Just Like Bigfoot, Black Bears Are Also Afraid of Trail Cams
Some Bigfoot researchers believe there's a reason why we never catch the "Big Guy" on camera. Dr. Mathew Johnson points out that the fact that black bears are fully aware of game cams tells us Bigfoots are just as smart at avoiding cameras. "If a Bear knows that a Trail Cam is a foreign object that doesn't belong on a tree in his home, I'm pretty sure Mr and Mrs Squatch know it too," Johnson wrote on Facebook.
Post by Robert Meier.
Uno!
ReplyDeleteNOICE! I wasn't even close on this one
DeleteHarry! ;-) Uno!
DeleteGood mornin my Mexican bigfeets friend.
DeleteAnyway time to get to it. Have a good day folks.
DeleteHave a good one harry b
Delete: )
WILD BILL cookin up lots of tham campfire vittles. caws it be a bear huntin seeson ans all
DeleteOBAMA in 2016 for your SAFETY
DeleteISIS who huntin who !!! ISIS vs ISIS
DeleteDr. Johnson is a Loony Tune
ReplyDeleteand a gigantic cry baby tard
DeleteJeffrey Meldrum wrote that book -
DeleteSasquatch: Legend Meets Science
he is SPOT ON!
So when a bigfoot is chasing down a deer they are also thinking the whole time "better keep an eye out for game cams". Its ridiculous. No animal is exempt from being captured on game cam. What about juveniles? Does the mother not let them leave her side for the first 20 years? Bigfoot is nonsense.
ReplyDeleteIt's simple... Sasquatch are not dumb animals, and technology is a pink flag in a sea of green. Whilst there are plenty of images of deer being spooked, why couldn't Sasquatch be of a superior level of sensory attributes that they should notice such technology even in he midst of such a process anyway? An alleged juvenile have been caught on a trail cam also.
DeleteOh and by the way... It'll always be a man in suit to you anyway.
It will be an actual bigfoot... When it is an actual bigfoot.
DeleteYou have failed to prove any of your claims is an actual bigfoot. Not my problem.
It won't be an actual Bigfoot... It'll be a deformed tramp, this a the level of sweaty delusional denial you'll no doubt resort to. You do it with ten thousand years worth of documented evidence, it's not a large leap to deny even a type specimen should one be rubbed in your face.
DeleteProblems? What's your biggest problem is testing evidence, you don't, you can't so the default position at this stage of study is that there is evidence that points to an unknown primate leaving it.
If it wasn't your 'problem' then you wouldn't be here all panicin Skywalker, ha ha ha!!
Make no mistake. If an actual bigfoot was found noone would be denying it.
DeleteYour response shows that you already know there is no such thing as bigfoot and you know one will never be found.
Your mistake is to deny 150 years worth of giant human skeletal remians documented in the US. When you have that in line with aaaaaaaaaaaall the other sources of evidence short of a modern type specimen, then the mistakes are your honesty in the face of so many of the best scientists telling you at the very least, there could be something to it all.
DeleteSweaty denial... And you wouldn't be here if you were confident.
: p
And no... You'll require another Sasquatch to prove the former.
DeleteCoo-coo!!
"Your mistake is to deny 150 years worth of giant human skeletal remians documented in the US"
DeleteLul wat.
When you have as much evidence as you claim yet zero bigfoots or part thereof then it points to there not actually existing said creature.
According to some, there's more than meets the eye when it comes to the evasiveness of bigfoot.
Deletecaws only tham richns folks havin tham game camaras
DeleteIf bears are afraid of trail cams how come there is one in that picture?
Deletesure bigfoots stay away from trail cams, no doubt bears will do the same
DeleteStill no biggie on the slab?
ReplyDeleteDon't exist.
Negative proof fallacy... One of many you express very regularly.
DeleteYou can't use the negative proof fallacy in your favour im afraid.
Delete"You can't prove bigfoot doesn't exist therefore bigfoot exists"
You realise how silly that sounds?
Almost as silly as someone who claims bigfoots don't exist yet spends their entire day trolling a bigfoot blog.
DeleteTrolling?
DeleteI'd prefer the word educating.
Educating? Bro... You don't even understand your own theories. The negative proof fallacy is where one assumes something is true if it cannot be proven false. It can also happen when one assumes that something is false if it cannot be proven true.
DeleteYou have assumed the position of impartiality is your prefferred default position... This is very, very, very intermediate stuff, and you think you're educating.
Man... I've had some laughs on here, but...
Not sure what you are laughing at when you are arguing that bigfoot is real...
DeleteAnd that's sooooo obvious that you need to be here every day reinforcing that 'belief'.
DeleteGood job Einstein... You're lucky I like using you as the model for mainstream silliness, or you wouldn't even have a cyber existence.
You ok over there Jon?
DeleteAnyway if you feel the need to argue on a blog then whatever.
If you actually could prove bigfoot is real I don't think you would be on some obscure blog.
This is a blog to discuss the imediate subject matter, silly boy... You are here remember and there's a reason why we don't go to 'skeptical' blogs. If there was nothing to discuss then there wouldn't be a Bigfoot subject, and there wouldn't be a Bigfoot blog.
DeleteSo obscure, you're here... Silly little nerds.
Are you really saying there is no such thing as fiction? Wow you really are having a bad day today.
Deletei agree that it is possible that there is a creature out there that is intelligent enough to be able to recognise an alien object out in the wilds and therefore avoid it...the perplexing thing is though,that purely as a mathematical probability,bigfoot should have been caught on a camera by now...a picture taken not of blurry and vague imagery but one of CLARITY...the sheer equation of chance states this as a mathematical probability...WHY has bigfoot NOT been captured on camera ?
DeleteAnd how did you react to Barrackman's analysis yesterday?
DeleteThis'll be good...
^ man in clothes...the colour of the items clearly visible and the arms were at least as long as to reach the pockets of the jeans he was so clearly wearing
DeleteDon or a cheap punk^
Delete5:32... Yes, yes, yes... "man in black clothes" that's 6 foot 8 inches tall, with long arms and colour consistency with the body... Ha ha ha ha!!! See what I mean??
Delete"the perplexing thing is though,that purely as a mathematical probability,bigfoot should have been caught on a camera by now..."
Ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
^ but there arms were LEVEL with his midriff and NO further...and don`t give me that bollocks about it beinf 6`8"...that is nonsense and you know it.
DeleteGood thing for Joe that big jon has his back. Other wise
DeleteJoes's daily Beat down by d maker& others would be 10×
Worse!
"the perplexing thing is though,that purely as a mathematical probability,bigfoot should have been caught on a camera by now..."
DeleteHa ha ha ha ha!!!!
The biggest laugh is on you...the FACT that there are NO images of a confirmed bigfoot just shows you up for what you are...a gullible moron...and a denyer of a simple fact
Ha ha ha ha!! Nerves well and truly hit. You people have listened to your crap for so long, you can't even remember what you read not 24 hours ago when in full denial mode, what a bunch of kooks!!
DeleteThere were three methods of determining the figure’s height, the average height of of these being 6 ft 8 in; this is within human height range but it is well above the average for the human population, seemingly very reasonable for a Sasquatch. Wearing all black, private land with few if any trespassers, it was not hunting season, and the temperatures make it unlikely that anyone was wearing uniformly dark clothing from head to toe such as a ghillie suit.
"None confirmed, none confirmed!!" You'll cry... None confirmed by you, silly boy... Got monkey suit?
Ha ha ha ha ha!!
^ you`re the boys with the monkey suit.
Deleteand as I recall,Barrackman is ANOTHER that has never seen the so called creature...correct ?
Strange how there`s so much panic in your posts...yet there are no followers to back you up...nobody else here that comes along to state they are real in your defence...go on,finish your fishfingers before they get cold
you must be confused... Monkey suits are your argument you can't reinforce, not mine, remember? Barrackman doesn't have to see a Sasquatch to put together analysis that makes you cry all the way to the therapist, ha ha!!
DeletePanic? Bro... If you didn't realize by now that I'm in my element doing this, then you're as dumb as what people take you for. Followers? People coming to my defense?? Bro... If you hadn't of noticed, I've taken about tree different people apart on my own and do regularly, sometimes at the same time. Why do I need any help?
I think you're getting angry, I can smell it... Ha ha ha!!
Without big jon, my (joe f), daily beat down would be 10× worse!!!
Delete^ ouch..musta struck a raw
DeleteNERVE with Joe,, due to the lack of responce!
Joe needs to learn and accept his place!!
BEHIND ME!!!
All this bickering is what's nonsense. Let's not forget that millions of people walk around every day believing that there is an all powerful entity in the sky that has the same amount, if not less, proof that it exists.
DeleteBears. It's always bears. Get a hold of yourself people.
ReplyDeleteBears "wood knock"?
DeleteSykes proved it is bears and he even found a new species of bear!
DeleteNo. Humans wood knock.
DeleteSykes proved what is bears? Sykes only "proved" what he had in his hot little hand. That's it.
DeleteAnd - when you are way out in the woods...on private property (a LOT of private property mind you 100's and 100's of acres) over 30 years ago - trust me...it's not some random person doing it. If it makes you more comfortable to think that - that's fine.
Sykes proved bigfoot don't exist.
DeleteSee his 3 part documentary.
Closure desperation can cloud both honesty and logic.
DeleteBears don't debunk this subject, take it from the very guy you celebrate who stated it himself, who's still accepting samples.
His lab is now charging to test samples the same as any other labs.
DeleteAfter he's just spent loads of his own money on samples, that outline his obvious enthuisiasm for the field.
DeleteHe found no bigfoot so he's done with it.
Delete(Sigh)
DeleteYes, yes, yes... In your little world. Keep seeing that therapist, bro.
^ still eyeing up those bigfoot slippers huh ? ...maybe ma will get them from Santa later in the year for your stocking
Delete^creepy foot fetish nerd.
Delete^ creepy nerd
DeleteOriginal... Einstein. You're about 16, right?
DeleteNo im seven years old,and it is my pleasure schooling your
Deletedumb butt each an every day
boyo!
What do they do with their shit piles?
ReplyDeleteAll creatures leave them.
Dont even say they keep it in jars.
Scat has been photographed and is not as uncommonly discovered as you would think. However... If you were an expert hunter & tracker, would you not be very much inclined to cover up all trace knowing that there are other trackers around trying to compromise your evasion?
DeleteEver notice how Joe is always writing excuses?
DeleteThe common household cat covers their scat.
DeleteSchooled.
And that makes bigfoot real?
DeleteClearly you didn't read the comment I was responding to. You better hurry or you're gonna miss homeroom.
DeleteGot monkey? Or are you just enjoying the role playing?
DeleteThis is a bigfoot blog, not a monkey blog. Have we not been through this before?
Delete^ seems a regular feature of this blog site that we go round and round in circles each day...the same old arguments versus the same old replies...neither is very helpful...neither is the "evidence" that is on offer...especially when we get shown "samples" and such that are clearly not of an unknown creature but of everyday animals of the forest and woods...these bigfoot "researchers" give themselves away as fools and incompetents...and we go through the same old debate day in and day out...which says quite a bit about the lives of those in attendance.
Delete^Don
Delete5:27... Do you know what/ I am inclined to agree with you to a degree. Where I don't agree with you is the fact that there is evidence, there is physical evidence, biological evidence, audio, thermals and paper trails documenting all the type specimens of skeletons you like.
DeleteI will not stand aside and let some dissinformant try and censor the facts, I don't care if it's repetitive, if people don't like it they can complain... Nothing that hasn't happened before. You can either like it, or lump it.
Also... We may have come across a Sasquatch sample before now, if they share the same DNA as us in line with archaic versions of homo sapien.
All seems so woo always falling short of real evidence
DeleteThe only thing that falls short is the perception of what real evidence is, as knowing it's there.
Deleteif they share the same DNA as us in line with archaic versions of homo sapien.
Deletewell there`s yet another unknown for ya`...and pondering that it may be true is nonsense...but you`re familiar with that as a trait huh ?
Your lack of come back ain't no body else's problem, dumb dumbz. Go pick up a book, start looking at something else on the net other than BBW, learn something.
DeleteThere are ancient versions of modern human that share our exact DNA. This is fact, you are easily one of the dumbest who come here, you make having an ego so easy, ha ha ha ha!!
^ you were talking of bigfoot you jerk !!!
Delete^^ produce this fact for us ?
Deletei`ll be waiting
Your lack of come back ain't no body else's problem, dumb dumbz. Go pick up a book, start looking at something else on the net other than BBW, learn something.
DeleteYour lack of any evidence to back up your claims is also nobody`s problem but your own...we KNOW you don`t have the evidence to produce...it is that simple...as you are,you dim fool
1:56... Yes I was, on a Bigfoot blog, you laughably dim twonk.
Delete1:57... How about you go and look it up yourself and stop relying on adults to drip feed. Here's a start... Cro-Magnon. Consider it homework.
2:00... Nargh, I list the evidence here daily, it's why you're all butthurt and denialist, remember?
DeleteEvery source short of type specimen, and I love it!
: p
^ Nargh,...you closest you`ll ever get to a specimen is eminem you laughable fool.
DeleteNow you're showing your age, man... I'm exchanging with a 16 year old, don't expect me to keep this up, not when you've been blitzed comments ago anyway... I don't usually mind baby sitting but I've already done my fair share for today.
DeleteStrange?? I was thinking the same thing , only Me babysitting you!!
Delete09-19-14
ReplyDeleteNever forget!!!
OBAMA has all under control
DeleteISIS on the run and the US is SAFE
so NO WORRIES
Any sign of that monkey yet?
ReplyDeleteNONE have been "found" at all...all there is are vague images,speculation and imponderables...and as you have not seen a bigfoot then you cannot state that you KNOW they are real...you may have a leaning towards the existence but you cannot say you KNOW
DeleteNargh... If you've found a dog in your back yard, found trace of it and filmed it and it's still at large, you've merely not caught it yet. Basic stuff bro... The sign accounts for everything short of type specimen, I know how that breaks you and I can't say it doesn't make me smile.
DeleteOh... And I can state for sure that I know they're real, cause I have friends in the field who've seen them and I'm not in denial about the data.
^ but YOU have not seen thyem and so cannot factually say they are real...neither have you produced evidence...you`d be laughed out of the courtroom dear boy
DeleteI have no reason to doubt friends who have 30 years experience in the wikdernes of the U.S. I am also convinced by the evidence... To which I have listed you every source of evidence on this very page.
DeleteGo and get some schoolin'!
^ follower of fashion.
DeleteOle smokey getting smoked as per.
ReplyDelete50 years and no bigfoot.
^ tiresome idiot
Delete4:01... 50 year old and still living with mum.
Deleteans only tham richns folks havin tham gamin camaras shure is
Deletesos you asain tham bigfeets to intellishun to gits a photo frum a gamin camara
DeleteIt's amazing to me the (seeming) huge volume of 'work' he's done analyzing the PGF. I won't pretend to have done even 1/10th of that amount of work vetting anything Bigfoot, ever. But wouldn't it have been better for him to spend such time (instead) attempting a real & proper re-creation of the PGF subject? I mean, that's supposedly his true area of expertise, right? Appears he's been doing so much 'science' lately he thinks he's been transformed from an under-appreciated costume maker to being the grand-poobah of a new Bigfoot ThinkTank™. At least that's what it seems he's trying to make everyone believe.
ReplyDeleteI'm still not sure how much we're supposed to appreciate the notion that if a Hollywood™ costumer thinks the PGF is not just a clever suit, then it's not just a clever suit. Ya don't say?
So anyway, would Bill care to properly explain why the hallowed PGF doesn't have any number of 'contemporaries' (so-to-speak) by now? In 43 years, wouldn't there be at least one more similar (or even better) film by now if the creature actually existed? Yet, not even one has showed up. Doesn't the fact it's never been duplicated ANYWHERE BY ANYONE FILMING ANYTHING THAT RESEMBLES A LIVE CREATURE OR A COSTUME give some in-your-face credence to the possibility that Roger Patterson really was as smart and clever as you refuse to believe he was?
I guess I'm in awe of the fact he's publicly proclaimed the real and true existence of a newly 'discovered' species of hairy-wild-ape-man SIMPLY by re-manipulating Microsoft Paint™ (in ways its mother never intended). To me that's amazing! I hear next up is the Munn's Anti-gravity Machine® (MAM™) that uses a high pitched dog whistle and two safety pins as part of its 'engine'. Truly amazing stuff.
Ok... For starters, the queries regarding Bill's alleged efforts at making a suit were dealt with here yesterday;
Deletehttp://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/heres-how-you-get-on-tv-show-with.html
The argument regarding suit experts who passed comments prior to the film being stabilized has been taken apart here (every single one of them);
http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/another-possible-sasquatch-filmed-near.html
For the third argument, it's simple... There have even been matching specimens filmed;
http://youtu.be/cR2cREt95sU
http://youtu.be/luue2Mv_VNM
And for the forth argument, it's not Microsoft Paint, it's Bill along with some of the best primatologists and conservationists in the world, not to mention the leading and most pioneering cosmetic surgeon (who understands organic tissue) in the US, anthropologists and wildlife biologists, supporting his stance.
Ignorance is bliss, until you get woken up... It tends to send people into full attack mode, poor guys.
^meltdown
DeleteI wasn't the one who resorted to a whole bunch of cut and pastes cause I run out of my already limited intelligence.
DeleteOld news... Old schooling.
Are you sure you want to call someone out for the sin of cut and paste? That's like David Hasselhoff accusing someone of drinking.
DeleteOk... For starters, the queries regarding Bill's alleged efforts at making a suit were dealt with here yesterday;
DeleteOh c`mon...deal with it all again for us...it might save time tomorrow...then again it might not as the same old bollocks is re-iterated day after day with absolutely no progress whatever.
1:33... Cut and pastes are fine in my book. There's also a difference between pasting your own comments and referencing. You on the other hand aren't intelligent enough to come up with anything original and it was hilarious to see you people resort to pastes as soon as you got smashed... Only to get smashed again I might add. No wonder you nerds hate me, I took your playground from you.
Delete1:34... This coming from the same twonk who's here crying about the PGF every day? Man, you want to bring it up, I'm only too happy to hand out the b-slaps. Stop crying like a girl it's pathetic. Oh... And no progress would articulate perfectly your stance, don't try and drag anyone else down with your shortcomings.
^ you`re a little mixed up dear boy...but there`s no shock there...i`ve never debated anything with you...you`re far too nerdy
DeleteAhh, yes, clearly the lack of a bigfoot anywhere in the history of man strengthens the case of the footers. Heck, bigfoot is all but proven at this point in sweaty's bizzarro world, lol.
ReplyDeleteHey sweaty.....where's bigfoot? Who is the joke on again? That would be you. How does it feel knowing Bob Gimlin and the other members of the good old boy bigfoot network laugh their heads off behind closed doors at footers like yourself after the lights go down, and the crowds have gone home?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteMeltdown^
Deleteans tham mexicuns gitin thar vittles frum Denneys shure is
Delete7:31... Easy.
DeleteComing this fall on the History Channel. Search for the giant skeletons. Will go on for weeks. Can not wait
DeleteChuck
Looking forward to that Chuck!!!! Man I wish I had access to American TV!!!
DeletePersons who deny the existence of Bigfoot do not simply do it "out of hand". They've seen and acknowledged the complete lack of a specimen and are making the informed choice of nonexistence. In spite of being unable to prove that Bigfoot does not exist, the intelligent choice is one of denial or skepticism - not belief. Given the situation presented by the real world, choosing to believe in Bigfoot is not an intelligent choice. It may be mostly fueled by emotion or ignorance.
ReplyDeleteThe intelligent choice would not be dismissal but consideration to the vast volume of accounts,huge amount of casts,and the history told by the native indian population..to cast these aside is the choice of a stupid person.
DeletePersons who deny the existence of Sasquatch, simply do it "out of hand". They've acknowledged the lack of a specimen and are resorting to a negative proof fallacy of nonexistence. In spite of being unable to prove that Bigfoot does not exist, the typical choice is one of denial or psuedoskepticism, which is another belief system. Given the situation presented by the the very best scientists world in relevant fields, choosing to not believe in Sasquatch is not an intelligent choice. It may be mostly fuelled by emotion or ignorance.
DeleteNope.
DeletePersons who deny the existence of Bigfoot do not simply do it "out of hand".
This was stated up to. You obviously didn't read.
You're obviously too dumb to notice That I did a version of the original comment, ha ha ha ha!!
DeleteWho didn't read? Ha ha ha ha!!!
people laughing at their own comments are rarely funny...i `spect you laugh at your own jokes too...as nobody else does
DeleteI've noticed you use the "ha ha ha!!" bit when you get smoked. Sort of like a criminal shifting from foot to foot when he knows he's busted and is out of options.
Delete1:36... What can I say, I love what I do to the point that it makes me laugh, oh how it makes me laugh.
Delete1:40... Bro, you'd have to point that out to me, I might have missed that. If you didn't notice, I've kind of cleared up and now dealing with the spoiled little nerds that can't get their own way bought for them on a blog, and have to get personal.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha... And so forth.
: p
^ you`re a lonely virgin with nowhere else to go...i doubt you`ve laughed in years though i accept you do slobber and dribble somewhat.
DeleteSkeptics disagree about whether it has been sufficiently proven Bob Heironimus was the one in the suit, but it seems to me he has a very strong claim - beyond reasonable doubt, found in this way:
ReplyDeleteFirst, you are right that it is a hoax. So who wore the suit? As Greg Long showed, Bob Heironimus is the one person from the circle of Patterson associates that makes sense. Roger got to use his horse for free. Bob wore the suit for free and transported himself there at his own expense. He was by his own admisison a "sucker". This is in perfect conformity with Roger's modus operandi. Bob was a big, beefy guy to fill out that suit well. He was the kind that would keep his mouth shut.
Nobody else in all these years has given a first-hand confession. Occasionally you see people alleging hearsay about someone else confessing. But the only one on record anywhere - in book and on camera - directly admitting the hoax first-hand is Bob Heironimus.
His story is also corroborated by the impossibility of the filming on October 20. Bob's account has it earlier, and it must be in order to develop the film in time for the 22nd showing.
I think people that doubt Bob Heironimus as the actor in the suit need to come up with a reasonable counter-proposal. Who amongst the Patterson circle is a candidate and why?
Nobody else bothered in all these years to go to Yakima and interview Patterson's circle of victims and associates. When Greg Long finally did it, people simply pointed to Bob Heironimus. Bob didn't come forward himself until after a show he saw finally got him fed up enough to overcome the indignity of Patterson making a sucker out of him.
People aren't real keen on announcing the stupid mistakes they made in life. When you see other people capitalizing on something you know to be a lie though, it can be enough to step forward. Having done so, look at the abuse he has taken by 'footers. Decades later in his elder years being contacted now by kooks. Your neighbors by word and deed calling you a liar. (Gimlin and Patty Patterson). It took some guts to step forward.
Bob Gimlin seems willing to go to his grave without confessing. DeAtley did a great job confessing as much as he could without admitting directly to theft by fraud.
The argument by best explanation puts a name in the suit. If you don't have that name you are a mile behind the story that does have a defensible name in the suit. If you went hunting amongst Patterson circles for who the ideal candidate is, you come up with Bob Heironimus. Well golly gee - he confessed!
In doing so he told for the first time the story of PGF film delivery to DeAtley. It was Bob Heironimus that mailed the film, whisked the suit out of the hoax site long before the 20th, and left Roger and Bob Gimlin at Bluff Creek to fake a spectacular set of tracks where nobody could miss them. They faked them out along the logging road where they wouldn't be missed.
They left as soon as they finished faking tracks because they were made so obvious to find. They did not fake the tracks at the hoax site. It was Labor day week. On August 27, John Green and Rene Dahinden flew down in a Cessna 185 to photograph the tracks and then tell Al Hodgson to call Roger. Because Roger had told them to do so. He pretended to be in Mt. St. Helens, but he had snuck in to bluff creek to meet Bob Heironimus and film the PGF.
Roger can't come back down right away because DeAtley hasn't developed the film yet. When the film is developed and edited, Roger returns to Bluff Creek to make the hoax announcement, and leave tracks that comport with the film they took. Bob Heironimus is in Yakima on 20 October 1967.
That's how they done it.
Meltdown\/
DeleteGreg Long; he's been caught out falsifying interviews that were published in his book. The 'costume expert' that 'made the suit' has no record of Roger buying
Deleteanything from him and had to hire a costume expert to make a gorilla suit that looked nothing like Patty. Bob H has more contradictions about the suit he wore
than anything I've heard and can't even find the 'film site'. You see... There's money in hoaxing a hoax, expecially when your target audience are largely
skeptical of the subject already. Author David Murphy had spent 11 years writing the biography of Roger Patterson. In this time he interviewed over 70 people who had some acquaintance with Roger and Bob or people who knew them extremely well, and in that time he came across not one person who didn’t think highly of both individuals, not to mention endorse their credible nature. This is in direct contrast to Greg ‘Liar’ Long who’s book was an attempt at making money from hoaxing a hoax.
Roger Patterson apparently knew Bob Hieronimous before he obtained the footage in 1967. Patterson had been wanting to film a low budget documentary about the subject. He organzied some people in Yakima for some stock scenes on horseback for his film. Bob Hieronimous was apparently one of those people, but that appears to be the extend of his assocation with Roger. Hieronimous is, in fact, one of Bob Gimlin's neighbors, but Gimlin had little social contact with him
over the years. Gimlin has boarded and trained horses for decades. It was not uncommon to for him to board horses of neighbors. During the late 1960's one of
the horses he boarded was owned by Hieronimous. It was, in fact, Hieronimous' horse that Bob brought down to Bluff Creek in 1967. If Hieronimous had felt left out of Patterson's project by 1967, it would have added insult to injury to learn that his own horse was used by Gimlin on the horse trip that made them
both famous. Yakima folks say Bob Hieronimous, by contrast, was always an under-achiever, since he was young. His bare-minimum work ethic won him no
admirers in the community. He didn't have many friends, compared to Gimlin. Gimlin had a rather large circle of friends in the Yakima Valley. Compared to
the Hieronimous property, the Gimlins seem to have done nicely for themselves. The Gimlins' home has always been well maintained, and nicely painted, and the landscaping nicely manicured. The Gimlins always had nicer, newer vehicles in
their driveway too. The Hieronimous family could never keep up with those Joneses. It was a formula for envy in a small western town. Hieronimous had been
telling people in Yakima bars for years that he would someday find a way to make money off the Patterson footage, like his famous neighbor did. So you see...
Even if Bob H was telling the truth, he was either participating in a documentary (not the PGF) or merely had his horse in the film. Lastly... And this is courtesy from John W Jones, why would the horse go nuts if it was his owner in a suit?
Friday, October 20, 1967
DeleteAt approximately 1:30PM, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin begin filming a hairy bipedal subject walking away from them, up Bluff Creek.
59.5 seconds later (assuming 16 FPS film speed), the role of film runs out.
Gimlin pursues the film subject up the creek on horseback for approximately 300 yards before returning to Patterson.
The pair spend about 15 minutes rounding up Patterson's horse.
Patterson changes the film in his camera under a poncho at the film site.
They return on horseback to Gimlin's truck (at Louse Camp?) for casting materials.
Upon returning to the film site, Patterson and Gimlin attempt to track the film subject. Gimlin follows sign for approximately 200' up the mountain before stopping due to the terrain.
Two casts are made - one of a left foot impression and one of a right foot impression. Patterson chooses the most perfect, foot-shaped imprints he can find.
Patterson documents the trackway on a second roll of film. This film is subsequently lost.
Patterson and Gimlin leave Bluff Creek and drive to Eureka, CA, to send the film via airplane to Yakima, WA, to be processed. Note that according to Daniel Perez, John Green's recollection is they drove to Arcata, CA, although all other sources say they went to Eureka. The two towns are only 8 miles apart.
While in Eureka, they call Patterson's brother-in-law Al DeAtley, Albert Hodgson of Willow Creek, CA, and the British Columbia Museum in Victoria, BC, requesting dogs and scientists be sent to the film site. While the museum sends no one, they do call John Green who in turn notifies Rene Dahinden.
Patterson calls the Yakima Times-Standard and is interviewed by an unknown reporter.
Patterson and Gimlin return to Willow Creek, CA, and speak to Al Hodgson and Sylvester McCoy before returning to Louse Camp.
Saturday, October 21, 1967
At approximately 2:00AM, the pair fall asleep at their camp.
At approximately 5:00AM, Gimlin is awakened by the sound of rain.
Gimlin returns to the film site to cover the uncast tracks with bark.
The intensity of the rain cause Patterson and Gimlin to strike camp and return to Yakima.
The Yakima Times-Standard runs a front page story under the headline "Mrs. Bigfoot is Filmed!" without a byline.
Sunday, October 22, 1967
Patterson, Green, Dahinden, and Jim McClarin view the film at DeAtley's home in Yakima. This appears to be the first time anyone other than DeAtley views the film.
Monday, October 23, 1967
DeleteLyle Laverty, stationed at a camp at Notice Creek as part of a timber preparation crew, comes upon the film site with his marking crew and takes three photographs (slides) of uncast tracks. (From an interview with Roger Knights and an article in Bigfoot Times, June/July 2005, p. 4, col. 2.) Follow-up: Did LL hear of the filming and look for the site or did he happen upon it by chance?
Tuesday, October 24, 1967
Walt Kurshman, upon hearing of the tracks from Lyle Laverty, goes to the site to see them. (Need reference.)
Thursday, October 26, 1967
The film is shown to zoologists and anthropologists in a hotel room in Vancouver, BC. They are unimpressed.
Approximately Sunday, October 29, 1967
Note: This date is based on a letter Bob Titmus wrote to John Green where he discusses first seeing the tracks at the film site "9 or 10" days after they were made.
Bob Titmus arrives at Bluff Creek to investigate the film site.
Titmus spends the entire day walking the creek looking for the tracks. He finds ample sign of Patterson and Gimlin's horses, but he does not find the film site.
Monday, October 30, 1967
Titmus finds the film site on the morning of his second day at Bluff Creek.
He tracks the film subject to a position 125-150 yards away from the film site, 80-90 feet up the mountainside, where he believes the film subject "sat down" in an area shaded from view but with a clear line of sight to where the film was shot below.
While he finds indication that the subject went up the mountain after stopping, he decides not to track it further.
Titmus makes casts of ten consecutive prints that demonstrate, in his words, "vast difference in each imprint, such as toe placement, toe gripping force, pressure ridges and breaks, weight shifts, weight distribution, depth, etc."
Titmus' sister Allene and brother-in-law Harry arrive in the evening and camp with him that night.
Tuesday, October 31, 1967
Titmus departs Bluff Creek.
You'll notice that according to the timeline provided, on the Friday...
Delete"Patterson and Gimlin leave Bluff Creek and drive to Eureka, CA, to send the film via airplane to Yakima, WA, to be processed."
This would give ample time for the film to be processed. If the processing machine in Yakima was already running there would have been no need to "fire it up" on Saturday. Possibly DeAtely had an arrangement with this "friend" to develop any film Roger came up with "under the table".
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete^ here`s a tip...don`t cut and paste so much...nobody reads a single post of the drivel you put up so save yourself time and effort
DeleteWhat's the matter boyo, got your dreams dashed against the rocks, or not got the literary patience?
DeleteI think both, ha!!
^ take your sheep wellies off when speaking in public .
Delete^^ "literary"...my my,you astound us with you diatribes
DeleteAnd leave you a little b-slapped the same time it seems.
Delete^ you`re the biggest troll here you fat freak
DeleteWhilst we're at it, let's look at further 'inaccuracies' that have been perpetuated as truth regarding the subject of the PGF. Here we go; Brian Dunning's 'facts' that are so off the mark it ain't true (who also had all his information from Greg Long who's a known hoaxer of a hoax, who used two liars as his main sources);
Deletehttp://bigfootbooksblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/skeptoid-botches-analysis-of-patterson.html?m=1
Why,you cheap punk !
DeleteGuys I think Joe is just upset because he bent his shiny new iphone
ReplyDeleteglobal climate disruption is where we need to be ! UN say game over in 2020 !!!
DeleteMeltdown achieved!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
ReplyDeleteI'm a little busy now... But as always... I can promise the nerd that I'll be along in an hour or two to kick aaaaaaaall his little meldown pastes back at him.
: p
Bet you won't be able to back up anything you say with an actual bigfoot though:)
DeleteToo easy:)
Plenty found;
Deletehttp://youtu.be/cR2cREt95sU
http://youtu.be/luue2Mv_VNM
http://youtu.be/lOxuRIfFs0w
... None caught.
: p
"Skeptics disagree about whether it has been sufficiently proven Bob Heironimus was the one in the suit, but it seems to me he has a very strong claim - beyond reasonable doubt, found in this way:"
DeleteNo...you`re wrong plain and simple...in a desperate attempt to divert the reality of bigfoot the skeptards such as yourself are trying any measure they can think of to refute reality...there`s just one problem for you...which is that the more you try to hide,the more it`s coming at ya`...each and every day...now you can run along,moms callin` ya for your fishfingers and chips
Skeptics don't need to try anything. They just sit back and let the lack of any bigfoots do the talking:)
Delete5:17 another spoiled and impatient role playing nerd that has to pretend he's a 'skeptic' in case his mummy finds him interested in Bigfoot; who just wants his body so he can come out the closet. Hey... If he can attain some level of attention he lacks so much in the real world in the process... Bonus! Why lose cyber pride asking questions on the topic when you can post 'skeptical' arguments that have threatened your closet enthusiasm and get others to counter them up for you, reinforcing that closet enthusiasm, eh?
DeleteLol^
DeleteGot monkey?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/B002UZNGCM?pc_redir=1410586453&robot_redir=1
DeletePlenty thanks... Got magic monkey suit?
Goe,
DeleteYou know how I know you're gay?
^ lemme guess...it is because his dick is up your anus ?
DeleteNone found:)
ReplyDeleteNone caught:)
None in existence:)
Plenty of bellends!
Plenty of bellends!
DeleteI suspect you`re fond of rubbing yours regularly...not got a woman to do it for ya`.
Ha ha ha ha ha!!
Deletelots lookin -
DeleteFinding bigfoot, Mountain Monsters, Alaska Monsters, Swamp Monsters all huntin for that bigfoot and on deck Killing Bigfoot in the box in October : )
I want to taterhole the Large Hadron Collider.
ReplyDeleteAlaskan Monsters is the best show on TV
ReplyDeleteYeah! For the weak minded!
DeleteYES - FACE top notch tracker for the Alaska Monsters Team!
Delete^ WILD BILL expert tracker then FACE runner up for tracking critters
DeleteWow there are a lot of damn monkey suits out there!
ReplyDeleteI will no longer listen to the footers lies of patty could not be a suit
There's certainly CGI, foam suits that weren't available in the 60's, Gemora suit that's only ever shown in low lighting to hide suit anomalies and a bunny rabbit suit lacking proportions made my a guy who states the PGF probably isn't a man in a suit.
DeleteBut no magic monkey suits anywhere?
: (
Lots of bigfoot evidence on the tv show alaskan monsters!
DeleteHi joe it's the guy from Essex here. I am still looking into my trip and gathering information. Just wanted to say that in all this negativity you seem to hold yourself pretty well. Why there's so much anger I will never be able to understand. What is it that makes people so angry that there could be something so amazing out there. Is it fear? I myself am very eager to have a better grasp of the vastness of the habitate that could well harbour this very rare animal/strain of human. What an amazing concept. The size of the forest and area involved is quite breath taking. Good luck I will keep you informed from time to time how I am getting on. And if I find nothing but trees and animals then at least I had a very nice holiday in a great country. I have decided on the sierras. You should go yourself one day. Looks absolutely fantastic. Americans are so lucky to have such a beautiful country.
DeleteE.
Hey buddy, we don't need you inviting Joe over here. We have no shortage of deluded footers already.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete9:29 it may well be to do with the way he relates to people ...speaks to those that disagree...he comes across as an arrogant twerp at times.
Delete^^ hark who`s talking you moron
Delete^ i agree joe that trolls the board with moronic comments projected at anybody that dare suggest bigfoot hasn`t been found yet
Delete1:53, 2:32... Please keep crying about it, your tears makes me smile.
DeleteIf you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen!
: p
Post...........
DeleteSo Joe...what of the Lapseritis Bigfoot ? ...you believe that they are paranormal ? ...or is that just too much for ya ?
Reply
Replies
AnonymousWednesday, September 24, 2014 at 2:34:00 PM PDT
oh no...joe needs to draw the line somewhere doncha know...he`ll believe in a creature not yet found or confirmed but not in a creature not yet found or confirmed...if ya follow my drift
joe 2:42 ...you fulfil all expectations
Delete^^^ what joe has to offer isn`t "heat" but hot air.
DeleteGot gator leg?
ReplyDeleteGot elk lay?
Got bigfoot running along a tree branch to knock over a 1m diameter tree?
Got wookie mask?
Got birthing station?
That bear scared the sh*t out of me! xx
DeleteLike bigfoot, joes common sense is non existent.
ReplyDeleteJ Randi for first gay President and me for first husband !
ReplyDeleteIt's obvious you JREF footers are a dedicated bunch but wow, just wow.
Deletewe need OBAMA for 2016 for our SAFETY
DeleteBlack bears are 100% real. Bigfoot is the opposite.
ReplyDeleteIt`s a TOUGH life for us footers...but we carry on as we know they are real and we are confident that we shall be vindicated in the future.
ReplyDeleteHi Joe.
ReplyDeleteDoes your boss at work know you spend this much time debating on a Bigfoot blog?
Hope you don't get caught.
you misunderstand....Joey boy is here all the time because he hasn`t got a woman to talk to...he`s a virgin.
DeleteSo Joe...what of the Lapseritis Bigfoot ? ...you believe that they are paranormal ? ...or is that just too much for ya ?
ReplyDeleteoh no...joe needs to draw the line somewhere doncha know...he`ll believe in a creature not yet found or confirmed but not in a creature not yet found or confirmed...if ya follow my drift
DeleteOh aye...what say Ye , Joey boy ?
DeleteWe can all rest easy tonight. Scientists from one the world’s preeminent centers of learning have demonstrated conclusively that a creature most of us think is possibly-but-probably-not real is in fact possibly-but-probably-not real.
DeleteWhat SAY YE Joey boy ?
DeleteEh............whay say YE ?
The silence is deafening....you have no response to this have you ,you COWARD BIGOT.