Bob Gimlin Speaks Candidly
There's no bigger interview, and no one more well known than Bob Gimlin in the bigfoot world. Here he is at the recent Sasquatch Summit.
World's Only 24/7 Bigfoot News Blog: Encouraging readers to draw their own conclusions from the evidence and arguments.
When Gimlin talks people need to listen ! He is legend ! Genuine top bloke !ReplyDelete
If the Patterson footage is a hoax, it is one of the greatest hoaxes of the 20th century, one of the greatest hoaxes of all time.ReplyDelete
If Gimlin is lying, he's very good at it. I have listened to and watched many of his talks on YouTube, and he is always consistent. Over the span of many years, I have never heard him once contradict his previous tellings of the story.
Exactly ! The skeptics who crow about it being a hoax can't even come close to recreating it using fabric technology of the time (which they claim was used) I dare any of them to put their money up and recreate it. shouldn't be too hard according to them . Patterson must have been the best special effects person of his time. even the bigfoot they made for the 6 million dollar man series can't hold a candle to the PGF so in theory he could have made millions in hollywood with his skills . Or maybe the skeptics know deep in their hearts that it was a real bigfoot and they just hate to admit it. In time lads, in timeDelete
It boils down to this: If Bob Gimlin is telling the truth, then sasquatches exist. If Bob Gimlin has been telling a tall tale, then the footage is a hoax.Delete
The number one piece of evidence used to support the existence of bigfoot is the Patterson-Gimlin film. If the film were ever to be proven to be a hoax, that would deal a serious blow to the bigfoot world.
The Patterson-Gimlin film has been scrutinized over and over and over for decades. People have ended up on both sides of the fence regarding this footage. Perhaps the best analysis and surprising outcome was the National Geographic documentary that concluded that the creature seen in the film was not a man in a costume.
The only person in the world who could put an end to the discussions regarding the legitimacy of the film is Bob Gimlin. If he were to make a death bed confession that the footage was hoaxed, that would be the only thing that would put an end to the discussions on this film. Bob Gimlin has consistently denied that the footage was hoaxed.
I have been interested in the topic of bigfoot since the 1970s. I have been waiting for proof for decades. My personal feeling is that, with so many people looking now, if the existence of bigfoot isn't proven within the next 5-10 years, then the bigfoot likely doesn't exist and is only folklore. Thousands of 7-8 foot bipedal primates that weigh upwards of 800 pounds can't hide from modern technology forever.
The key here is that “thousands” of 7-8 foot bipedal primates that weigh upwards of 800 pounds haven’t managed to stay hidden. They’ve left impossible amounts of trace evidence and have been observed for thousands of years. And what’s an extra 5-10 years of one not sitting down and breaking bread with a biologist when you have all that?Delete
They just need to be left alone and acknowledged for what they are. Be careful out in the woods and appreciate that the world is a feckin incredible place.
Here's the thing - even if it is a hoax Gimlin would never admit it. He is looked upon as a revered icon in the Bigfoot community. He thrives on the admiration and attention he has gotten over the years and even pockets a little change for doing so. He will NEVER dash the hopes of those who so willingly believe and have faith in him. His story that he has maintained over the years will die with him unchanged.Delete
Time will be the thing that finally puts closure on Bigfoot. If Bigfoot stories continue to come in and there is no body in the next decade or two then even the devoted believer will have their doubts. Most sensible people have already given up hope it will ever be proven.
There will be no big reveal from Gimlin - take that to the bank.
Can't they inject Gimlin with some truth serum? Or maybe get him drunk as a skunk to see if he will talk freely about Patterson hoaxing the famous footage.Delete
Yeah, great ideas dumbass. Why don't they just tie Gimlin to a chair and beat it out of him. Or shove bigfoot footprint casts underneath his fingernails.Delete
Ello mateY , I’ll volunteer for that bloody job , I’d really fancy beating the pudding out of that tiny lying bloke !Delete
The PGF is impossible to hoax.Delete
haha, nice try 9:02. And Iktomi is correct - no one has even come close to recreating the PGF and with today's technology you'd figure bob's yer uncle it could be done in a snap !Except not one skeptic has been able t prove it was a hoax . End of storyDelete
even if they manage the impossible and show it was a hoax the have thousands of witness accounts and thousands of years of stories from native people as well as all the footprints . So go head and try to prove it was a hoax - good luck boyos !
lktomi is dead wrong on stating the PGF film is impossible to hoax. First of all it's in the eyes of the beholder how realistic it looks. The distance, grainiest of the film and relative shortness of it all play into the illusion. If there was a strong enough incentive and enough money available for such an undertaking then I'm confident there would be much better results in duplicating what is shown in the film than the weak attempts made so far. As it is there doesn't seem to be much reason to do so as most believe it's fake anyway due to no body ever being produced after all this time.Delete
You can make any argument you want but until a body or part of is produced you have nothing but your faith and belief that all so called evidence is accurate and legit. The only thing that will ever be impossible to hoax is a body.
so crowdfund it and prove us wrong ! Do it and make us eat crow but you will have to use all the technology that was available to Patterson in 67 and let's see you do something grand. i'll be waiting for that cracker of a video boyo !Delete
The fact that you would require a “enough money available” debunks your own argument with a little context.Delete
Roger Patterson was a broke cowboy who couldn’t afford a camera, and there is no fur cloth method known to SFX, let alone affordable, for that which is accounted in that footage. The muscle tone, flexing muscles and clear biological tissue that you can seen, even the anatomy that can only be pointed out by a small number of experts who have worked with living tissue, hist isn’t logical to add to a costume that Roger never knew would be stabilised in modern times. Think about that... why add such impossible, unaffordable detail to shaky footage?
Even by today’s standards of SFX, what you see in that footage is near enough impossible to replicate. One individual (Blevins) had such a “strong enough incentive” that he devoted almost three years of his life using modern materials to replicate it, and failed. All this, and you have the fact that the physical evidence that was left by the subject in that footage is consistent with published decades’ old studies on homo erectus trackways... BEFORE the majority of the population even had heard of it.
The factors that you would need to click all in place by pure chance and coincidence leave the footage impossible to hoax.
And I’m anthropology, one would not require a body... because studying and documenting subjects in their natural environments would be sufficient. So considering all that, one can easily argue that the holy grail of Bigfoot evidence was acquired in 1967. If you are in denial of that... then you are very welcome to challenge the thousands of years of anthropological data and peer reviewed physical evidence that is so plentiful that it yields average height and weight ratios.
One does not require faith when one has the data. Science... it’s a bugger if it doesn’t go for you.
Wow talk about triggered. People sure get defensive when you challenge their faith. Produce a body or forever have people question the film's authenticity. End of story.Delete
Stuey is getting flustered . he knows there is no bloody way he can recreate the PGF . So it comes down to one cold hard fact - regular cowboy Patterson was the greatest SFX wizard and could have been a superstar star in hollywood with his fur techniques or he captured a living bigfoot on film back in 67. What do you think Stuey ? We didn't he go into hollywood with his SFX mastery which according to you is all it was ????Delete
Schooled once again boyo !
People can question the film’s authenticity all they like. It’s a free country. It’s a matter of getting their ducks in order it they expect that to stick.Delete
There is no costume you can point to, not even a single SFX method, however there IS scientific data in that footage that corroborates the peer reviewed physical evidence and three databases of eyewitness testimony.
There is no scientific argument yet proposed against the physical evidence the PGF left behind. When that comes along it would be fair to say you’d have something more than the mere faith you project against the lists of expert/scientific opinion for it being genuine.
It’s simple... start proving your point. A lack of expedition to find a body doesn’t warrant ignoring thousands of years of anthropological data, physical evidence and eyewitness testimony. That’s perverse special pleading.
BINGO ! Stuey can now whimper back to his lair like a dog with it's tail between the legs licking it's wounds !Delete
Simple glorious !
I still think that they should beat it out of Gimlin.ReplyDelete
Let the North Koreans get it out of him.Delete
I like Bob Gimlin and he tells a very convincing story with a video to back it up. Wish he would take a polygraph test though.ReplyDelete
Can't they beat Gimlin up and force him to take a polygraph test?Delete
Bob Hieronomous did it and passed.
So did Roger Patterson. Difference is, Roger’s was arranged by National Wildlife magazine... and the show who did Bob H’s was discredited as a farce.Delete
I've heard of Bob H's TV show polygraph results but never heard they were discredited. Who spilled the beans ?Delete
Jim McCormick who did Bob H's first polygraph died in 2009 and Bob H’s attorney, Barry Woodard, refused to reposnd to requests from another local polygraph expert for a peer review of those test results. The ‘Lie Detector’ show’s credibility took a hit concerning his second polygraph, when host Ed Gelb was accused of exaggerating his own academic credentials and the show was victimized by a guest who made up a story, aced Gelb’s polygraph and then bragged about it in a magazine.Delete
That's interesting and complicated. Thanks I didn't know that.ReplyDelete
Oops That was for 10:43 ^Delete
In about 1969 I got a Time-Life coffeetable book that had a few frames of the PGF in it for Christmas. I can unabashedly say that I was convinced at a pretty young age.ReplyDelete
As the years have gone by not a thing has come up in analysis that even hinted at a hoax. In fact most analysts end up concluding that the subject is genuine.
I believe Bob. I believe Roger. And I definitely believe M.K. Davis.
There are upright bipedal creatures in North America and certain locations around the world anywhere there is game, water and cover. They are physical, Earthly and natural. They (adults) possess something north of 1650cc of brain volume and that brain seems to outstrip ours so far as concealment and stealth are concerned.
Our lack of awareness of something like this is the biggest blunder of our species.
Personally I think we’re at a good time as enthusiasts. We can point to irrefutable evidence to make the career hoax cultists look like idiots... and the hominin can be left alone (to some extent), free from interference from people who want them (potentially archaic humans) on a laboratory table.Delete
... and if people in general can be more aware of what’s out there, then I think that would keep everyone on all sides a lot safer. Temperaments would obviously be a lot more extreme in an archaic human.Delete
The old man is milking his hoax for all it is worth. Wouldn't you?ReplyDelete
I suppose it's better than having to work as a Wal-Mart greeter.Delete
You know answering your own comments is indicative of not having confidence in your opinion, right?Delete
That’ll be the sheer lack of evidence that corroborates that opinion.