Sasquatch! Monster or Myth?

Nurhachi1991 said:

so your going to see a moving muscle from a suit? I do not care how realistic it looks if its a suit your not going to see mucles moving man.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I really don't see any moving muscle. Pretty sure that's just that's just the actor's muscles. Perhaps they got the German Mechanic's father to play him. Who knows?

Nurhachi1991 said:

and no one walks like that look at the arms swaying while its turing a man does not walk like that in a costume and they have proven that

Click to expand...

Watch him going backwards. This is just my idea, but he looks like my dad trying to do the moonwalk, so who's to say that it's not a reversed film of an actor? Hmmm?

Nurhachi1991 said:

THE PATTERSON FOOTAGE WAS NEVER DECLARED A HOAX END OF STORY

Click to expand...

And it was never proven, either.
For me to believe in this creature, they'll have to get some irrefutable evidence. Film is inadmissable in court, so why should we accept this?

Nurhachi1991 said:

all these sites that say they worked on the costume is a bold faced lie it would be on national news if it was and they would have to show evidence to back up their claim and they have none! At least bigfoot has video evidence of what we believe is a bigfoot

Click to expand...

If it were anyone else, I'd read this and assume they were being satirical. But, I guess you're actually serious.
I don't neccessarily believe those people, but honestly, is this your best attempt at logic?

Nurhachi1991 said:

and does that look blurry to you? Nope its clear man

Click to expand...

Really? Where do you live? Do they not have HD TV there? The only thing that is clear is that this film is a hoax.
Oh, and an interesting point. When they play the film in reverse, everything seems to be perfect, except his walk is a little funky. Maybe I'm on to something. Seriously, everything looks extremely blurry until they play it in reverse and then everything seems to fall into place. I'm thinking about making my theory heard.

Finally, look at the costume, excuse me, fur, again. It's really shiny. My dog has to eat special dog food to get his hair to look like that. So, then, do we have people feeding Iams to these buggers? The hair looks like polyester or some synthetic fabric.
And, what about that pose where he turns towards the camera. If I was a hominid and I saw someone pointing a black box at me, I'd run. Wild apes always either investigate, fight, or flee the scene at the sight of a human. Only domesticated animals (and hoax animals) are brazen enough to look at people and think nothing of it. If bigfeet (I guess that's the plural form ) are real, then they obviously haven't had much contact with humans. So, then, how are they so domesticated? They couldn't be.
So, again, Sasquatch is a myth, albeit a damn good one.

Sasquatch is as much of a myth as the people trying to declare it a hoax they have no proof at all nothing but theories. This is video evidence is it real i think so but who knows but its alot more of evidence than any skeptics could show

as much as i love the idea of these creatures and believe there are many species not yet discovered I think anyone who watches the paterson footage and believes its a real creature needs to have a quiet word with themself.

I don't see anything in the movement that would render it impossible for a human being to do.

Also there is a few steps where you notice the soles of the feet. Big grey pads. I can see that with my naked eye I don't see how with a bit more analysis they couldn't prove this to be a fake!?

While I think its highly unlike I like the notion that the creature could exist

however, lets be honest, the patterson footage is laughable.

[EDIT] backwards theory is very good.
you'll notice the part when it appears to look towards the camera, when played in reverse, it is as if it is just looking behind it (so if walking backwards to avoid tripping)

Nurhachi1991 said:

Sasquatch is as much of a myth as the people trying to declare it a hoax they have no proof at all nothing but theories. This is video evidence is it real i think so but who knows but its alot more of evidence than any skeptics could show

Click to expand...

I am most assured that we have concluded the exact opposite.
Even sasquatch believers are willing to admit that the Patterson film is a fake.
If it makes you feel better, the sasquatch could still exist, even if the Patterson film is a hoax, however that is very unlikely.
All that I am trying to show is that the film is a hoax, and my prior statements have verified that.
I am trying to think of how I could make known my backwards theory, I think it really holds up.
And, by the way, please learn to use punctuation. Your paragraphs are huge run-on sentences. You don't have to write perfectly, but please write legibly.
If you need help, here's a site you can use:
http://www.arts.uottawa.ca/writcent/hypergrammar/endpunct.html

adventure al said:

[EDIT] backwards theory is very good.
you'll notice the part when it appears to look towards the camera, when played in reverse, it is as if it is just looking behind it (so if walking backwards to avoid tripping)

Click to expand...

Thanks al. I really think we've stumbled onto something with the backwards theory.

You make very good points man the backwards theroy is good really good


I still think the video is real though

adventure_al said:

as much as i love the idea of these creatures and believe there are many species not yet discovered I think anyone who watches the paterson footage and believes its a real creature needs to have a quiet word with themself.

I don't see anything in the movement that would render it impossible for a human being to do.

Also there is a few steps where you notice the soles of the feet. Big grey pads. I can see that with my naked eye I don't see how with a bit more analysis they couldn't prove this to be a fake!?

While I think its highly unlike I like the notion that the creature could exist

however, lets be honest, the patterson footage is laughable.

[EDIT] backwards theory is very good.
you'll notice the part when it appears to look towards the camera, when played in reverse, it is as if it is just looking behind it (so if walking backwards to avoid tripping)

Click to expand...

Wow you must have one hell of an eyesight because I do not see any grey pads at all. Maybe those are....... I don't know the bottom of it's feet?

Nurhachi1991 said:

Wow you must have one hell of an eyesight because I do not see any grey pads at all. Maybe those are....... I don't know the bottom of it's feet?

Click to expand...

But wait, I thought you said you could see the video very clearly. I guess not. My guess is that the film was intentionally blurry to keep people from noticing such details.

I must say that Patterson video is pretty crappy, sorry , it's all jumpy and blurry. And yes I could see the "pads" on the feet, they don't look like they are even the shape of the foot, just round pads.

This is a great thread, really good discussions and arguments going on and good theories. Not really sure where I stand with it personally, but I am enjoying this.

Though Indy did find Bigfoot. He was with Han Solo's corpse. hehe

Seriously though, good thread idea.

I can't say for certain if Sasquatch is real or not. But if he is, then don't mess with him. Like, say, offer him a ride and then speed up as he reaches for the door handle, or shake up a can of beer and give it to him, or swat his butt with a towel. And especially don't do any of these things to him whilst munching on beef jerky. You'll live to regret it.

Kooshmeister said:

I can't say for certain if Sasquatch is real or not. But if he is, then don't mess with him. Like, say, offer him a ride and then speed up as he reaches for the door handle, or shake up a can of beer and give it to him, or swat his butt with a towel. And especially don't do any of these things to him whilst munching on beef jerky. You'll live to regret it.

Click to expand...

LOL I love those commercials.

Those hikers got what they had coming to them.

Have you guys ever seen the "Tenacious 'D'" Sasquatch episode?
"Just tell 'em...it was a fwiend..." *sniff sniff*

There's a stabilized version of the Patterson film which is really cool to watch.
From what I recall, he says that he shot the film on horseback (and the horse was upset).

Indy fan 235 said:

This is a great thread, really good discussions and arguments going on and good theories. Not really sure where I stand with it personally, but I am enjoying this.

Though Indy did find Bigfoot. He was with Han Solo's corpse. hehe

Seriously though, good thread idea.

Click to expand...

Yeah me too. One of the better threads on here recently.

I enjoyed the UFO/MEN IN BLACK thread as well, though I didn't post on it, I did read the whole thing.

WillKill4Food said:

But wait, I thought you said you could see the video very clearly. I guess not. My guess is that the film was intentionally blurry to keep people from noticing such details.

Click to expand...

Yeah I said I could see the details when magnified by modern science.............. I have a theory why the footage was blurry............ It was in the 1960s there cameras sucked ....

I think the Beastie Boys had a run in with him.

Sasquatch: a reasoned approach

Is it possible that an undocumented bipedal primate exists in mountainous areas?
Yes - the Gigantopithecus, believed to be long extinct, may be a possibility:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantopithecus

There is precedent for "extinct" animals being found alive.
The Coelacanth, thought extinct since the Cretaceous, is probably the best example of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanth

And one plausible (but not particularly probable) Lock Ness Monster explanation is that people have been seeing a Plesiosaur

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plesiosaur

<insert ?other shoe dropping? sound effect>

But my biggest problem with Sasquatch is this:
No bodies, no skeletal remains, no undisputed tangible forensic evidence...and this for a creature whose sustained population would have to be large enough to account for the numerous reported sightings all across North America...many of which are not in the deep woods, but close to campgrounds, roads, and other populated areas.

As an counterexample ? I give the Giant Squid...it was never filmed nor photographed alive in the wild until less than three years ago.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/09/0927_050927_giant_squid.html

But - did anyone doubt its existence? No...

That's because we had bodies aplenty, the longest being over 60 feet...many large museums have them.
Even though this animal spends nearly all of its time in areas even more devoid of humans than Sasquatch - ocean depths of 3,000 ft - we still had undisputed evidence of their existence. Namely, actual bodies caught in nets or washed ashore.

Animals can hide from people and avoid being seen, but their dead bodies cannot.

This is the vital piece of evidence which Sasquatch apologists conveniently have not been able to produce.

If there were a living, sustained population, then somewhere, somehow their remains would have been found and would be in museums. It?s just the law of averages.

Like the Giant Squid, the debate would be over ?then it would be just a matter of getting a living specimen on film?of a tad higher quality than the Patterson film

But until then ? I remain an ?open minded skeptic?

Well they have found in the footprint casts that the prints show dermal ridges (similar to your thumbprint but on the bottom of a foot). It's found in apes as well. That's actually good evidence.

Not a monster or a myth. Just a unknown species (probably ape related) that most scientists are too lazy to leave academia to look for.

Bigfoot was allegedly sighted on may 19th, here in New Mexico.

Where's the paranoid smilie when you need it...?

|ZiR| said:

Bigfoot was allegedly sighted on may 19th

Click to expand...

He was probably off to the cinema...