Big foot tape finally revealed as fake

[Bo8a_Fett]

[toys2cool]

i think they said it already a while back, i remember they had the fake foot print makers

[Bo8a_Fett]

There was supposed to be a pic but my work pc is so unallowed to do anything fun it's gonna have to wait until I get home.....

[SeattleEd]

It you are speaking of the Patterson film then yes, it's been claimed to have been faked since 2002. The parties involved finally came out and stated that it is a fake.
Patterson-Gimlin film

There is a museum here in Seattle that was dedicated to the bigfoot phenomenon but before they closed shop they too came to terms with the it being fake. Sad to see it go but at least it can lay to rest.

[MIB41]

Hardly a shocker. The Big Foot hoax is something people love to believe in. I know it's fun to think there is "something" mysterious roaming the hillsides. That's the kid in people. But let's be honest. Anything that big would have been found, dead or alive, in some capacity by now. And all of these films are just hysterically bad.

[johnmiic]

If you're referring to the Patterson/Gimlin film; it can't be that. It is on Super 8 film; not on "videotape". Guys, Wikipedia is not a very good source of info. Anyone can change any entry on Wikipedia to say anything. They can say Hitler was a nice guy, the Earth is travelling on the back of a giant tourtose, anything can be altered on that site.

This Bigfoot research site has tracked the people who have "claimed" to disproven the Patterson/Gimlin film. None have really succeeded:

http://www.bfro.net/news/korff_scam.asp

The BBC's attempt-no comparison! Even with a film to refer to they got every detail wrong-even the colors.


It is easier to point at something and say it is a fake than it is to investigate something that's never been caught. What if you had to describe a giraffe or a panda bear to the rest of the world if you were the only person who had ever seen one? People would think you were crazy if you had to do it. Some Bigfoot prints are fake but many more are not. Some have even been examined by the FBI and they said they were not fakes because there is no known way to forge finger-prints. Foot-prints have marking like finger-prints and they have detected those details in some casts.

The big difference between the researchers and the debunkers is the debunkers stories keep changing-the people who have sighted Bigfoot or in this case who made the film-have had a consistent story. The debunkers have had to parade out a lot of different people whose stories don't add up. Police will tell you in the basic steps of investigation if a person tells you a story and keeps changing it then the story doesn't wash. So far the debunkers claims have not added up-not the witnesses. Debunkers must be able to duplicate what is seen in the Patterson film to prove it is a hoax. If it is a costume that was made in the 1960's then the material and skill to make an exact copy must exist today and it should be easier to make that costume. That is the process of investigation and inquiry. If it was faked show us how it was faked. No one else has ever made a costume which looks anything like the creature in the Patterson film.

[Bo8a_Fett]

lol....I was refering to the Patterson film and am aware of it being found to be fake...as I said in my earlier post there was meant to be a picture attatched that was a joke to go with it....but the restrictions on my work pc don't allow me to post/upload it...lol...i'll try and do it when I get home but I think by now the joke has lost it's impact

[MIB41]

It is easier to point at something and say it is a fake than it is to investigate something that's never been caught.

Big Foot has been investigated for DECADES. There is nothing conclusive that is evidence of anything. And it's not for those who do not believe to prove anything. You say it's there...prove it. Scientists have conclusive proof of dinosaurs. Are they "hiding" it? Nope. Are they building a secret Jurassic Park? Nope. So where is your Big Foot? In your imagination. The proof is insanely funny. Here's a creature that leaves 'foot prints', but no DNA. It never craps? Never leaves behind it's dead? Is it shy? Does it not want to come out of the closet? It's like arguing the merits of Santa Claus because you didn't see your parents put the gifts out. You see the gifts, the half eaten cookies and ash covered foot prints on the fire place so you accept the myth. If your SO SURE it exists, go take your 'evidence' and find one. If you can't, then he's sharing the same home with Santa.

[Bo8a_Fett]

are you saying santa is not real.......

[MIB41]

are you saying santa is not real.......

Maybe... I found PROOF when I was a kid!

[mego73]

Of course it's fake. It doesn't look like the real one Steve Austin fought.

[johnmiic]

Big Foot has been investigated for DECADES. There is nothing conclusive that is evidence of anything...So where is your Big Foot? In your imagination. The proof is insanely funny. Here's a creature that leaves 'foot prints', but no DNA...It never craps?...Never leaves behind it's dead?...If your SO SURE it exists, go take your 'evidence' and find one. If you can't, then he's sharing the same home with Santa.

I don't see why you take this so personal. You haven't read the books, kept up on latest research and probably ignore some of the points I made in my post. There has been DNA collected-but not enough, scat has been found, lean-to's and bedding sites found, some footprints have been verified by the FBI to be real prints-that of a living person or animal and not fake. I put that in my post but you ignored it.

I bet you didn't even click on the link. If you had you would see most people who try to debunk Bigfoot are some of the worst opportunists, liars & scammers than anyone who claimed to see one. They have not proven it's a hoax because they can't prove how it was done. You can say costume but you must make a costume that matches to debunk it. No one has-no can.

If you don't like what I have to say and you can't tolerate a differing opinion don't return to the thread.

Of course it's fake. It doesn't look like the real one Steve Austin fought.

:-)

[Bo8a_Fett]

Finally got to post the picture but to be honest i think i've started a ...ahem...debate rather than have a small joke picture...sorry all

[johnmiic]

Well, this means Mego73 was right.

[MIB41]

I don't see why you take this so personal.

I'm not taking it personal. You are. I'm laughing because you want to defend it so personally like someone just p*ssed on YOUR research. This has nothing to do with you. It's a discussion about a MYTH.

You haven't read the books, kept up on latest research and probably ignore some of the points I made in my post.

You don't know what I've read. When I was a teenager, I was into Big Foot quite a bit. I have watched countless documentaries on the topic in the last ten years as well. And not from "Ghost-chaser" BS artists. I wasn't 'ignoring' what you posted because I have a different conclusion from yours. And that is what I shared.

There has been DNA collected-but not enough, scat has been found, lean-to's and bedding sites found, some footprints have been verified by the FBI to be real prints-that of a living person or animal and not fake. I put that in my post but you ignored it.

That is evidence of nothing. You admit the DNA is questionable. But because you want to believe, YOU lean on the fact it's questionable as 'evidence' of it's existence. Well that's ludicrous. DNA is FAR from an exact science and that's where you choose not to be grounded in your view. You simplify it by thinking scientists just gather it up and say, "Oh, that's a rabbit. That's a wolf. That's a Big Foot." C'mon. Let's be educated adults here. It works well at crime scenes because of EXISTING DNA. And lawyers are able to exonerate those accused by comparing crime scene DNA with that of the accused which determines probability. In the wild, you have nothing to compare. DO you know how similar the DNA of a man is to animals? Do you know we only have twice as many genes as a worm or fly? Where is YOUR reading?

I bet you didn't even click on the link. If you had you would see most people who try to debunk Bigfoot are some of the worst opportunists, liars & scammers than anyone who claimed to see one. They have not proven it's a hoax because they can't prove how it was done. You can say costume but you must make a costume that matches to debunk it. No one has-no can.

That statement is ridiculous. Do you have any idea how many reports of big foot sightings are proven to be a hoax each year? The "opportunists, liars, and scam artists" are in that lot. People do that for media attention. How you don't see that is just bizarre. And this whole matter on costumes is hilarious. They could CGI that thing today and you would be first in line saying, "There it is! There it is!!"

If you don't like what I have to say and you can't tolerate a differing opinion don't return to the thread.

It is YOU who can't tolerate acceptance of those having a differing opinion. It's officially a MYTH. I laugh at it because there is no hard evidence to suggest otherwise. You get your back up because I don't take it seriously. Well that's a personal problem for you. Big Foot is not a relative of yours. It's not a personal friend. And it certainly isn't anything that is going to be relevant in anyone's life. If you want to talk about the pros and cons of the MYTH, have at it. But don't whine about people 'ignoring' your self proclaimed 'facts'. That's juvenile. And when I was laughing at the myth, I was not laughing at YOU. You simply took it that way. But now you want to call me out on it. So if you want to do a point by point discussion so be it. Otherwise let's TRY and respect the actual title of this thread which states he's fake. If you want to start a thread about him being real, I'll stay out of that one.