700 from the Radford's in May of 1967 to fund his Bigfoot film (not the Patty footage).
      Bob Gimlin sold his rights to Dahinden for $10 and got a copy of the film.

      There are also conflicting stories of what happened that day and also conflicting stories on how the film was handled to get it developed.

      I can't say if the film is real or a hoax, I'm just adding information.

      Delete
    14. Anon 4:51,

      First off I agree with your very first sentence in which you said: "the people I said that faked the Bigfoot have proven to be liars". You're right, Patterson was a known conman and Gremlin is on record lying about being arrested for receiving stolen property. So I absolutely agree with you and thanks for being honest with yourself. Ha ha.

      Anyway, I know what you meant to say and you son, are full of shit and flat out lying at the same time. Neither Reinke OR Kemball have been proven to be liars. They're (Reinke and Kemball) only passing down first hand knowledge that came from Romney and Patterson themselves. Of course Romney denies it on record, he is friends with those who own ANE. Romney stated that he was indeed the one in the suit on more than one occassion to Reinke. Anyone who knows Reinke will tell you he is not one to just flat out make up bullshit and definitely isn't going to flat out lie about someone. That means Romney indeed told him he was wearing the suit and like I said of course Romney denies it on camera because he is close to those at ANE. Harry Kemball is another man who isn't full of shit and he stated that Patterson boasted about the hoax. Now, who you going to believe? Kemball or a KNOWN CONMAN named Roger Patterson? Clyde Reinke? Or Romney who is friends with ANE top executives?


      Easy decision here. I know the truth hurts you deep in your misguided heart but the truth is the truth. Deal with it.

      Delete
    15. LOL 5:20 - I was going to bring up the stolen property but what's the point nowadays. He's a an old timer cowboy just living out his life. He has been put on a pedestal.

      I hope I never get famous or involved in something this deep, receiving stolen plywood and nails could be the end of me.

      Delete
    16. They lied because they couldnt have faked it physically then or now. It's not possible-period. Even if it were faked the suit would be worth millions and nobody would sit on that! Show us the friggen suit then. We want EVIDENCE of the suit so it can be examined! Until then they are making it up! Son

      Delete
    17. What's even more pathetic is that he lied about it. I mean why not just say: "yeah, that was me and here's what happened..............".

      NOT THIS:

      Gimlin: "No. Not me. There's about five Robert E. Gimlins."

      Gimlin: "I've never been arrested for anything,you know. In fact, I'm a good Christian man and I live a Christian life."

      What that did is: PROVE BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that he CANNOT BE TRUSTED, period. If he will lie about something that is as "easily verifiable" as that then what else has he lied about?

      Delete
    18. Anon 6:12... what do you mean the suit is worth "millions"? To who? Don't you understand that 99.999% of Americans couldn't care less about Bigfoot or the PGF? To say it has some value NOW, sure, but then? No. Patterson probably burned it.

      Delete
    19. Because it's famous ! Actually it's 34 percent of Americans douche! 99.99 is just a stupid guess coming from a skeptic ! Again show the suit! Otherwise I don't believe a word your saying !

      Delete
    20. Gimlin didn't lie. Why keep up the hoax because he's not making a sizable amount of money on it ! Nothing supports the hoax theory!

      Delete
    21. Where's the friggen suit!

      Delete
    22. Anon 5:20, anon 4:51 meant Reinke and Kemball Are the hoaxers and liars ! They have not a shred of evidence!

      Delete
    23. Hohohoho good old Timmy's back with his old trick bag of lies post after post. LOL The best proof we probably have the film is no hoax is someone like Timmy's on-going charade here, it's very clear he's a bigfooter himself it's a totally normal thing that happens to the human psyche once denounced and kicked out of boards or organizations the scorned person retaliates by switching camps. Notice how he piles it up and thinks he's won some award when he's not even won any arguments, by saying things like "crushed your dream" and "deal with it". LOL Guess what loser, we don't give a flying-f what you think so your endless lying rants are all falling on deaf ears. There was no suit anywhere ever because it neither humanly nor technically could be one so to blindly believe the costume nonsense because it suits you psychologically better is quite frankly evidence of serious mental health issues.

      Delete
    24. anonymous dipshit at 113, not everyone who thinks bigfoot is bullshit and posts here is ME, you stupid lutz. Basically you are a) giving me too much credit and b) delusional for thinking ANYONE who disagrees with Bigfoot existence is anything but logical and correct

      You'll know when its me. ;)

      Delete
    25. Use Firefox thru Linux, Timmy doesnt have but one IP address. A bunch of people think Bigfoot is total lies and smoke and mirrors include me there. Funny to see Timmy has the footers scrambling with wild accusations!!

      Delete
  10. MK Davis a lunatic.... That goofy massacre theory of his has ruined his reputation. Even you are a PGF believer you have to know this guy is a con artist and/or boob.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No we have to know you are.

      Delete
    2. Brilliant reply, anonymous genius. You the same dipshit who thinks every non-believer here is ME, LOL? Wow....delusional I tell ya.

      Delete
  11. People seem to think I "hate" MK, or whatever. But really, I don't. I've just been trying to get him to stop spreading this "Massacre" conspiracy theory, to leave Bob Gimlin and John Green alone in their old age, and to keep doing what MK is GOOD at... stuff like THIS. For the latter, I'm grateful to MK, actually. And also, in conversation he is a pretty nice dude.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think most people really don't care what you think...........Self centered a little are we?

      Delete
    2. According to himself the massacre stuff isn't his idea. Nobody likes outlandish claims and I think that's basically why people bash that whole massacre thing because it's new and it's shocking while there's a gentleman's image surrounding Gimlin which I'm sure is well deserved the nice man that he is, but Davis only suggests there's more to the story than just coming around a bend and filming a Bigfoot. They did film a real one - all except the trolls agree on that - but the question is if there's actually two different ones and only one of them is Patty. In other words, two different occasions spliced together as one single event figuring in '67 no one would ever know.

      Delete
    3. Or the same one but they forgot to tape the breast on the first one they filmed.

      Delete
    4. ^^A boobie blooper.^^

      Delete
    5. Not the same individual according to MK, one probably male. The shooting idea sounds weird but it could be true the logging hired crew simply documented it all, and this became the famous Patterson/Gimlin Film. They just gave it to Roger or a tiny bit of it for him to make a buck if he could, no one ever thought it'd raise this much heat hence Gimlin struggling with it now and the heated opposition from trolls (ie MIBs).

      Delete
    6. gimlin struggles with it now because its a hoax and maybe now hes started to feel a bit of guilt as time goes on, not to mention his wife nearly divorcing him over the hoax

      Delete
    7. The PGF is real.I used to think it was a hoax but after watching it over and over it is real.

      Delete
    8. it would be nice to think it was real... i mean imagine that, an upright ape walking around the pacific north west, how awesome would that be???

      ... unfortunately though we have to be realistic, it doesnt exist, and the evidence points to the PGF being hoaxed, and the complete lack of any evidence for bigfoot

      Delete
    9. The way Steven to stop spreading a theory you don't agree with is to NOT post links for those of us who haven't heard or don't care enough to search it out.
      Silence is often wise.
      Too late though this time around.


      On the reason for this article: very cool, very impressive work.

      But, this was over 50 years ago.
      Where is that Ketchum DNA Study and the EP amazing HD footage?

      How can can things go from a "study will be out soon," to dead silence?

      Any ideas?

      Delete
    10. ^How do we know you're realistic.As far as we know you could be bigfoot.lol

      Delete
    11. I would like to stop the lying trolls.

      Delete
    12. Only trolls are the blind Bigfoot believers following each lie and hoax no matter how stupid or far-fetched. When I need a laugh I think of liars like Ketchum, Patterson, Moneymaker, etc, spreading ridiculous shit that amounts to nothing...50 years later. Wow Patterson WAS a genius!

      Delete
  12. I watched this on Nat Geo I think it was last week. The part that can't be faked is the knee bend, and the ratio of upper leg to lower leg. You could put a 7'6" human in a suit, but the knee bend will still have proportional human ratios. You can't make the human lower leg shorter from the knee bend to the ground, like this bigfoot has. PGF bigfoot has a shorter lower leg in proportion to its upper leg. That why this is not a fake, because its impossible to reproduce the same upper/lower leg ratios with a human in a suit. Let the skeptics try to do it, and reproduce this ratio, with a smooth flowing gate, with mid-tarsal ridges in footprints depths requiring 800 lbs. Some things cannot be faked. This is one of them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. an 800 lb ape wouldn't have a mid tarsal break if it walked on two legs, this would not be something evolution would select for.

      and it's more like 6'5 from top to bottom, that's been proven too.

      and it all fits a person, that's been proven too.

      give it up, it's a fake, deal with it loser

      Delete
    2. proven by whom, asshat?

      Delete
    3. 1. All of our ancestors had a mid-tarsal break except Homo Sapien Sapien

      2. 7' 6.5" Tall or 4' 5" tall with different film aspect ratio

      3. Does not fit human measurements including a human head inside the creature head.

      Get a life you idiot!

      Delete
    4. "does not fit human measurements"

      did you personally measure patty with a tape measure?

      have you personally measured every single person on earth? cos ya know not everyones the same right, ratios included.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. At 1:34 - Roger Patterson said Patty was 6' 6"- 7' and weighed between 350-400 lbs.
      Just saying.
      Delete

      Delete
    7. Denier, troll, recent GED!
      Thanks ANON 4:08 couldn't have made a good call without that input.

      BTW Bigfoot is real.

      Delete
    8. Yes, Bigfoot is real.
      I rarely bother to say that here, I don't want to make deniers and trolls feel any smaller than they behave. They don't handle it well.
      It must be hard for them really, even sad, missing out on so much with their eyes and ears shut.
      But Bigfooters? We have a blast, we know, we accept it, and we find some pleasure in that.
      The only reason we can tolerate this site, because it doesn't matter what all the people do and say.
      Bigfoot is real whether you like it or not.

      Delete
    9. It would be interesting to know how Patterson got the measurements of the height of the bigfoot, wouldn't it?

      Delete
    10. benchmarked it against whisperer gimlins horse. after the shot you see in the standard vid

      Delete
    11. If its not 7'4 all the measurements are bullshit...and it isnt 7'4.

      Next!

      Delete
    12. Guess squatcher Patterson knew since he looked at Patty directly that she's seven feet fits logically too given her build. Quite impossible to fake they can't even fake a satisfying bigfoot costume today it'd cost an arm and a leg - literally.
      The idea that it's easy to fake is proven not to be the case many times over, pick the movie yourself. Those saying differently pretty much means it's an agenda.
      Romney or whoever tall guy would actually be the wrong size for it because of his legs, so for this human anatomical fact alone we safely rule Patty not fake. As funny as it sounds basically we're too tall to fake it being a leggy species primarily where the long part of a sasquatch is the body upwards.
      To have all this biology and technology function perfectly in a suit from 1967 no less, is at best very ignorant to suggest at worst deliberately.

      Delete
  13. Replies
    1. Sorry troll but it's not.

      Delete
    2. ^ so bigfoot is a scientifical accepted species and you have proof? thought not.

      Delete
    3. He gives reasons it's not a fake and your reason---Zero!

      Delete
    4. And what reasons are those? I am a firm believer.

      Delete
    5. Hey anon 2:03 - why are u here? If u don't believe then what the hell are you wasting your time for? You must just like arguing for a living! What other things in your life do you like frustrating yourself over ? Oh I'm going to go on a Bigfoot sight and keep telling everybody it's not real, then I'm going to go argue with my family and neighbors . Ohhh that's fun! Loser!

      Delete
    6. I see another one in the background look real close

      Delete
    7. Hey anon 2:03,

      Still haven't figured out that belief is not a requirement to post on this site eh?

      At this rate, you just may die a moron afterall.

      Delete
  14. why does the skin disappear underneath the thigh :S

    genuine question

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It does? Don't think so.

      Delete
    2. look closely, if you dont see it then your head is in the clouds

      Delete
  15. Worth the stop here for sure!

    ReplyDelete
  16. just shows the nice "in the open", no obstructions path that heironimous walked, leaving a nice area for footprints to be subsequently hoaxed, thanks MK for showing the support towards it being hoaxed

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only hoax is your so called expertise. What do you know? Where do you get your info and what is your degree in? BS

      Delete
    2. Yeah, Bachelor of Science, BS. and yes a fucking retard can tell its a fat guy with fake tits in a monkey suit.

      Delete
  17. Why do DENIERS come here, what is the point?
    The disruption is only visual.
    The commitment to Bigfoot not being real doesn't seem like enough motivation to make a fool of ones self here.
    Witness bother because they know the truth and have the motivation to convince others, if only to end the insults.
    But a Denier?
    What gain beyond that of the irritation of a gnat? makes no sense to me.
    They did not show up until this website was quite popular, make no sense to me, unless the MIB theories have some credence...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. witnesses? you mean crazy people, panicky people and lying people? any coincidence that the % of people who claim to see Bigfoot is about the same as the % of people who suffer from mental illness?

      Delete
    2. denier? theres nothing to deny, bigfoot doesnt exist.

      if bigfoot did exist then saying it doesnt exist would be denial, but as it doesnt exist, saying it doesnt exist is just acknowledging the truth.

      your welcome.

      Delete
    3. Then anon 2:42 what the hell are you here for ? Give me one legitimate reason! Knowbody who doesn't believe in the possibility has no reason to be here unless you just like to argue for a living. How fun are you? If your so dead set on it not existing then your argument is over! Knowbody will convince you so let it be! Let it be. Are you here just to change others minds? Then if that's the case why don't you try to convince a dog he's a cat! You must like beating your head against a wall.

      Delete
    4. I don't feel there is any evidence to support the existence of Bigfoot. I come here because I hope one day to be proven wrong. As of yet, that hasn't taken place.

      If you can't handle skeptics, you really aren't much of a believer IMO. Skeptics serve a great purpose, we give perspective and aren't as prone to jump to undefendable conclusions about suspicious looking "evidence"

      Delete
    5. Then how can u say it doesnt exist if you keep checking this site ! Then you should rephrase it to there is a possibility. I've seen enough evidence to know there is a very good possibility of it's existence and I live in the area . Most skeptics I've talked to are so dead set against the idea, but when I ask them how they know they don't exist they don't have any answer . Almost everyone I've talked to in person are not big outdoors people, don't go out to the deep woods at night, and only think Harry and the Hendersons Is there best reference they have about the species.

      Delete
    6. Tons of evidence but skeptics choose to ignore it'

      Delete
    7. where did i say it didn't exist? I said I have not seen any evidence for the existence of Bigfoot. Evidence being the sort of things that would be required to prove the existence of a new kind Tiger or a new Salamander. Type specimens, crystal clear photo's, behavioral study type video documentary footage. But, really, a type specimen is really what's needed here.

      If said evidence is ever presented and verified, then I will be happy! When I was a kid i loved all this stuff, and I still find it interesting today. Though I suspect there is nothing to it. But I hold my opinion as open to persuasion with the presentation of evidence.

      Delete
    8. You said as anon 2:42 that it doesn't exist! ?

      Delete
    9. Well open your eyes idiot, can't weigh the credibility of others? then go out in the wilds and see for yourself.
      Some people think the world revolves around their GED.

      Delete
    10. Nick B, do you actually go out in the field or do you try to find your answer on these blogs? I too had a childhood fascination , but it wasn't until I had a large group of family , friends, and others who saw them. Not only did they see them, but saw the crap, hair, tracks, and later thermals. I've heard them. My belief system is different than a person who only reads about it . I'm going out now at night without announcing it to anyone (avoiding the possibility of hoaxers). These sightings happened over a period of years and it wasn't until recent that anyone actually shared or knew that the others saw them. I've talked to Forest Service people who know they are there. I don't need to be convinced, but I do want to see one. That's why I go out now. Good luck and get out at night.

      Delete
    11. I live on the gulf coast, no bigfoot here, spent so many years on the bayous and have seen nothing that isn't a normal swamp critter

      Delete
    12. One of the best spots is northeast Texas . Get involved with a local group and head out. I think u would enjoy it,

      Delete
    13. I'm a true sceptic; I always have an 'out'. I don't believe they exist but I would just love to be proven wrong!
      If they are never proven to exist, I win! And if they ARE proven to exist, I still win!
      See how that works?

      NickB

      Delete
    14. It's called critical thinking douchebag. Judging something based on the evidence presented rather than by anecdotes and religion.

      If more people thought this way, the world would be a lot less stupid.

      Delete
    15. Give Nick b a chance. He's willing to be at least partial to the idea! Nick just some advice. When out be extra observant. Most people can live in an area and never even notice the local wildlife. Only a small group of people pay attention to most stuff when they are wheeling or walking. Others can pick out s certain bird call . Pay lots of attention. Good luck!

      Delete
    16. LOL. NickB is a closest Bigfoot believer. Seriously, it''s reverse psychology and it's obvious who wants Bigfoot to be real so bad. Just come out of the closest and admit it Nick. I know it sucks to admit something you know could possibly exist, but please don't bash people while you're at it.

      Delete
    17. I live in Eureka CA and in spite of you crazies, there is still no Bigfoot in NorCal.

      I come here to be fascinated with blind-follower psychology, no matter how crazy the belief.

      Being a denier would mean we actually saw real physical proof and didnt believe...not faked bullshit and more lies

      Delete
    18. No Timmy being a denier like you means you deny there's tons of evidence which there in fact is both for the pgf and the sasquatch in general, it's the last proof we still seek.

      The evidence the film's real is overwhelming so much so that it's merely a specimen we lack in confirming it real. That's how real it is in details.

      The big question is why the trolls gather when they know they'll see the proof everywhere you could possibly think of like news papers, TV, radio, hear it on the streets, etc.

      There's no need to come here and look for trouble just to ridicule what you're evidently clueless about, like saying witnesses all being loonies for example really shows your preconceived notion.

      Delete
  18. whilst i might not agree with some of MK Davies's stranger theorys' his video work is sometimes outstanding - this is a realy good piece of work thanks

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anon2:41 has a mental illness!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. if you call coating yer mother's face in man gravy a mental illness, i guess you are correct, I have it early and often

      Delete
    2. You must have grown up in a sick family !

      Delete
    3. Anon 2:48 - if that's the way you talk then you must have grown up in a sick and mentally I'll family. Funny how people who claim others have issues are the ones themselves in denial!

      Delete
    4. Sounds like anon 2:48's first girlfriend was his sister! Lol.

      Delete
    5. I dropped your sister off, at her house on whore island!!

      Delete
    6. Point proven ! How was your upbringing 3:18? Ohh just from your comments we all know. Dirty talk, lots of playboys, and inflatibles. Funny now we all know your a fake because I don't have a sister!

      Delete
    7. When were kids, I found a couple playboys out in the woods once. Dont know why, but wierd stuff always showed up out there.

      Something to think about.

      Delete
    8. U placed them there ?

      Delete
    9. Bigfoot likes human women and porn

      Delete
  20. lookin good, bob "diaper butt" heremonius

    honestly dont care anymore, if it makes people happy let them believe in it

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. except if they gain financially

      Delete
    2. What does that have to do with anything. I hope you don't gain financially. U must like being unemployed then!

      Delete
    3. Thank you, go away.
      We are happy to believe because we know Bigfoots are real.

      Delete
    4. Anon 3:09 was responding to anon 3:05.

      Delete
    5. Trolls are diaper obsessed.

      Delete
  21. Bigfoots are real. Real. Real. Real.
    Bigfoots are alive and well and nothing anyone here can say that will change that.
    Real. Real. Bigfoots are real.
    Real.
    Pretty amazing actually, maybe why deniers can't take it.
    Is it just too amazing, unsettling perhaps? Knocks one right onto the evolutionary bush, just another hominin.
    Real.
    Bigfoots are real. Read deal. Real.
    Did I mention Bigfoots are real? They are.

    Bigfoots are real and alive and nothing can change that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing can change that. Hmmmm how about a 30-06 to the head? I pretty sure that would change something.

      Delete
    2. Don't kill yourself over this, a 30-06 to your head would end your misery, but not the Sasquatch species. It's OK though, they don't bother most people, just the idiots out looking for them.

      Delete
    3. Yes no kidding. They have torn up all of my treblehook snares.

      Delete
  22. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKUwdHex1Zs

    Very good program and used scientific methods.
    For those that don't belive...go troll somewhere else or back up your 'evidence' its fake.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the null hypothesis is that it's fake, it's on you to prove it is real.

      proving a negative is impossibble

      Delete
    2. A guy who is in the pics with Patterson nd Gimlin but remained overlooked and hidden said "we faked it". aka Bob H.

      Pretty sure if Armstrong came out and said "yes we faked the moon landings" people might believe him...just like Heironomous who was in a saddle on the PGF trail...obviously later out of saddle in a suit too

      Delete
    3. Two different trips Timmy one spliced adventurous film. Errornomous never did visit Bluff Creek as his poor tales tell.

      Delete
  23. gimlin speak up and end this nonsense

    I for one would shake your hand if you did

    a great a hoax well done sir, but enough is enough.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe on his deathbed but that might be a while. Saw him the other day, great shape for an older gent

      Delete
    2. I think Gimlin could make more money from exposing the hoax than keeping it secret. I guess it's hard to reverse a lie that has been lived for so many years.

      Delete
    3. They pay his expenses, feed him nice chicken dinners, buy his books, and bow at his feet. Salami, salami, baloney.

      Delete
    4. dont know about that - lives pretty frugal.

      Delete
  24. How did I get here? I was on singlemuslim.com, clicked on a sweet pic and ended up here!
    Bigfoot is real BTW!

    ReplyDelete
  25. if it is so fake and you have all the reasons why,
    you should be able to do a recreation, in almost 50 years, not one recreation comes close. How can a financially strapped horse rancher do such an elaborate hoax that still has not been duplicated.
    Just another couch potato, skeptic with All the answers... EPIC FAIL !!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. if patty was real, and you were somehow able to convince her to re-walk the path at bluff, and you had the same camera, you STILL would not be able to recreate the film.

      Delete
    2. Anon 4:41, speaking of potatoes. Lick my tater hole.

      Delete
  26. why wont anyone believe me? manbearpig is real im super serial!

    ReplyDelete
  27. MK Davis is a very clever fellow, old work or not. For the next generation of this video, he could extract the Patty figure onto the panoramic minus the frame remnant, just the figure. Now, that would be cool to see. Good work MK!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Whatever you want to say, MK does a good job with this stuff. I think I would like an app where I can make Patty walk across Abbey Road with the Beatles, or walk on the moon, or walk across the stage at the Apollo.

    ReplyDelete
  29. i think this comments sections speaks volumes

    clearly even footers are starting to doubt the footage is real

    maybe progress has been made?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. PGF is the only thing left for footers to hang onto. It's so sad watching them implode now that all hope for Ketchum has been lost.

      Delete
    2. You are such an idiot, and with apparent limited grasp of either the depth or breadth of what's readily available to hang on beyond the PG film. Libtard!
      Go away!
      You are in the wrong place and unwelcome. People here know better than you, almost all of them.

      Delete
    3. You are far out numbered by the minions of tater hole. He should get his own TV show.

      Delete
    4. I don't see any footers Doubting much here ! What did you take a poll idiot? A majority of bleevers don't even comment on here like me, but u have not a clue!

      Delete
  30. As a retired employee of Kodak in Palo Alto on old Page Mill Road, I was impressed as hell with what MK Davis has done. Good on him.

    I started watching his work when he detected splicing in the PG film. Some impressive detail work with old 16mm Kodachrome 2 was not an easy process, it was complex as hell. I don't know the man personally, but I can testify to his work detailing the PG film. (I was the guy that helped layout Ivan Marx's Kodak processing equipment. He processed rather sloppily but got the job done in decent fashion.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As a retired employee of the DeLorean Motor Company, I was not overly impressed with what MK Davis has done.

      I was in charge of some of the set design for Teenwolf.

      Delete
    2. Should be obvious to Shawn that trolls are trying to destroy this blog site here, or is it okay for them to do so ? Almost seems that way, otherwise it'd been stopped long ago wouldn't it.

      Delete
  31. Very interesting video from MK Davis showing that PGF is a man in a suit. To be continued indeedy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You dropped out of a 12-step program, right?

      Delete
    2. U know nothing Anon 7:40!

      Delete
  32. To the skeptics....please logically argue against the upper/lower leg ratios regarding my post at 1:34pm. The bigfoot's lower leg is much shorter in proportion to the upper leg than any human. You'd have to chop off the leg above the ankle to get an equivalent upper/lower leg ratio. This cannot be faked. Period. Don't be mentally lazy. How do you explain this? The knee bend is the reference point, it is where it is. You generate the upper/lower leg ratio from there, to the hip and heel. The lower leg in humans is much longer than the bigfoot species. This was pointed out in the analysis on the Nat Geo program last week. (though it might have been a rerun). This is a living moving animal. If it's a human in a suit, the lower leg would be much longer. There is not a human on earth with a lower leg so short in comparison to the upper leg. But apes and chimps have a similar ratio. Don't just rag on and say there is no evidence. This is evidence of the highest order. A human of 6 ft will have the same ratio of upper/lower leg lenth as a human of 7' 6". It makes no difference. Deal with this fact. The bigfoot in the PG film has a much shorter lower leg in comparison to the upper leg than ANY human on earth. This is incontrovetible. Argue the point please skeptics. I'm sorry if I've confused you with the facts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its a man in a monkey suit.

      Delete
    2. It's due to the fact that the top of Patty is not the top of the head of the person in the suit, if you do a ratio of the shoulder ball (clearly seen) and the knee bend (clearly seen) you have the EXACT SAME ratio as that of a 6 foot tall human being in the suit....

      nice try though, there's a guy called Tube who already dealt with this , the pictues math and everything, but I couldn't find his stuff

      go here and look at his stuffm it's very thorough and not dismissive or anything.

      http://orgoneresearch.com/category/bigfoot/

      Delete
    3. James ignore the people who just post fake and man in a suit! You know what your talking about and I've seen the evidence supporting that. Poor comments about a fake never have verifiable proof or expertise behind it . Appreciate your post !

      Delete
    4. Its a man in a monkey suit

      Delete
    5. Do you keep repeating it's a man in a monkey suit in an attempt to convince yourself ?

      Delete
    6. Its a man in a monkey suit.

      Delete
    7. Shut up troll. James you're right the anatomical facts have always confused the socalled skeptics, in fact they probably know by now how wrong they were all along but you'll never get them to admit it.
      That's why this ought to be a closed forum troll-free, unfortunately Shawn has let his blog turn into a free for all joke of a frenzy meaning that all serious debate is difficult. Let the trolls yap in solitude to their fake God Randi of some Communist Russia plot against free speech but here we can do without them so block the freaks somehow. It's obvious who the spammers are. Back to James' point, this leg issue is rightly why we know Patty's no hoax. Sasquatches may be very tall but they're primarily so from the waist up - we're a leggy species ourselves something fakers never knew before and they still don't as seen in movie suits, and even if they'd known it's still not humanly possible. Trolls know this data now, that's why they troll in some vain attempt to fool the last suckers wising up.

      Delete
  33. Do you JREF closet footer bleever people bleeve the suit has been found ?

    Is this your version of waiting and hoping for the Ketchum report ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm a skeptic, and i will believe that the suit is found when I see it.....

      Delete
    2. No PGF suit ever existed so none will ever be found unlike the Bigfoots that do exist.

      Delete
  34. @8:40pm....leave the shoulder joint...stick with the simple facts of hip to knee and knee to heel. this cannot be faked, even with a "head" extension. Period. End of story. You can't do it, and you can't find a human on earth that has that short of a lower leg in comparison to the upper leg (knee to hip joint, also clearly shown).

    ReplyDelete
  35. ummm, have you seen this picture ?

    http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/89614996f85077c1f.jpg

    or this one? http://orgoneresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Tom-Pate.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Both of those pictures have been debunked douche.

      Delete
    2. could you please not post that filth here?

      Delete
    3. neither of those pictures have been debunked, and I don't appreciate the name calling, can you perhaps try to find a way to express yourself without acting like a spoiled child?

      Delete
    4. Ok jackass I won't call you douche anymore.....lol

      Delete
    5. Everything the Randi douches say and lie about has been debunked.

      Delete
  36. Was roger a con man? Yes

    Did roger make money from the film? Yes

    Case closed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did he try more than once to make money with bigfoot before the October 1967 footage? Yes.

      Delete
    2. So? Most people with footage this good would try to make a buck. And no he wasn't a con man only very excited.

      Delete
  37. @9:28,July 6....I looked at both of those pictures. The first, supports my point not the skeptics. The humans' lower leg is MUCH longer than the bigfoots'. This is what cannot be faked. The second also shows a longer lower leg bone (tibia). It's the ratio of the upper leg bone (femur) to the lower (tibia), that is different in humans, than in the sasquatch species, and in apes other than humans. The PG film shows an animal other than a human.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correct. They're most likely some kind of hominin hence the bipedalism, speech, humanlike feet and faces. Something totally unique and separate from our species but of the homo family still.

      Delete
  38. "It's a man in a monkey suit" is what the asshat's mom told him so he'd come out of the closet and go to bed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're too kind, the jerk can't even spell and writes its instead of it's.

      Delete
    2. Its a man in a monkey suit.

      Delete
  39. What is an asshat? Dumb term . Must mean sitting on a hat with your butt? How about headhat! I think I'm going to make up a new term-assbutt!

    ReplyDelete
  40. If Bob Gimlin were to hypothetically admit on his death bed that the Patterson footage was a hoax, do you think that would end the belief/interest in bigfoot once and for all?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. as a physical creature - yes

      but as a metaphysical shapeshifter - no

      Delete
    2. No such luck trolls, you'll have to continue the tiresome job you've been given by some authority to bother bigfooters. Yeah I know it probably sucks but there you go, it's your sour lot handed in life's lottery.
      Gimlin would never say that because he knows it's real.
      He may know it went down differently than the official PGF story goes, he may even be one of the massacre shooters if anything like that ever took place, hoax though it sure as heck ain't.

      Delete
    3. Gimlin will stick to his story as long as suckers keep paying to kiss his tarnished ring, or his chokes on a chicken bone at a conference buffet. Whichever comes first.

      Delete
    4. Hey anon at 2:20, how is asking a question like that trolling? The PGF is the holy grail for many used to support the existence of bigfoot. There's no reason to get defensive when someone asks a good question. Would belief in bigfoot still be around if the PGF was taken out of the discussion?

      Delete
  41. Its REAL for sure. NO doubt.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Saved as a favorite, I love your site!

    Also visit my website ... Nike Air Max Pas Cher

    ReplyDelete
  43. I think that everything posted made a great deal of sense.
    However, think on this, suppose you typed a catchier title?
    I ain't saying your content is not solid., however what if you added a post title that grabbed folk's attention?

    I mean "M.K. Davis Enhanced View Of Patterson-Gimlin Film, Will Make You Feel Like You Were There"
    is kinda boring. You ought to look at Yahoo's front page and see how they write news titles to grab people interested. You might add a related video or a related pic or two to get readers excited about what you've written.
    In my opinion, it could bring your posts a little bit more interesting.


    My blog post :: Air Max

    ReplyDelete
  44. Thanks for finally writing about > "M.K. Davis Enhanced View Of Patterson-Gimlin Film, Will Make You Feel Like You Were There" < Liked it!

    Here is my blog: NFL Jerseys Cheap

    ReplyDelete
  45. I'm not sure why but this blog is loading incredibly slow for me. Is anyone else having this problem or is it a issue on my end? I'll check back later and see if the problem still
    exists.

    my web page; http://www.converseshopfr.com/

    ReplyDelete
  46. Admiring the persistence you put into your website and in depth
    information you present. It's great to come across a blog every once in a while that isn't the same old rehashed material.

    Excellent read! I've saved your site and I'm adding your RSS
    feeds to my Google account.

    My page Abercrombie Brussel

    ReplyDelete