Is Bigfoot REAL?! w/ Jimmy Akin
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ย. 2024
- 📺 Full Episode: th-cam.com/users/li...
Jimmy Akin talks about why he isn't so sure anymore that Bigfoot is a hoax. What was this new evidence that made him less sure? Didn't someone admit to the video being fake?
🟣 Join Us on Locals (before we get banned on YT): mattfradd.loca...
🖥️ Website: pintswithaquin...
🟢 Rumble: rumble.com/c/p...
👕 Merch: shop.pintswith...
🔵 Facebook: / mattfradd
📸 Instagram: / mattfradd
We get a small kick back from affiliate links.
Yes! I live in the PNW 🌲🌲🌲 of the USA. I know reliable people who say they have seen them. Not attention seekers. No reason to lie. Also there are old old writings about them.
I do, too.
I live in WA have never seen one……yet.
Ahh ... "there's old writings about them" ... then it cannot be but true.
@@lizadowning4389 first hand encounters, along with native history…
They are real, and they are extremely intelligent.
@@TakeitSleeezy69 "First hand encounters" and "native tales" ...
If one would use those parameters to establish evidentiary knowledge then by definition just about any fantastic beast over the course of human history would be real.
How do you know they are extremely intelligent, you studied them in their habitat, maybe interacted with them?
Face it, no bones or remains have ever been found of such large creatures. And we should have because for a sustainable population one would need at least a couple of hundred specimens. If there are 'first hand encounters' there should be traces of such a population in the vicinity, yet none has been found. We should have found multiple bone fragments, even traces of habitation. Alas, for all those who claim to have seen one, they can't seem to follow up and trace them to their habitat. Strange, or maybe convenient, isn't it?
Believe in yourself, even when no one else does. - Bigfoot
Classic line
Bigfoot Lives Matter
Say his name
Ya OK rasis. ONLY Blck lives matter!!!!
@@garywinthrop6828Cannon Hinnant
Michelle Obama concurs.
Another BLM movement?
Patty has all the muscle groups going for her. She’s got movement everywhere, in the head, the trapezius, the deltoid and the erector spine. Her shoulder blades are moving under the skin and her quads contract when she walks. She even has great flexibility in the foot, like where we see Patty take her heel off the ground but yet keep the entire forefoot in touch with the ground. None of this ever shows up in any of the Hollywood costumes.
The other costume problem is seams. Hair is the easiest way to cover up seems, and to do this costume makers use longer patches of hair to cover the seams. Patty does not have longer patches of hair, as the experts have pointed out; her hair is a consistent 2 or 3 inches all over her body. So it is not long, like say Chewbacca, who has 8 inch hair everywhere to hide his seams. It is Patties short hair that allows us to see her muscles. If the Patty film showed a suit with seams disguised with standard hair length, why did Hollywood not adopt the same style suit after all these decades?
Apes have longer arms than humans. In Hollywood this means arm extensions, which means an elongated forearm. That also means that the wrist, hands and fingers never move, they just hang in place. Patties wrist and hands move, and her elbow is where it should be, there is no foreshortening. So a human in her “suit” would not be able to bend his arm because his elbow would be located in her upper arm, which does not bend. How about “girth”? Hollywood bulks up their men into apes by making them wear foam padding. This provides muscle mass, making them appear to be bigger, stronger and bulkier. This is done under the outer layer suit. Speaking of Chewbacca, he is a twig compared to Patty, because Patty has girth. Patty is thick with mass in both depth and width. And Patty has 3 foot shoulder muscles. No one in Hollywood shows neck and shoulder muscles. Yet somehow Patterson did it way back in 1967? And you might recall that Chambers planet apes wore clothes, while Patty did not. Patty had nothing to hide.
Then there is the head. A human wearing a Patty “suit” would not be able to see out the eye holes of her “mask”. This means a person in that Patty “suit” would have to look out the neck. But the placement of her lower jaw does not allow for this. Her head is in the wrong spot for a human using her shoulders. The proportions do not fit. A human in Patties body would have their jaws sticking out her neck. That is just another reason why it could not be a suit.
Totally spot on. Most excellent fact providing post. 👍
A superb response! The doubters should read Bill Munns' definitive book "When Roger Met Patty".
It's a bit odd that the best evidence is still from that long ago but it's also obvious to me that is no man in a costume. Whatever that is, it's a real creature in my view.
@@kevinb9830
I think the fact that Roger and Bob were on horses and had been ensconced in the area for weeks was a vital factor. Who does that today? People today mostly just rock up in their cars to a camp site, get out and bang sticks against trees for one night then drive home.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Yes that's a fair point. I'd love for it to be true but I'm 50/50.
The panda bear was a Cryptid for a very very long time, it took Theodore Roosevelt decades to find one, I believe it it was 40 years later Theodore Roosevelt's son caught one if a black and white bear is hard to find in a green area for so long think about how hard it would be to find an animal that basically wears its own ghillie suit that don't want to be found.
Plenty of people knew about the panda. The panda was commonly depicted in Chinese art for centuries.
@@andysedlak1534 not in the west, just like plenty of native cultures know that there is a giant hairy man living in the forest do people in China knew that there's a big white and black bear that ate only bamboo, just cuz it's a Cryptid to some people doesn't mean it's not real to others.
Problem with Western civilization, white folk feel that if they haven't found it yet it's not real
Bigfoot is the least of the weird things we share this earth with
The real ones, yes. Lots of woo bigfoot encounters though that can't be attributed to real ones. Those are projections by NHI.
@@richiesun9676 NHI… such as a Sasquatch.. lol pretty contradictory statement there
@@TakeitSleeezy69 What do you mean? I don't think all sasquatch encounters are blood and flesh. Go read The Messengers by Mike Clelland.
So many cameras and eyeballs, yet a seconds long clip of film from 1967 continues to be the best evidence by far.
The name of the book by Dr. Jeff Meldrum (Idaho State University) is entitled “Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science” 😊 It’s one of dozens of books I have in my Bigfoot library.
Take it to where he appears and he'll sign it for you, I did.
Very Cool Panther Paw! I'd Love To Find One At The Bookstore! Shalom And Amen!✝️✝️🛐🛐😇🌟🤗🙏🙏🙏🇨🇦🇮🇱♾️🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🗽🦅‼️
Dr. Jeff Meldrum at Idaho State has some scholarly papers on the dermal ridges, hallux, mid-foot ridge issued.
The guy who thought that an elk indentation from laying down was a bigfoot lol
@@babel-fishai , I don't watch tv shows, I read his academic papers and spoke to him in his office.
@@kingbaldwiniv5409 That's great but the guy doesn't know the difference between an elk laying on the ground and a strange mythical creature.
One of the most convincing videos was taken with a FLIR at night in Florida. There, they call it the Skunk Ape (because of the smell) and the creature moved from one tree to another. A skeptic who tried to debunk it made the distance and bright calculations and said the creature had to be at least 8’ tall and moved far too far for a human.
Stacy Brown Jr from 2011
th-cam.com/video/PFHxo6znjvo/w-d-xo.html
Can you direct me to that video?
Link?
Here’s a video posted by Les Stroud (Survivorman) 3 years ago. It’s not the video I originally saw, which was produced by Ben Paulides before he took his life. The vignette on the FLIR video starts at 44:54.
th-cam.com/video/i1PznuAPnx8/w-d-xo.htmlsi=S3v6CKeXexpqYarH
This is true. The men who filmed it is Stacy Brown Jr. and Stacy Brown Sr.
One of the most state of the art costumes back then was the Creature From The Black Lagoon's Gillman costume...that suit was made by experts and it cost about as much as the average home cost and that thing was clunky and definitely looked like a guy is a suit, The best costumes from that year were the Planet of the Apes suits, again, looking like guys in costumes no matter how much you had to drink the night before. I doubt two itinerate cowboys from Washington had that kind of cash or would spend it like that if they did, anyway.
Wrong, that was in the 50s.
The Patterson Gimlin hoax film is absolutely fascinating when you get into the history of the whole thing.
Patterson was obsessed with Bigfoot and with the Rowe female Bigfoot hoax from the late 50s.
He was so obsessed with it that he plagerized an artists depiction of it in a magazine and used it for his book DO ABOMINABLE SNOWMEN OF AMERICA REALLY EXIST.
The book was released in 1966 just a few months before the hoax film was shot in 1967.
In early 1967 after the airing of the STAR TREK episode GALILEO SEVEN, which depicts giant neanthradal looking men.
Patterson contacted Desilu Studios inquiring about renting a suit.
As the story goes in the FX community....
He contacted John Chambers who did work on STAR TREK, LOST IN SPACE, VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA, PLANET OF THE APES, ETC.
Most of those shows had small budgets and in order to save money, Chambers would part out suits and create different monsters by utilizing various parts from other suits.
So as legend has it, Chambers rented Patterson a suit.
The mask came from GALILEO SEVEN with extra hair glued on it.
The body came from the LOST IN SPACE episode SPACE CROPPERS and was a werewolf in that episode.
He told Patterson to use the old Charlie Gemora waterbag trick.
Gemora, who was the best apeman in Hollywood, had a system he started using in the 1940s.
He would put waterbags under his suit so that when he moved it would look like muscles moving underneath.
Gemora was also the Martian on George Pal's 1955 classic WAR OF THE WORLDS.
He constructed the Martian out of paper mache.
That's the legend. That the suit was a parted out rental.
There's many other fascinating things about the hoax too.
Such as the film development.
They used a special film which was only developed at a few labs in the country.
One of them was in Yakima which doesn't match up with their story about having the film developed over the weekend in the nearby town.
They also didn't work weekends.
There are many other factors too.
"Sasquatch" by Dr. Jeff Meldrum, professor at Idaho State University. Physical anthropologist specializining in bipedal locomotion in hominid species.
YES!
Canada has plenty of breeding gound for them.
In Australia they call them yowies.
In canada we call them pine apes, sabe, wood boogers, bigfoot, yeti, sasquatch.
30-50% of canada is unexplored
This is NOT a North America thing ? There are all OVER the world ! Here is a fact , no ONE talks about . In south America , you have Indian tribes in the JUNGLES talk about these things ? Were did they come up with this idea ? NO TV , NO radio , NO PC'S , No cell phones , NO news papers ?
And now we have all those things and still not a single legit confirmed sighting or fossil?
Bigfoot is a thing on all the continents, apart from Africa, would love to hear about some theories on that
There are some fossils coming from some areas where bigfoot is seen, but they usually don't make the connection somehow.
Best explanation is the surviving human ancestor. All the ancient apemen have been found all over the world.
Bigfoot saw me, but no one believes him . . .
Bigfoot says, “believe in yourself “. 😂
😂
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🎉🎉🎉‼️
Love it when a newcomer, like Jimmy Akin, has done his homework and states to some degree, my gosh, there really could be hominids, which a Bigfoot is one, out there. The person and book Jimmy mentioned is Sasqautch Legend Meets Science by Jeff Meldrum, first published in 2006, and now being updated for a second edition publication. Dr. Jeff Meldrum is a long term professor of Anatomy and Anthropolgy at Idaho State University, whose specialization is the locomotion of the great apes and hominids of which both humans and Bigfoots are. He has in the neighborhood of 400 casted Bigfoot tracks from all over the United States and Canada which show the dermal ridges and mid tarsal break that Bigfoots have, and much different than our foot, but it is specialized for their extremely difficult, rugged, and often elevated terrain they deal with. Dr. Meldrum can go on for hours about the differences between there feet, anatomy and locomotion compared to ours. In the short clip that was played you can detect several differences. One of course is the huge muscle mass and movement of such, under her hairy skin. Another is she does not lock her knees when when walking and humans do. And another is watch how far up she brings the back foot while walking to where her whitish, greyish heavily padded bottom of her feet come of the ground and perpendicular to the ground. Humans do not raise there feet in this manner while walking. Don't believe me. Go to your local Walmart and watch a few minutes of people walking and you will never see one person walking this way. They also walk with no to very little straddle that is there tracks are in a straight line. This is not evident in this clip, but was in the trackway left behind and witnessed by several people that came later of high quality including noted tracker of that time, Bob Titmus. Another difference which can be seen here is the length of her arms compared to ours and also we have about a 50/50 torso to leg length ration. Theres is closer to 60 torso and 40 legs. Also their legs are shorter from knee to ankle in proportion to ours. I was lucky enough to witness one walking a muskege swamp in Roscommon County, MI east of Houghton Lake, opening day of deer season of 1976. And have had multiple encounters in both Michigan and Ohio. Right now the internet is ablaze with websites devoted to stories and best of all lenghty interviews with people who have experienced the Bigfoots, my favorite being The Sasquatch Chronicles, which is now close to episode number 1050 over the past ten years. Also the BFRO.net (Bigfoot Field Research Organization) has been in existence since the mid 1990s with researched sightings and encounters from every state, except Hawaii, of course with several thosands of reports, and they have only scratched a miniscule amount of the stories people felt comfortable enough to report. Thank goodness, that in this day a lot of the old timers are now willing to come out with there encounters, after keeping it hush for so many years due to the ridicule factor. Currently Kentucky is a tresure trove of these people.
Nice post. Nice to see someone besides me give out detailed info.
You don’t find them , they find you.
You can see Patty's muscles flexing. I am so happy you're coming around on this one.
And female suits weren't made till the 90s
Um no.
@@mcflycowboy4088 that's what the doctor said to your mother
You can't deny visual reality unless you are blind or a trans-radical activist 🤷♀🤷♀@@mcflycowboy4088
I live in Utah a very mountainous state in the US. People see Bigfoot here all the time, I had one walk in front of me through thick trees while I was deer hunting. I did not see it but it very large and on two legs. I could tell by the sound how big and how many legs it had. If you have not spent many years in the woods hunting you won’t understand having that skill level of hearing animals. 99.9 percent of people stay on the marked trails when hiking and even hunting. There are vast areas just in my state that people don’t go and a Bigfoot could hide just off the trail and never be spotted. I’ve never seen a cougar or a bear while hiking or hunting though I have seen their tracks and heard them. My point is simply these things are smarter than us when it comes to wood craft and staying away from people. People will see them on occasion but they don’t hang around when people are in the area making them very, very hard to photograph. Patterson got very lucky to get the footage he got, there is other footage out there too like the Freeman footage and there is trail cam images. Most people who have seen one and even have good images of them won’t talk about for fear of ridicule. Only a body will prove they exist and because they live in groups I don’t envy anyone who tries to shoot one. There are accounts of these thing being shot and others retaliating. Not to mention I’m convinced the government already knows what they are and won’t let the secret out for some unknown reason. Now if you don’t know much about this topic, have never heard of Dr Jeff Meldrum, and did not even know about the track castings with dermal ridges please don’t bother trying to argue with me. I won’t respond to scoffers.
I agree with you mate. All the scoffers come from a position of total ignorance.
I agree and will be lookin into Dr Jeff
Take a picture
@@johnyang1420 I’ve been a professional photographer for over 30 years. It isn’t as easy as just take a picture. Most sightings happen at night from a vehicle and only last a second or two. The people who see one in the daylight and get a good look rarely have a camera let alone one that will show any detail at 25 yards or more. Try going out with your phone and taking pictures of an animal, say a fox, and see how good your pictures turn out. I have a Nikon D850 camera and a 150-600 mm lens and even with that getting decent wildlife pictures is not easy.
DR. Melba Ketchum also and her work on the DNA …
There is a talk that Bill Munns did that is on TH-cam about why the Patterson-Gimlin film is really a Bigfoot and not a costume. I recommend watching it. Bill was a Hollywood costume designer and he explains why this is not a person in a costume.
The Camera argument does not hold water. In Northern Ontario and Quebec the forest is so dense that even drones have a hard time penetrating. Lost planes are often found by accident years after they crash.
As measured by those who first studied the tracks, Patties stride was 47 inches at first, and as she began to walk faster her stride reached 65 inches. The longest stride by a normal human tends to be 36 inches. Patties stride length puts her at over 7 feet tall. Some of Patties prints showed distinct pressure ridges, which show a push-off that comes about as a result of the very flexible mid-foot. This same, unique feature shows up in footprint samples across the world and have since the 1950’s.
They all believed the tracks were made by a real creature and were NOT fakes. The Bluff Creek footprints alone prove this is not a person in an outfit walking across the sandbar. Investigators went to the site soon after the film was taken. The imprints in the sand showed the weight of the creature to be around 700 pounds. The men in their cowboy boots could hardly make an impression at all, even when they tried to by jumping off logs.
These investigators said that Patterson and Gimlin would have needed a machine with them to imprint the footprints that far into the sand. But the investigators who were there could see no other tracks outside of theirs and the creatures. There was no evidence in the sand that a machine had been there or that the ground had been cleaned up, no shovel marks, nothing unusual at all was found. Except of course the large footprints the creature had made and the giant strides between them. And the horse tracks - a thousand pound animal who, although the feet are spread across 4 different hooves - could not make as deep an impression in the ground as the creature did. As measured by those who first studied the tracks, Patties stride was 47 inches at first, and as she began to walk faster her stride reached 65 inches. The longest stride by a normal human tends to be 36 inches.
One of the 7 men that declared the Patty tracks authentic became Deputy Of The Interior. There is NO WAY that a bigfoot hoaxer would be given that job, because it goes directly against what the government wants. They don't want Bigfoot because that would ruin the logging industry.
The only people who don't think the various Sasquatch species are real are those who have not done any research into the matter.
I'm not convinded they're all real. That film is still the best evidence I've seen by a mile. I think if they existed all over the world we would surely have some fossil evidence by now. In a remote region I could be swayed that they can remain hidden until now.
How do you know there are "various species"? Have you collected bone/tissue samples, etcetera?
Or are you, as I suspect, just talking nonsense?
People have been convicted of multiple life sentences on flimsier evidence than is available for consideration about the Sasquatch. Only an ignorant or completely narrow-minded individual who will ignore the multitude of evidence would say such things.
All I can say is open your eyes and ears and do a little research beyond your little test tube laboratory mentality. The evidence is out there easily found now that we have a thing called the Internet.
Best comment here. Anyone who spends a minimal amount of time looking into this will easily come to the conclusion that Sasquatch is not something you can easily dismiss.
I know a fellow here in Western Washington who's uncle was Ray Wallace. He can't be convinced because his uncle hoaxed tracks in Northern California. I got a chance to ask Ken Gerhard what to say to this guy and he said, Ask him where he came up with the idea to make the fake bigfoot feet. When I met up with him later and asked him this I thought I had him, no, he said; What, don't you have any imagination? This is how stubborn and hard headed non-believers are.
Love to see Jimmy coming around on this topic. The reality is that we have conclusive physical evidence and corresponding historical accounts of multiple species of relict hominoids in North America, but most people do not take an honest look at the data.
Well done for reconsidering…
What if it’s not just a biological animal?
It’s a very very odd subject,
then how would it leave footprints?
I’m considering not saying for certain that this thing may have abilities we don’t understand.
It leaves footprints because it is physical - when it leaves the footprints . I know several witness that have seen one but… who knows what this is?
If it was just an ape, it would be in a zoo by now.
It's a legit topic. I've known a few people that have had encounters. The deeper you go the more evidence shows these aren't mere animals though.
It's a bit like UFO's though - the more people who now have handheld UHD cameras in their hands at all times, the less evidence we seem to have in modern times.
One of those things where it’s hard to believe until you have an encounter.
One that I saw in south central Missouri was on all 4s down doing something in the grass. I immediately froze because “Bear” was what ran through my mind, and I don’t know any Missourians who have even seen a bear. I didn’t move a muscle for around 10 seconds (I’m estimating) and this thing rose up standing on two legs.
It was at least 7 feet tall and was very lean compared to what we see in the “patty” film.
Eyes were black and it basically did the exact same thing that I was doing. Stood still, and then took around 5 strides and was across the river. Wasn’t a very strong current for floating, but I don’t know anyone who could get across the width of the meremac with such ease.
It felt like I made eye contact with another human that was caught somewhere they shouldn’t be.
@@TakeitSleeezy69 100% I've never seen one, but I've heard them and their activity. Trees crashing at different locations in short timespans and calls. We went out the next day and scoured the forest and no trees were down or damaged. Thanks for sharing your encounter. I would probably run if I saw one. haha
@@dmcc1703 are you here in Missouri?
That’s actually the first time I have typed that out, or described it in any way, to anybody.
It was probably right around 75 yards away when it stood on two legs and glanced my direction. I was looking down at an angle of at least 25 degrees.
When I realized it wasn’t a bear, my body and mind were petrified. This was no more than around 10 miles from two highways (44 and 8) near steelville
@@TakeitSleeezy69 I'm not, but I used to do yearly canoeing and camping trips on the Little Eleven Point in the Mark Twain. I know of one guy that had an encounter there. Some fairly wild country.
I've seen it pointed out elsewhere in the past that the Bigfoot in the Gimlin-Patterson film has breasts and is a female.
Right- why would 2 cowboys make a female suit?? The angle of the film would not allow any male genitalia to be seen, so why make it harder to fake?
And why make a female bigfoot suit?
It isnt an ape.
Well, it's an ape of some sort. Most likely a human. Most likely Bob Gimlin.
Oh, you all should watch Think Thunker. He analyzed the PG film by comparing the arm and elbow and hip, leg, and knee lengths of Patty to a human.
PG film could not have been hoaxed at this level in 1967. Why make the suit a female and make it much more complex? If it was a suit, it obviously was very expensive, why only use it once?
The drag it 200 miles out in the middle of nowhere. Its already so hard to survive out there. Nobody takes anything that far out for no reason.
My favorite part of the movie Elf is when they mimic this film
I'm a better than 50% chance believer in Bigfoot. I'm not certain, but I would be more surprised to learn he's not real than to learn he is.
When we first see the PG Film, it looks like a person walking in a costume with a large cutout across the face to see out of. But when seen in zoomed in and in detail, it becomes clear that there is no cut-out at all and that there is a real face there with a crested head above it. Super clear transparencies of the film and single images show muscles moving under the fur. These can be seen in the back, shoulders and even the buttocks. Costumes in 1967 did not look or work like that.
Patty walks Perfectly. She is fluent, natural, never taking a misstep. No struggle or awkwardness over uneven ground, even while turning to look at the men. People cannot walk this way well at all, even more so if they had to do it over rough ground full of broken wood and small rocks. Especially while wearing a bulky costume that weighs more than they do AND wearing BIG CLOWN SHOES.
A big, heavy, bulky, costume and over large shoes would restrict a human’s movement, causing them to walk stiff and clumsy. Patty is only walking but she is BOOKING. Just look at how FAST she is going and how much ground she is covering.
And she is doing this with her back foot completely vertical, using a high knee and leg lift “zero gait tightrope step”* averaging between 42 and 67 inches apart - far more than a normal human. The footprints show that she was going faster the farther she got away from the men.
Humans walk with a side by side stride with the lower back leg bending about 50 degrees. The leg swings back and the knee locks and this motion repeats over and over. But Patie walks tightrope style, one foot in front of the other, with her back leg rising at 70 degrees and her knee thrusting far forward, coming down without the knee locking. Basically, her leg is going over and down, which is the total opposite of a human stride. She is not walking straight up and down like a human but instead walks leaning over, knees bent, back bent, and head bent. She is 6 and a half feet tall when doing this, but if she were to stand up straight, she would be almost 7 and a half feet tall. This means a human would have to be wearing stilts or would have to be looking out her neck, making it even harder to see where they are going.
We can conclude that the biomechanics and gait of the Sasquatch walk are way off compared to a human and would be highly improbable for a person to perform this very strange walk under these conditions. The walk and her footprints are the best scientific evidence that the creature in the film is a real Bigfoot, and not a human hoax.
*
Just another of God’s creatures. I was camping where they were present. No one could convince me otherwise.
They are real.
They real.
If this comment section doesn’t convince Matt to have the guys from Blurry Creatures on, I’ll be so disappointed! If you love the mysterious and spooky stuff from a Christian perspective, you need to listen to that podcast!!
“Jamie, pull up the video of the bear inside the bigfoot costume…”-Joe Rogan 😜🤣🤣🤣🛸
Is that supposed to be funny? That's not a man in the suit. it's SASQUATCH
So here's a couple stories I have gathered that suggests that Bigfoot is something much darker than an ape:
- a story told by the Bob Gymlan (might be Gimlin) TH-cam channel described a young girl whose family had an encounter with one. Her dad had seen it one afternoon digging by their house in a sandpit. When he dug up what was buried there, he found numerous depictions of angels. Lawn ornaments, Christmas decorations, all of angels.
- in a story retold by Base Camp Chris, a woman was with her family night fishing near Dallas Texas and when she had left the group to relieve herself, Bigfoot started walking towards her in a menacing way. She pleaded with it to leave her and her family alone, and invoked Jesus name. The creature immediately stopped, then turned and walked away.
- I believe this next story was featured in the Sasquatch Chronicles, and it was a man who had allegedly hit a Sasquatch as it was crossing the road. When his car hit the creature, there was a flash of light, and then the creature disappeared, leaving no damage on the car, but leaving an oily blood all over the front bumper.
There are so many stories that make no sense with our reality, and imply a spiritual bent to these creatures that not enough people talk about.
Thank you i wish more people would look this deep into i had one come crashing through the brush and beat on its chest and screech at me like a chimp in northeast iowa while squirrel hunting when i was in highschool
ThinkerThunker on youtube.
😂
What Lurks Beneath has been having a lot of content lately about Sasquatch being a spiritual being.
I also notice and found it interesting that in Bigfoot encounters, they smell like sulphur, they never enter a home or even a tent even though they easily could.
And never leave evidence such as bones, hair, tools, etc. Probably same beings as the Marfa Lights 🙃
They do
They do enter homes according to many first hand accounts.
@@georgemonnatjr.172they do leave evidence. Lots of hair samples collected and some analyzed.
@@mR-dc4oq maybe they are invited in? most of the stories I have been binge watching, the humans get way, and no damage to property.
I was living in Tacoma, Washington, during the year that the Patterson/ Gimlin, footage became public. As a boy during that time, I read an article from the Reader's Digest, concerning the incident, which caused a sensation, and questions, since camping was a common diversion.
One thing confuses me. Patterson said his horse neighed and threw him off, after which he began filming. So, it seems to me that Bigfoot’s behavior in such a situation is completely unrealistic. She hears wild sounds (the neighing of a horse), sees two creatures (a horse and a man) and CALMLY WALKS. Moreover, she only turns around ONCE. And then calmly, without turning around, she moves on. I can’t believe that as she moved away from the two large creatures that made the wild sound, she didn’t turn around again or even speed up.
I feel like the turds would be plentiful , large, and odorous. Like chilli textured Pringle’s cans laying about. Someone needs to bring one in for analysis.
😂
According to most experts - the professionals who are paid to make suits for a living - we cannot be looking a suit. Sure, at first glance it looks like Pattie has a top and a bottom and a cut-out where the eyes are. But the pros have gone over Patty with a fine-tooth comb, zooming into the details, and what they see is not a cut-out at all, they see there is less hair on the face. They also see that there is no break in her torso, no separate movement between her top and bottom halves. So when multiple professionals who make suits for a living say it does not look like a suit to them, then most likely it is NOT a suit. Any suit makers who say it is a suit have the burden of proof to make a suit just like it that will pass the film test using materials available in 1967. It has been 54 years, and still no one has done it. John Chambers, Stuart Freeborn and Bill Munns all said they could not do it. Stan Winston and Phillip Morris, could not do it and neither has anyone else. Even though Hollywood has been making suits for years, no one has made a suit that shows muscle mass like what we see when Pattie walks.
In 1979 Bigfoot researchers interviewed some of the best costume makers in the world and the ones with the biggest budget. These were the people who were working on the second Star Wars movie, The Empire Strikes Back. These people were among the best in their field, and they said that the Bigfoot in the Patterson Film was probably a real animal. They said this because even they could not make an ape suit as good as what was seen in that 1967 film, because the film, when studied closely, showed muscle movement. Obviously Chewbacca was the best they could do, and Chew was nowhere near as authentic as Patty. Because Chew was filmed to not show any patches and flaws in his costume. They said that only one person they knew could replicate a suit that might look like the Patty creature - and that guy was John Chambers - the guy who in 1968 made the Planet Of The Apes. And Chambers said he did not make a Bigfoot suit and probably could not even make a suit as good as what was seen in the film. In fact he too thought it was not a suit, but that it could very well be a real creature.
So if the people who make the suits say it is not a suit then it must not be a suit.
In 1957 the town of Harrison Hot Springs in British Columbia decided they needed some publicity. The Government was giving out $600 dollars to towns that would come up with a project celebrating the centennial. What better project than to stir up tourism? The stunt? Put on a Sasquatch hunt! Use a mostly forgotten local legend in order to bring in tourists and their dollars. The project was rejected by the government, but the ploy was a huge success! Newspapers all over Canada ran the story and soon hunters and newsmen flocked to Harrison Hot Springs. Though the idea and hunt was silly, many started to take the folklore serious. John Burns came to the town to affirm that Sasquatch was human. So again, how did we end up with a hairy primate? No hunter came back with a sighting claim, but one local man did. In short William Roe said, “that in 1955 while hiking in the woods I came across a very large animal that stood about 6 feet tall and almost 3 feet wide. It was covered in hair. As it came closer I noticed it was female! Her arms were thicker and longer than a man’s. When she walked she placed her heel down first. Her head was higher in the back, her nose was broad a flat. The only uncovered area on her body was around her mouth, nose and ears. When she noticed me she turned her head and watched me for a moment as she walked away. This was more animal than man”. The story spread like wildfire, and one man in particular paid close attention to this account.
The account I quoted above should sound familiar to anyone who has seen the Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin footage. In 1966 Roger Patterson wrote a book titled Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist? In this book he cites witnesses and their stories including Roe’s. A year later he announced he was setting off to find this creature, and lo and behold he did just that! He filmed the exact scene Roe described, down to the heel pattern, female anatomy and head turn! It is not surprising that today’s Cryptologists, when arguing for the film’s authenticity ignore the striking similarities of the two sightings. Patterson never let anyone see the original film footage. He made a copy and to this day the copy is locked away in a safe. He died asserting the film was real, though he made little money off of it. The documentary he tried to make was turned down because no scientist would say the film was genuine. To this day the only people who argue for the film’s authenticity are those who firmly believe in the creature.
For anyone sitting on the fence over the existence of Bigfoot, this should be enough to finally convince him or her that what started out as Native American folklore has morphed for some into a White American symbol for the last remaining piece of the undiscovered country; the last vestige of the untamed North American forests. For others Bigfoot is the ultimate sideshow gaffe, something to fool the masses with. To all those who still believe Patterson and Gimlin caught the legendary beast on camera I can only say that P. T. Barnum was right; there’s a sucker born every minute. Actually, Barnum didn’t say this, his competitor George Hull did. People like Hull and Roe are lost to history, but real showman like Barnum and Patterson live on.
Keep up the Bigfoot research Jimmy. You will be amazed.
To echo a few other comments, there is a really interesting and perplexing spiritual aspect to a lot of bigfoot stories. Whether it is purely material, spiritual, demonic, or some smattering of all, it's definitely not as simple as if he's "real" or not. Good podcast series on this is on Haunted Cosmos. They're Christians (Reformed) and raise a lot of interesting stories and spiritual implications that I had not really heard before.
oh and It’s also worth pointing out that the specific way that the Roe Bigfoot and Patti (the nickname for the Patterson/Gimlin film Bigfoot) are female is inherently a little suspect. Apes only have breasts when nursing; humans are unique among primates (and frankly, unusual for mammals) in that fatty breasts are a permanent structure. And even for a lactating ape, they wouldn’t be covered in luxurious fur. They’d be mostly hairless.
So Patti just so happens to have a unique anatomical configuration completely separate from the unique anatomical configuration of being a bipedal ape… or it’s a person in a costume.
Ive read most everything on the subject watched every show and video i could get my hands on. I was skeptical about it. I'm 99.8% convinced it's real.
Same here. I will trump you at being 99,9% sure.
Same- I'd bet money on it being real.
Jimmys first Bigfoot video was the only one I’ve seen so far that made me go “ohhhhh come on Jimmy!” because he’s so spot on in the other episodes. I was so disappointed! Seeing this is making me fist pump the air 😂
“I’m not saying it was aliens but…”-guy with crazy hair on Ancient Aliens 👽 😂
Patterson film Bigfoot was way too life like to be a man in a suit
Shape up Jimmy boy
Where are the corpses? Do they bury their own? If so, shouldn't we still have, by now, found a single example?
I would also direct you to “The Sierra Sounds audio collection from Ron Morehead. Verified by science real recordings of several Sasquatch vocalizations in the Sierra Mountains.
Jury’s out on that one… The whoops sound very real whilst the rest of it sound a bit sketchy
It's creepy for sure. The banter between 2 creatures sounds legit.
I wish I had never seen one.
I believe there are more than 2 billion acres of woodland in the north american continent! That clinches it for me!👍
Yeah it’s not completely insane to imagine that there’s a species we haven’t discovered yet.
I was lucky enough to have seen one in northern Wisconsin and even before that I heard a lot about them being real
Evidence? Eye witnesses, not enough?
Bigfoot is of massive interest to me, I'm hooked. I want to see one, yet I also don't want them to be found, humans being humans tend to be ultra invasive, so I like things as they are now, a mystery, fleeting glances here and there, chase but don't catch.
The only thing i cannot explain is why would the Patterson film fake a female creature?
My first thought when I saw it walk, is that it was female.
@reginatorres9124 it's weird because a female outfit in the 1960s? Complete with breasts?
Roger Patterson was shown an artists rendering of a female Sasquatch by John Green in 1964-5 and had drawings of female Sasquatchs in his book Do Abominable Snowmen of America really Exist 1966.
@AranRinzei
There are dozens of male sasquatch that Patterson drew. The females he drew look nothing like Patty except for the one he copied from Morton Kuntsler, which was itself copied from the female sasquatch William Roe's daughter drew under his direction. Patty is much larger and bulkier than the Kuntsler image however. Much.
Seeing as Patterson mostly drew and talked about male sasquatch, the question still remains. Why make it more difficult by adding moving breasts, especially as for all that effort they are glimpsed for a split second and he never brought any focus on them.
We know that Patterson not only
knew about the William Roe encounter (during which a female Bigfoot was spotter by a hunter) but he also drew an illustration of it. On top of that the PG film has several more similarities to the Roe encounter such as the way it begins with the Bigfoot crouching andunaware of the people observing, the unhurried pace
away, and the casual glances back as she leaves. That Patterson is known to have intended to film recreations of famous encounters for his documentary makes all
of this a little suspicious.
My shoe size is 14 ..do I qualify?
I am size 15, I'm a biggerfeet
@@beefcakesensei..😆
If you weight some 800lb's, ie can imprint into the ground to the same extent that these have been found to.
Talk to Shaq then let's see
Shaq is Bigfoots boy toy.
Question. Do American Indians even talk about Bigfoot? If anyone knew Bigfoot the longest it would be them.
There are native legends. While they vary (as is to be expected) there are native legends of hart giants living in the woods.
Yes they definitely do.
The other question would be. Is it a spiritual being? Because if it was then it might not be real but an illusion
@@irisyoung690 well they leave footprints...
American pseudo Catholic clown Akin breaks his own record as usual 😅
Can we get jimmy on Rogan?
I love hearing these Bigfoot stories, but unless I see one I don't believe it.
Bigfoot/Yowie is my guilty pleasure. I'm glad that Jimmy has done further investigation here and come to realise the case for their existence is stronger than he initially thought. I agree that the lack of video evidence is a problem, but there is some extremely compelling thermal footage that was filmed here in Australia about 2 years ago.
th-cam.com/video/-g15ky_dm0o/w-d-xo.htmlsi=WQgph2UaMAPyh1YM
Could they be spiritual or dimension traveling creatures?
@@thelonelysponge5029 a case could be made that sometimes there is a spiritual element to some of them. Aside from that it's all speculation.
Maybe there are real ones, and spirit ones? There are real humans and their spirits seen frequently.
Cryptids are real.😊
Wonderful episode 😀
Bigfoot owes me money
If thousands of people have alleged encounters it only takes one to be real
This is all my old man watches. 24/7 Bigfoot. Wtf is up with this Bigfoot i don't get it
COOL!!
Dude has great radio voice. Should be doing coast to coast
If Bigfoot was real, I would expect it to be in serious decline, bordering on extinct if not completely extinct. First, great apes share extremely similar bodies with us, and disease that infect us often infect them as well. A North American great ape would likely have been exposed to novel diseases just as the Native Americans were. If the Native American population dropped by the millions that it is thought to have due to small pox, I would not be shocked to find a similar pattern in another American Great ape. Secondly, Great apes often need very large territories. As American has been divvied up, we would be reducing range, fragmenting population, and putting serious pressure on the great ape population. So I would not be shocked if we found out in fifty years that there was in fact a great ape species native to North America prior to colonializaiton and that some of the sightings of the last 100 years, especially the ones from before the 80s, were people seeing the last members of a dying species. That would explain why, even with the vast amount of cameras and eyes we have now, we have difficulty actually getting evidence. They don't exist anymore. But maybe they did back before everyone had a pretty good camera at their fingertips at all times.
I agree about declining habitat, but not that it's enough to say they're extinct. Diseases, you'd have to say that they've had the same level of up close interactions with europeans as the native americans did, which would be very difficult to even hypothesize.
I'm sure you won't believe me, but I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that I had my first encounter with on, face to face at about 15 feet away, in my yard on the night of September 7th 2023. To say that it was an extreme instance of ontological shock is putting it lightly. We just stared at each other for maybe 10 or 15 seconds after his eyes' reflective glow (had a headlamp on, it was about midnight). I measured the spot where it's eyes were (it was slightly crouched behind bushes, on flat ground the same level as me), and that was over NINE FEET HIGH, fully standing this individual was probably around 10ft. I saw it in extreme clarity the next morning, walking perpendicular to my point of view and in an instant I knew this Patterson and Gimlin video clip was the real thing; the way he walked and moved was exactly the same down to the tiny details. However this one has reddish brown fur that is long and oddly clean and beautiful looking, and has a physique that is insanely imposing: huge gorilla-esque arms, a much slimmer and toned looking abdomen than I would have imagined, and enormous pectoral muscles. Looks like he could bench press a tank , I can't imagine the strength these beings have.
Make of this what you will, but I would say the same exact descriptions under oath without hesitation, and I promise I have better hobbies than making up elaborate stories about witnessing something that will guaranteed result in people insulting my intelligence and questioning my sanity lol. But I really feel like we the people deserve to know what is going on with this, and wont let naysayers bully me into silence.
Regardless of how you assess my claims, I hope you can gain something if value here and I appreciate you (and anyone else who sees this) reading my account. This was only the beginning of an ongoing set of experiences that only become stranger and wilder, and I'm happy to share everything I've experienced and learned here, with anyone and everyone.
Cheers 🖖🙏🔱
@@user-sq1vd7sy1i thanks for sharing mate. 👍
We came into contact with plenty of great apes without wiping them out though. The thing about less convincing sightings now we all have cameras in our hands also applies to UFO's.
Bigfoot probably isn't an ape, but some closer human relative- dozens if not hundreds species were clearly all over the earth.
I didn't read every comment, but one thing I didn't hear or see mentioned about Patty was that in the first few steps where her feet are visible, you can see the toes flex upward when she steps. If a suit maker even thought of this detail, it would have been impossible to make an articulated suit where the foot would move like that. Furthermore, anyone capable of making this kind of suit in 1967 would have been a fool not to parlay it into a highly lucrative career as a Hollywood VFX artist. If that's a suit, it's more advanced than what they have now.
The Bili Ape wasn't discovered till 1996.
It was way to advanced to be a fake
So here's the thing about Bigfoot... I'm kind of in the same camp as Jimmy here... BUT, regarding the argument that we have so many cameras and eyes... I've been an outdoorsman for 40 years. I live in a region with thousands of black bears present. Very healthy population. In 40 years I've run into two black bears in the woods. I know I've been in close proximity to them many times, but never saw the bear physically. If the animal doesn't want to be seen, it won't be. In regard to Bigfoot, presumably this would be a creature whose population would be much, much smaller than that of the black bear. If there are 500,000 black bears in the US, let's say there are maybe 10,000 Bigfoot creatures... that may be very generous. What do you think the chances are that you'd ever see this thing? And keep in mind, people claim every year that they have, so it isn't as though sightings don't happen. And every now and then there are photos. They're never conclusive, but in 2024 what difference do you think it would make if someone DID get an awesome photo of a Bigfoot? No one would believe it with the tools we have available to produce a hoax these days.
I think they do exist and have started being the hide and seek champion after most of them were wiped out with small pox. Just a theory.
Totally agree. If a North America great ape existed ever, small pox and other novel human diseases introduced with colonials would have been devasting to their numbers.
They've evolved to evade us while watching our every move
The Big guy Is real, Spend time in Yosemite, you 'll find out. And I'm not delusional, and I am not a liar. Foot prints, hair, dna...you all need to Catch up on the DATA.
the existence of a second hominid species would raise theological questions would it not?
As a person with Krampus suits.
A: Costumes are a Hassle, walking around randomly in the woods in Costume's is lame.
B: Humans often don't see that an obvious Costume is a Costume they will totally panic either way.
C: A good Costume like the Patterson one is not needed to scare peopl out of their minds.
D: My experience of 10+ years playing a Demon is that people are not reacting to my Costume the fear lies way deeper and is far more ancient.
E: Costumes haveva relation to bigfoot because there is already a fear or phenomena niche in our minds for a bigfoot type monster/demon.
F: Bigfoot are real and probably related to SATAN
Sasquatch are not demonic ffs.
@@AranRinzei they are
@@universalflamethrower6342 No they are not. Some are benevolent and some are malevolent.
@@AranRinzei demons are capricious always have been, folklore underscores that
Demons don't exist. Angels and Demons are extraterrestrials interpreted into those biblical STORIES. These ancient human like people are NOT demonic.
Cryptologists point to the long history of Bigfoot sightings by Native Americans. They love to say that for hundreds of years Native Americans have included Sasquatch in their legends and oral traditions. The problem with this connection is that the wild man that haunts Native American lore is not the same creature that eludes us today. The Native American Bigfoot legends talk of hairy wild men and women who are human, many can even speak local languages. Some suggest the wild men are super strong and are cannibalistic and vicious. In some accounts, Bigfoot is made of stone and can shoot fire out of his fingers! Some are tall and some are very short. The shy primate like giant is not found in any Native American story.
In 1920 John Burns, an American schoolteacher who was teaching (acclimating) native children became fascinated by the stories he heard while working in Washington State. He is the one who coined the name Sasquatch. It is an anglicization of a word in the mainland dialects of the Halkomelem language. His stories that were recounted in a magazine told of a tall wild Indians, with long hair and who could use fire, wore cloths and used weapons. So how the hell did we get a hairy primate out of these stories?
Because i went to film school i have been approached twice to purpitrat a bigfoot hoax.
The Bigfoot captured on film was a female. So how many costumes are made with breast?
Only needed one.
What size shoe would thar foot be mens sizing?
It’s always amazing when someone actually listens to actual evidence and has an open mind. There’s more good evidence than most people understand.
Yes! People jump yo the conclusion that it doesn't exist without an ounce of knowledge of all that is put there about Bigfoot. Hundreds of thousands of people lying about seeing this creature, the historical accounts, worlwide lore etc all being all a hoax is more disturbing than it being real.
Have a look at Patti's face close up, that's not a mask and it's not a human.
They are real. I've seen one here in Shelby N.C. / Cleveland County. I've, in Christ, Shannon.
So he's not convinced it isn't a suit but then says we didn't have the technology to make a suit for the video in the 1960's how does that make any sense? 😂
We know where the PG film was shot. ANYONE interested in proving it a hoax can try to replicate it with a person in a suit. No one has. Also, together with the many casts of footprints taken in the area at time lend credibility to the film but are not usually mentioned.
"It's okay to be a Bigfoot"
Bigfoot claims he once saw Chuck Norris but nobody believes him.
There are now buckets of videos on TH-cam. Sasquatch Theory, and Sqatch Watchers are among the best at looking for and finding evidence. Also the commonalities of things being seen and discussed by people interviewed in different places at different times suggest something prevalent.
I accept the Patterson film as the real thing.
Europe, except for maybe Scandinavia, seems too crowded and has been inhabittted for too long to have a whole species living there. Would have been found by now IMO. North America, on the other hand....
Get on the Bigfoot! Yeah!