American Paranormal: Bigfoot

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on January 26th, 2010

Cryptomundo readers Luke from MN and loopstheloop wanted to know where they could see this program.

Somebody by the handle AusAries posted the entire episode in 5 parts on youtube.

Better catch it while you can…

About Craig Woolheater
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005. I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films: OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.

9 Responses to “American Paranormal: Bigfoot”

  1. Heath84 responds:

    On the whole – a very interesting program.

    In the last couple of year’s several docos have been aired concerning the Patterson/Gimlin Bigfoot and with time and technology improving, various measuring devices, techniques and enhancements have been carried out.

    One would think that with all these enhancements and 21st century updates, that the footage would be proven (upon very close inspection) to be a fake. However the case is quite the opposite and the footage not only holds up under close scrutiny but is also starting to rule out other quite plausible scenarios!

    During this documentary three things stood out to me: the fact that it took the best and brightest of 2010 (and a fair wack of cash I’d say) to build a model/suit that came close to looking and behaving like the figure in the PG film. Secondly the measurements of height approximated by foot size and the final resizing of 7’6 1/2 using the likely real configuration of the camera used in 1967. Lastly what really struck me was when Bill Munz said words to the effect of “it would be very, very hard to find a human being who has the appropriate anatomy to wear a suit even if you made one.” So not only was it very unlikely a suit that complex could have been completed in 1967 but also even if one was – you’d struggle to find a human being to wear it!

    I have always swung a bit back and forth between thinking the PG film is real or a hoax, however I’m now convinced that the figure in the film was a unknown living flesh and blood creature. I’ve never seen a Bigfoot so I can’t be fully convinced of their existence unless I see one with my own eyes, but whatever that thing in the film is – it ain’t a human being…


  2. arewethereyeti responds:

    While I continue to question the feasibility of a sustainable population of enormous bipedal creatures roaming, undiscovered, across North America, there remains the matter of the P/G film…

    There is no middle ground there: no fuzzy, out-of-focus, blobsquatch to ponder; no it-might-be-a-bear; or, perhaps, a misidentified hunter. It’s clearly not a tree stump, a rock, or otters walking in a row! 🙂 Either it is a man in a suit, or it is the real deal – visual evidence of a large, upright-walking hominid existing in our midst – no two ways about it.

    Other evidence aside, until/unless Patty is proven to be a hoax, I cannot honestly discount the possibility that Sasquatch exists.

  3. loopstheloop responds:

    Thanks a million, Loren!

  4. loopstheloop responds:

    *ahem… sorry, thanks Craig!

    Nat. Geog. pulled part two in Ireland anyway, but will watch the rest before they disappear. Thanks again!

  5. seesdifferent responds:

    I was troubled by the fact that they referred to Patterson and Gimlin as “two ranchers.” If their professions were important enough to mention, then it is important enough to get it right. They weren’t ranchers. Gimlin worked intermittently at construction and trained horses on the side. Arguably, Patterson’s vocation at that time could be termed “Bigfoot promoter.” They were at Bluff Creek not as ranchers going about their daily jobs, but rather were attempting to film a sasquatch. The implications should be obvious, and I suspect this was an intentional “distortion.” Why does this kind of thing always creep into these programs? BF’s cause is not advanced by it.

  6. Loren Coleman responds:

    Seesdifferent has a point. However, I would say that Roger Patterson was a rodeo rider who had a few things going on the side to try to make money, including inventing items and trying to sell a documentary. Technically, Patterson was not at Bluff Creek “attempting to film a Sasquatch.” He was actually filming background footage (b-roll) to show what kind of forest Sasquatch are thought to live in and to demonstrate what occurs when Bigfoot searching occurs. They appear to have had no idea or hope of filming a Bigfoot during that shooting trip.

  7. CBFResearcher responds:

    This is probably as close to scientific evidence and study as we’ll ever see. Very well done by all involved. Even though NG has basically concluded that the creature is all but real, they left you hanging with one person claiming it is a hoax, even though all evidence points otherwise. Get rid of the one sceptic, and the conclusion is that there is a great ape right here in north america that truly exists.

    Nice job Nat Geo.

    Thanks Craig.

  8. doctoratlantis responds:

    I don’t know. I found it troubling that Munns so slavishly adheres to Gimlin’s 100 yard estimate. Both P & G called the creature in the 6 & 1/2 foot tall range with widely varying weight estimates. It’s very difficult to guess how tall something is – and they were there.

    Also I found it somewhat disingenuous of Munns to say that the shoulder height couldn’t match with a human since those who claim it was a suit also claim there was shoulder padding and prosthetics for breasts. That doesn’t make it true, but for Munns to disregard that factor seems odd. (Though whether he said that and it didn’t make the final cut of the show can’t be discerned from what we see in the final product.)

    I did like that Munns got to shoot from a 1st generation copy of the film, but it continues to be troubling that the original has disappeared since it would be nice to see if the developer’s dates match up with P&G’s story.

    (But, obviously, I’m skeptical. Still, it is a fascinating story that has captured the imagination of perhaps millions of people. Whether, in the end, Patterson caught a real creature on film or made a hoax – he’s made a huge mark on American pop-culture that can’t be ignored.)

  9. dogu4 responds:

    First time I’ve had opportunity to sit down and watch this latest. Keeping in mind that it’s designed to be entertaining and informative and that it’s from Nat Geo, it’s pretty good. No, actually it’s very good, and lays out the argument pretty fairly, I think.

    The search continues.

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest


Creatureplica Fouke Monster Sybilla Irwin


|Top | FarBar|

Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.