Watch: Bigfoot Discovery Museum Behind the Scenes Tour Rev. Jeff's Exclusive Pictures
Join Rev. Jeff for a behind the scenes tour of the Bigfoot Discovery Museum in Felton California. (Exclusive pictures of the possible Bigfoot Tooth in testing for DNA).
FIRST EAT IT SUCKER!
ReplyDelete^Joe's mom
DeleteFor all Anon's Mom's, EAT IT BITCHES!
DeleteMike Ruggs is kinda sexy!
ReplyDeleteball boy
Or am i the only one who think that?
Deleteball boy
I wonder what Joe has planned for us today?
ReplyDeleteMaybe a few settlers stories, 19th century newspaper articles or even maybe some ancient aliens stuff!
Actually, when I was boning his mom last night, she mentioned that he was grounded and couldnt use the computer today.
DeleteOr, we'll get another schooling on eyeshine.
Deleteball boy
Bigfoot omits light from his eyeballs
DeleteGood mornin you sexual scandal initiators wtf is up
ReplyDeleteHey, miss me?
Deleteball boy
Always big boy woooo wooooo
DeleteLol
DeleteHAVE A GOOD DAY AT WORK EVERYONE AND ENJOY LIFE WE ONLY GET ONE SHOT DO IT RIGHT
DeleteDo I have to?
DeleteHey Harry, I'm one of those dumb fucks that didn't learn to read good. Did I read your comment correctly? did you write HAVE A GOOD DAY AT WORK AND EVERYONE ENJOY MY WIFE?
DeleteI sure enjoyed yours
DeleteBut if you'd like try it lets see what happens to you
DeleteStop taking drugs Harry!
ReplyDeleteStop sweating my nuts fucky
DeleteI would think you should actually discover something before having a discovery museum.
ReplyDeleteBest and most accurate comment EVER!
DeleteBravo!
Delete^^You can have a museum of anything if you can sucker enough people to pony up the dough.
DeleteI think you'd find if you trotted on down the the museum, you'd be made aware of the many different sources of evidence there is.
DeleteStill... Better to deny it rather than look stupid trying to counter it, eh?
Pgf was a bloke in a suit. Bigfootery really does end there. 50 years have passed and there is still nothing. Now if there are bigfoots casually strolling along creek beds as the pgf would have is believe then we would have plenty of pgf style footage. However we dont. Why? Because the pgf does not show a wild animal, it shows a bloke in a suit. Now 50 years ago without the aid of stabilisation and with the possibility that if people went out to look they might find one, it is understandable why people may have been fooled by it. No doubt though if you told those same people that in 50 years time nothing similar would be found they would probably shake rogers hand and say fair play roger you got us good.
ReplyDeleteWhat is incredible is that 50 years on we have a whole religion based on the film. No doubt helped by rogers death shortly after and the greed of those taking royalties from the film. Indeed why would anyone "out" it?
All the believers have to do is find a matching specimen and they win. The skeptics will be destroyed. But they don't. Ever.
The answer is simple. Set aside your fantasies and accept the world for what it is. It is an incredible place without the need for magic monkey men.
Sup dickweed.
DeleteCult would be a better discription than religion.
Delete100% right anonymous. There is no bigfoot. Never was. Its a lie from start to finish by people out to make money and a name for themselves.
DeleteFunny thing is that Footers are always ready to trust people's account, but still they dismiss patterson's family repeatedly stating that the man was a joker.
DeleteDouble standards at his best
All footery is, is double standards.
Delete4:54...
Delete*a broke cowboy to have made a suit that has defied 46 years of technological achievements, with materials that weren't available; isn't good thinking.
*the 'suit' that defies and distorts human proportions; isn't good thinking.
*not understanding that Bigfoot research was being conducted prior to the PGF, and then naively spewing that this has spurned on a 'religion', isn't good thinking.
*not realising that the capturing of Patty on film was off the back of considerable research; is not good thinking.
*claiming that members of Roger's family have condemned his character, is lies.
*suggesting that a widow who get's money from one of the single most amazing pieces of footage in history is the result of greed; isn't good thinking.
*suggesting that Bigfoot research is akin to a religion, where it is in fact more along the lines of anthropology and wildlife biology, has along list of these professionals involved and even has people like Attenborough and Goodall open to the idea; isn't good thinking.
*suggesting that we don't have other sources of footage when there is, isn't good thinking.
*drawing attention to no stabilisation of the footage, when we now have that with brushed up digital versions that show it clearly can't be a suit; isn't good thinking.
*suggesting that this field won't find anything in 50 years time when science is beginning to ask the questions; isn't good thinking.
*stating that all footers have to do is find a specimen when science has refused to participate, isn't good thinking.
The answer is simple... Good thinking isn't your fortay.
You were welcome.
In 2002, Philip Morris of Morris Costumes (a North Carolina-based company offering costumes, props and stage products) claimed that he made a gorilla costume that was used in the Patterson film. Morris says he discussed his role in the hoax privately in the 1980s but first admitted it publicly on August 16, 2002, on Charlotte, North Carolina, radio station WBT-AM.[50] Morris claims he was reluctant to expose the hoax earlier for fear of harming his business: giving away a performer's secrets, he said, would be widely regarded as disreputable.[51]
DeleteMorris said that he sold an ape suit to Patterson via mail-order in 1967, thinking it was going to be used in what Patterson described as a "prank"[52] (ordinarily the gorilla suits he sold were used for a popular side-show routine that depicted an attractive woman changing into a gorilla.) After the initial sale, Morris said that Patterson telephoned him asking how to make the "shoulders more massive"[53] and the "arms longer."[54] Morris says he suggested that whoever wore the suit should wear wide football-type shoulder pads and hold sticks in his hands within the suit. His story was also printed in The Charlotte Observer.[55]
As for the creature's walk, Morris said:
The Bigfoot researchers say that no human can walk that way in the film. Oh, yes they can! When you're wearing long clown's feet, you can't place the ball of your foot down first. You have to put your foot down flat. Otherwise, you'll stumble. Another thing, when you put on the gorilla head, you can only turn your head maybe a quarter of the way. And to look behind you, you've got to turn your head and your shoulders and your hips. Plus, the shoulder pads in the suit are in the way of the jaw. That's why the Bigfoot turns and looks the way he does in the film. He has to twist his entire upper body"
After the death of Ray Wallace in 2002, following a request by Loren Coleman to The Seattle Times reporter Bob Young to investigate, the family of Wallace went public with claims that he had started the Bigfoot phenomenon with fake footprints (made from a wooden foot-shaped cutout) left in Californian sites in 1958. In addition, David Daegling stated that Wallace "had a degree of involvement" with the Patterson–Gimlin film, and that this gave grounds for suspicion of it.[66]
DeleteThe evidence for this involvement is Wallace's alleged statement, "I felt sorry for Roger Patterson. He told me he had cancer of the lymph glands and he was desperately broke and he wanted to try to get something where he could have a little income. Well, he went down there exactly where I told him. I told him, 'You go down there and hang around on that bank. Stay up there and watch that spot.'"
Patterson and Gimlin both denied that they had perpetrated a hoax, but in a 1999 telephone interview with television producer Chris Packham for the BBC's The X Creatures, Gimlin said that for some time, "I was totally convinced no one could fool me. And of course I'm an older man now...and I think there could have been the possibility [of a hoax]."
Delete"Some decades after the Patterson–Gimlin film's publicity, Greg Long interviewed people who described Patterson as a liar, a conman, and sometimes worse. One of the pictures in Roger's book (him sitting next to a campfire, drinking a cup of coffee with his horse in the background) was actually taken in his back yard, not in Northern California as the caption claims. Pat Mason, Glen Koelling, Bob Swanson and Vilma Radford claimed Patterson never repaid loans they made to him for a Bigfoot movie Roger was planning. Later, records show that Bob Gimlin sued DeAtley and Patterson's widow, Patricia, in 1975, claiming he was not receiving his share of the film's proceeds. Radford alone had corroborative evidence: a $700 promissory note "for expenses in connection with filming of 'Bigfoot: Americas Abominable Snowman.'"[4] Patterson agreed to repay her $850, plus 5 percent of any profits from the movie. The movie was supposed to be a pseudo-documentary about cowboys being led by an old miner and a wise Indian tracker on a hunt for Bigfoot. The storyline called for Patterson, his Indian guide (Gimlin in a wig) and the cowboys to recall in flashbacks the stories of Fred Beck and others as they tracked the beast on horseback. Since the film was to be a pseudo-documentary, Patterson and Gimlin would have needed actors. Lacking a real cooperative Bigfoot, Patterson and Gimlin would have needed a costume to present a reasonable representation of the creature supposedly encountered."
Delete"According to Jerry Merritt, both he and Roger tried to attract investors to help further fund his Bigfoot movie. They were not successful at this. Later, after Patterson died, Ron Olson (of ANE Studios) made a version of this and renamed it Sasquatch, the Legend of Bigfoot, while neglecting to give Patterson a co-writer credit. Roger DROVE TO HOLLYWOOD OFTEN. He and Merritt visited various friends in the entertainment field including Gene Vincent and Ross Hagen (who starred on the late 1960s hit television show Daktari), and who worked with Patterson on his Bigfoot song they recorded in Hollywood."
DeleteYou were welcome
Wow!
DeleteJoe getting pwned by his own copy/paste way!
Touching the bottom, Joey
9:07... Closure desperation much? There have been many claims to a suit being made and nothing turns up, ever... And you people suggest Footers cling to rumors and hearsay? Not good enough I'm afraid, Kitakaze has taught you people well. Also... There are extended toes in the feet, you can see this very, very plainly when watching the footage. Also, soft clown feet wouldn't leave tracks. The proportions of the shoulders to function with bending fingers would have to shift totally into the neck of the individual, totally disproportionating the eye sockets of the 'mask' to human eye placement.
Delete9:09... Chris Packham has to edit an entire phone call with Bob Gimlin. It's pretty obvious the entire phone call interview was edited, because you don't hear the entire exchange... You do not hear Gimlin explain himself as well as he probably would have liked and from this snippet of an interview, Packham focuses on a small statement, a rational reflectance on Bob's part (to which anyone would in thinking over an incident so life changing and profound time and time again)... And twists that as his main reason to denounce the footage as a hoax. Implying further that Gimlin has let the car out of the bag, so to speak. Gimlin's statement, to anyone who is impartial, would suggest merely he has nothing to hide and like he said... It would have been a pretty risky prank considering he had a rifle loaded and pointed at Patty. I have also worked in editing and know how easy it is the manipulate the viewer. Oh and Packham hasn't even got a PHD.
Bob Gimlin isn't his family, and I find it very telling that even after all that, Gimlin wouldn't reveal all about the 'hoax' to take Roger down? I wonder why that didn't happen?? There is no evidence that the photograph of Bob in an Indian wig is Bob (laughably) and it is common knowledge that Roger was an amateur film maker, but the post at 9:11 is a complete fabrication of events and a version of what is 'theorised' happened; an effort at linking the PGF to an experiment with a new film camera... To which many people did in the late 60's with the development of such technology.
I think that wrapped it all up?
Next...
So you makes a hoax to gain money and you don't destroy the suit?
DeleteMakes sense.
Not much as a creature that calmly shows up one day and then ever again
"The Documentary and the PGF are were two separate projects. One was planned and everyone knew about(the documentary) the PGF happened after Roger and Bob returned to Yakima, Roger received a phone call from John Green then Roger and Bob packed up and went to Bluff Creek, based on what Roger was told by John Green. I have never seen it said anywhere that John Green had anything to do with the filming of a Documentary, or that he was feeding information to Roger Patterson for the filming of this Documentary. These were two separate events. Roger did not call up Jerry Merritt and the guys and say, "Okay we gotta pack up and head to Bluff Creek guys, we may have something down there to add to the Documentary."
DeleteKeep fishing joe, dude just pwned the hell out of you. Wow.
DeleteNational Wildlife Magazine - 1970 article by George Harrison. The magazine's editor demanded Patterson take a polygraph test before having anything to do with the footage. Roger gladly agreed; and passed with flying colours. Only psychopaths fake polygraphs.
Delete"Only psychopaths fake polygraphs"
Deletethere ya go
if it was before having anything to do with the footage, so what's the point?
Deletedumbass
Only psycopaths fake polys?? Holy shit! Joe, you just lost a great deal of my respect. Sorry bro.
DeleteAnd who here is to say that patterson wasnt a psychopath??
Delete"As it turns out, some of the Yakima residents who were quoted by Greg Long in his book now say their stories and comments about Roger were distorted in his book. They say Long seemed to be on a mission to make Roger Patterson out to be a petty criminal.
DeleteRoger was an unsophisticated cowboy, but a highly motivated, multi-skilled cowboy with big aspirations. Only a few years after obtaining the footage he was diagnosed with terminal cancer. He died in 1972, at the age of 46. Apparently (and not surprisingly) Roger had not repaid all his personal debts, or completed all his planned projects, or returned all his borrowed items, before his cancer put him into the bed where he eventually died.
People who die of cancer in their prime of life often leave behind a lot of loose ends and debts. Does that make them petty criminals? Greg Long would have you think so.
Greg Long told folks around Yakima that Roger Patterson made a heap of money from the famous footage, and he (Greg Long) wanted to find anyone who was owed money by Patterson ... or who would otherwise bear witness against him, as Long claimed everybody in town was doing .... For example, Bob Hieronimous claims Roger owed him $1,000 for wearing the costume in the footage ..."
Notice how joe completely ignored the psychpath exchange after his asinine comment.
DeleteSorry, I was too busy tuning you people with the plain and simple fact that for every person you people claim makes money off Bigfoot... There is a money grabbing fraud on the opposite side of the fence making money off helping you pathetic clowns sleep better at night.
DeleteWhat you wanna know about psycho's, numpty?
As my wife has her PhD in psychiatry and I am a LCSW of 13 years, please tell me about "psycho's" Joe.
DeleteOh, and here's this too...
Delete"At the end of 2002 the time had arrived to accept the meaning of the fake feet possessed by the heirs of Ray Wallace, a wealthy contractor who had started planting fake Bigfoot tracks in 1958 and saw his ruse succeed only too well to the time of his death in November of 2002. While always discrediting himself with extravagant claims to have film, recordings, and colorful stories of Bigfoot activity, Wallace nevertheless was one of the people who saw genuine Bigfoot tracks at the start of the Bigfoot publicity that began in 1958. The distinctive fakes that Wallace put into circulation can be sorted out from the record and disposed of. I addressed this issue in Volume 7 of Wonders. There I related the history from 1958 onward when what appear to be genuine tracks were first given widespread publicity.
Some faked impressions, made in imitation of genuinely large footprints, were discovered in at least three instances, in 1958, in 1960, and in 1967.
In short, after the initial sensational interest in Bigfoot was sparked by a genuine set of strange footprints, Ray Wallace hired two men to look into the matter. Soon thereafter he began to deposit false footprints along creeks and roads in Northern California. Those carved tools for hoaxing appear to me to have been based upon a find of genuine footprints made by his employees. Bigfoot seekers, who had little experience with Bigfoot prints in 1958, were fooled by those bogus impressions. Until the presentation of the hoaxing tools in December of 2002 one particular set of fake feet has had a significant impact on the record of Bigfoot. With further study of genuine Bigfoot tracks, more can now be said about how this success was gained and how genuine Bigfoot tracks can be viewed."
http://www.cryptozoonews.com/hall-ii/
... And there's so much more... Watch this space...
11:21... Wonderful, I bet your wife is a very interesting person... But you stated that I avoided a question regarding psychopaths, so I think the proverbial ball is in your court.
DeleteDid The Green River Killer not get through a polygraph?
Too much reading
DeletePlease try bro... It's the tuning of a lifetime for them.
DeletePeace.
That is a most credible looking group in the screenshot. Another nice collection of hats too.
ReplyDeleteJustin's boots are kind of gay, though.
Deletei see you need a certain look. to get into the in crowd
DeleteSmeja trying to get his face in every bigfoot related photo.
ReplyDeleteWhy is he called Rev ?
ReplyDeleteReverend of the bigfoot religion I guess
DeleteNumpty of the Tardist religion right here ^
Delete5 bucks and the application on the back of a matchbook cover you can be a " rev " also. also some kind of taxfree status i think
DeleteRugged wilderness men with beer bellies , jowls and several double chins apiece.
ReplyDeleteMen who really do spend time out in the wild are toned and muscular not soft fat old geezers like these guys.
These guys are not fooling anyone.
sounds like your describing my good friend Johnnie Jones. He's 610 years old and his stomach is as flat and tight as a frying pan. When you see pictures of him in his new book, you'll swear he looks like Elvis! At 61, he has lost no hair, it's as thick as a rug.
DeleteHis friend, Tina Running Bear
Ops sorry, 61 years old my typo!
DeleteTina Running Bear
Sorry 5:56, try hanging at your local hunting/fishing store for a little while. The most obese out of shape men on the face of the planet.
DeleteAnyone up for going out with me for a cuppa coffee?
ReplyDeleteNO!
DeleteThat depends, do you have a vagina? I mean like an actual real one that you were born with.
DeleteThe second funniest news article of 2014 (nothing can top the woman pulling a gun out of her vagina). A woman is hit by a car driven by a chihuahua:
ReplyDeletehttp://denver.cbslocal.com/2014/01/11/woman-at-red-light-hit-by-car-driven-by-chihuahua/
Is the Reverend no taller than a sawed off Justin Smeja, or are my eyes deceiving me again? I guess that must be why he only films himself from the shoulders up.
ReplyDeleteJoe's absence is disappointing.
ReplyDeleteWhat's about all these fake pussies showing up?
DeleteI may be one of two lady people that are in fact, lady people. I can't speak for the 'ladies' who don't have actual profiles. Personally, I think it's the all the people here who apparently were never given names that's more concerning.
DeleteHello Georgina, long time no see, sis.
DeleteHope all is well.
Peace.
Sup, George
DeleteHey Georgina! The anons here welcome you! We tend to scare women away for some reason, so we don't see many of the female persuasion here.
ReplyDeleteGood :) I do miss the good 'debates' that Joe inspires, for better or worse! It's been a while since I've ventured back here, because yes, some of the anons are a little peculiar...anon above excepted.
Deletethar bez bigfoots out thar fer shure
ReplyDeleteWhat's up with all these english people invading our truly 'murican Bigfoot site?!?!
ReplyDeleteNow this is an appeal, guys:
BRING BACK THIS SITE TO BE AMERICAN AND KICK OUT ALL THOSE CROOKED TEETH-STINKY-I DON'T HAVE A BIDET SO I DO NOT WASH MY ASS- ENGLISH!!!
THIS IS LIKE THE INDIPENDENCE WAR!
Drones be the answer, they da ones to find bigfoots
DeleteBOBO knows where da bigfoots goes
ReplyDeleteifn U findin tham thar critters trax gits U a hound dog and find that thar critter fer shure……….
ReplyDelete