Sasquatch Coffee

New PA Footage Discovered: Is It Bigfoot?

Posted by: Loren Coleman on May 26th, 2009

Will this become known as the ultimate blobsquatch footage for 2009?

This short film clip was discovered on an 8mm 3 minute reel purchased at a yard sale in Pennsylvania. The reel was marked 1977 and according to the seller, the camera operator was a farmer/hobbyist who is deceased.

It was discovered in 2009. It was posted on YouTube last week.

It is owned now by American Feud, who are Pennsylvania political filmmakers.

Is it a publicity stunt for a forthcoming documentary?

Is it merely a distorted videotape of a person in a field?

What is shown in these images?

About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct). Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013.


37 Responses to “New PA Footage Discovered: Is It Bigfoot?”

  1. Brothermidnight responds:

    I looks like it could be Bigfoot tho it also looks like it could be just about anything else, The quality of the film makes it almost completely imposable to make any call as to what it is or isn’t. Its so hard to tell whats there that it could even be film that somebody made by filming a movie at a drive in or even on a tv screen(both are things my parents did in the 70’s with an 8mm camera with results similar to this).There really isn’t any way say.

  2. jadewhiskey responds:

    Hard to see – but, it looks like someone in a costume trying to walk like a Sasquatch with the long gate and arm swing – it just looks to “overdone” and fake.

  3. WOLVES-TALON responds:

    This is very interesting…. The broadness of the chest, the bulkiness of the body and the appearance of “no-neck” leads me to think that we could have an interesting piece of footage on our hands.

    But… on the other hand, how many times has this footage (tape) been copied ? This can lead to deterioration of the content. And was this tape authenticated as being from 1977 ?

    Can’t wait to see the outcome of this !! Thanks Loren !

  4. cryptidsrus responds:

    Whatever it ultimately is, it certainly provides one with things to ponder about.

    I also wonder about the absence of a neck and the bulky nature of the being. Ultimately, it is just too unclear to tell. Hmmm.

    I vote for real but unverifiable. My story and am sticking to it. :)

  5. kokodhem responds:

    I’m with jadewhiskey on this one… I somehow don’t think that a real Gigantopithecus descendant would walk like someone mugging onstage for the musical Oklahoma… I think time will tell that it’s a viral video attempt for an upcoming film on Bigfoot hunting in the 20th century or somesuch.

  6. shumway10973 responds:

    impossible to say…the film itself should have been burned years ago just for what mold and other hazards could be on it. I have never seen film this bad before. There seems to be a bipedal thing. At one point towards the beginning it looks pot bellied (or beer bellied), then it walks away from the filmer and we see width, but nothing else that can be used to say that this is or could even be big foot.

  7. Richard888 responds:

    From all the enhancements, I find 0:59 (maximum contrast black & white @ speed 60%) as being the most helpful.

    Also, the choice of still image at 1:37 is very good.

    Both show the boundaries of the silhouette clearly. Of biggest interest is the neck angle that is reminiscent of the Freeman video and appears difficult for a person in a monkey suit to imitate.

    So even though this short film is very “noisy” I think it should be among the Top 10…

  8. kittenz responds:

    “Is it a publicity stunt for a forthcoming documentary?

    Is it merely a distorted videotape of a person in a field?”

    I choose (C) : Both of the above

  9. dabode responds:

    could be anything bipedal I suppose but since it’s exiting a cornfield I think its swatting stalks out of the way, I know I’ve made those kinds of arm movements when I’ve walked through our corn and wasn’t using a pathway, so without further info and seeing how the owner has passed on its tough to call but I wouldn’t rule out the possibility of it being sasquatch, perhaps a professional can extract better video or screen shots as I’m not too confident in some youtubers abilities.
    Whats needed on the web is a site that doesn’t post stupid misleading videos because these kinds of videos; ghosts, ufo’s, cryptids etc have 99% pranksters and 1% serious footage (wtf footage I call em lol). I really don’t know what to make of youtube videos.
    One thing for sure if I had footage or get any on our farm there’s only 1 place it will go to and that is Mr. Coleman. Wouldn’t trust anyone else.

  10. AlbertaSasquatch responds:

    The arm swing seems way overdone on this, so I am definitely leaning towards fake, probably as a way to garner attention to a new documentary or something of that nature.

    It reminds me of the Gable film including the circumstances of how it was supposedly found. Wasn’t that shown to be a fake as a attention grabber for some documentary?

  11. Buckeyes1 responds:

    The fact that the figure is more or less centered within the shot leads me to believe this was not a random or “accidental’ film capture. In other words, somebody knew to some extent at least, what they were shooting.

    That leads to the question, who takes a motion picture of a Bigfoot and then tosses it away without saying anything? And why does it seem the figure is throwing it’s arms around? And why walk out and then dance around and walk back into the field in the first place?

    The whole thing makes no sense and of course, as bad as the footage is it could be my own brother and I couldn’t recognize him!

    Too blurry, too dark, too many damn questions….

  12. Roddy Hays responds:

    Bloke in a suit, or maybe not. It’s not a ‘squatch, though.

    I think it’s a piece of film that was shelved as they (the hoaxers – or mebbe normal people which the film showed in an abnormal “light”) thought it was too obvious. Hence it never got seen until found.

    The over-riding facet I do not think rings true is the very human turn-about back into the cornfield. There’s no animal fright in the movement.

    As always, willing to be proved very wrong, as normal :)

  13. fossilhunter responds:

    Greetings All!
    I realize this is a bit of a double negative, but I don’t see the “no neck”. What I do see is someone in a hat, and probably cold weather jacket, flailing around the edge of a field of dried corn stalks. The “grass” is a little green, the stalks are pale brown, so Autumn time would make sense clothes-wise and vegetation-wise. Corn that has had a bad year will grow short, sometimes only four feet tall, so the height against the corn is no clue.
    But I really really don’t think that a Bigfoot would be doing almost a “buck and wing” coming out of a corn field. Not stealthy at all! That’s not how you stay secluded for centuries. I also see a hat brim, baseball cap or “Elmer Fudd style” cap, in both the moving and still shots. It looks like the guy is looking down, which would make it look like they had no neck on this quality of footage.
    I’m reminded of a phrase used in a “UFO Hunters” episode. It basically spoke to people who automatically judge all unknown objects to be alien spacecraft, because they can’t identify them as man-made. Something like: you can’t decide that just because you can’t tell what it is, therefore you know what it must be! Some unidentifiable bipeds are people (I’ve seen the footage they don’t want you to know about!!) :)

  14. Andrew Minnesota responds:

    I can’t really make out the hat, but it is hard to make out anything besides a blackish upright figure flailing about. For all we know it could be a big guy getting chased by bees.

  15. lancemoody responds:

    Looks like someone in a coat running away from camera then turning perhaps as though to kick a ball?

  16. glendoor42 responds:

    The quality of this film is so bad that anyone could see what ever they wished in it.

    It could be Bigfoot walking out of a cornfield.

    It could be a guy in a Bigfoot suit being directed to break the line in the cornfield and then quickly walk quickly back in so no one can get a good look at you and ” by the way, swing your arms more ape like when you do it this time.”,

    It could be Uncle Fred walking out of a cornfield after a hard day at work and sees someone filming him and decides to rush back into the field because he doesn’t want his picture taken.

    Oh hell, for that matter it could be Shoeless Joe Jackson realizing he’s in a Pennsylvania cornfield and hurries back in the cornfield to go play ball with Kevin Costner in Iowa.

    Hopefully, this piece of junk will be quickly forgotten.

  17. thehoch responds:

    Does it matter?

    Obviously this film proves nothing. Is it interesting? EH….

    Could it be a man filming someone at Halloween time?
    There could be a million possibilities.

    To say these types of clips are becoming annoying is an understatement. When someone gets real solid video, with no grainy resolution, no shots from 300 yards away or from behind a thousand trees.

    Until then, I’ll just keep waiting….

  18. TimmyRyan65 responds:

    If no one mentioned Bigfoot to me before I saw this then I would say that based on the way the arms are moving and the bulkiness of the figure, it was someone in a wintercoat crosscountry skiing. The movement is identical to someone flailing their arms with Ski poles moving down a crosscountry skiing path. I see it all the time up here in Maine! What do you think of that theory my fellow Mainer Loren?

    My 2 cents!

  19. korollocke responds:

    Oh for petes sake, it’s just a man wearing a heavy jacket with collar turned up and farmers cap! You can see the collar and the bill of the cap! Why waste your time on this Loren?

  20. DWA responds:

    I appreciated the enhancements. They made the blurriness blurrier and the shakiness shakier. They also helped define the lack of definition.

    I won’t try anything like “no way this guy shoots a Bigfoot and then shelves it.” Really? Why not?

    But yep, publicity stunts have come far cheesier – as well as far less cheesy.

    Fun to watch once, though.

  21. raisinsofwrath responds:

    Just seems awfully convenient that the film is so degraded. It’s from 1977 not 1947. I’m not biting on this one.

  22. Dr Memory 1701 responds:

    Isn’t that Louis from Left4Dead?

  23. bamsbocce responds:

    The problem is how the film has been transferred to digital. There are more professional methods to produce a better looking copy. Yes, the film is degraded since it was on 8mm reel but there is still color and definition you can see. There is alot more cleaning up you could do to this film to get it sharper. Until then, it stays a blob walking through a corn field. Bigfoot? Maybe. Man in hat and overcoat? Maybe.

    Until we have an objective third-party, enhanced version, we may never know.

    Until then, let’s be hopeful yet realistic.

  24. larrykat responds:

    Poeple commenting about “theatrical” arm swinging: Have you ever walked through a cornfield? That is how it’s done; knock down or brush the stalks out of the way as you go. Looks normal to me.

  25. DWA responds:

    bamsbocce responds:

    “The problem is how the film has been transferred to digital. There are more professional methods to produce a better looking copy.”

    Actually, that’s not the problem. The problem is: nothing can be done with this, period.

    I’m not sure how the idea persists that film that says nothing can be doctored to say something. It has to say something in the first place.

    “Until we have an objective third-party, enhanced version, we may never know.”

    Actually, with this, we will NEVER KNOW WHAT IT IS.

    It’s OK to be hopeful. But let’s also be realistic.

  26. postpro responds:

    Sorry… Looks and smells a little bogus. To top off all of the other valid points of skepticism, the story is also derivative of the “Michigan Dogman” story in regards to an old 8mm film from 1977 is purchased at a yard sale and lo and behold, we have a strange creature on it.

    To me the odds of the exact same thing happening have to got be pretty slim.

    And just me being a little picky… There appears to be a “hotspot” on the transfer of the film itself. It appears at the midpoint of the frame, 3/4’s up from the bottom. Bad transfer or intentional obfuscation? I’ll gladly do a clean transfer, free of charge if they want to send it down to NC. :-)

    Matt

  27. swnoel responds:

    Looks like someone stomping down corn stalks for the fun of it.

    I see nothing unusual.

  28. sschaper responds:

    I can’t even make out the corn in this clip.

    Imagining the corn though, the behavior of coming out of the field, going over a few rows, and going back in, is that of a contract corn detasseler, a job which I have done myself. So even though the individual appears pretty stocky in this clip where you can’t really see anything, I’m voting for a human corn detassler.

    The trail will have grown mighty cold since 1977.

  29. planettom responds:

    I think I see Jimmy Hoffa making a crop circle? Nah, in all seriousness, it’s just too hard to tell.

  30. RocKiteman responds:

    MK DAVIS! CALLING MK DAVIS!! YOUR SERVICES ARE REQUIRED AT CRYPTOMUNDO!!!

    ;~)°

  31. bamsbocce responds:

    DWA responds:

    “Actually, that’s not the problem. The problem is: nothing can be done with this, period.”

    This seems a bit short sighted DWA…I never claimed that this was BF…but a better transfer than a hanging bedsheet and a handheld camcorder can make a clearer picture and then more options for digital manipulation.

    We might as well use the tools availabe to disprove (or prove) grainy, shakey video claiming to contain BF footage. As it stands in the video above, your right, not much more can be done, but let a professional transfer the original and we might be able see something…my guess, a large zipper down the back.

    I was really trying to be realistic.

  32. Dr Kaco responds:

    Kids Kids play nice lol It is sketchy at best but I give it 2 thumbs up for the nostalgic value and 2 thumbs shakin’ hard for all around BLOBSQUATCH! Nice! ;)
    Keep up the good work Loren.
    Peace!

  33. The Y2J Problem responds:

    I agree I see a split second outline of the collar. Honestly I am not even sure the original people planned it too be bigfoot. Heck I’m not all that sure it was even sold as a bigfoot film. Due too the fact it has the same year and found the same way as the michigan dogman I am betting its for an upcoming film. Maybe even about the michigan dogman.

  34. youcantryreachingme responds:

    Answer is Yes! This will become known as the “ultimate blobsquatch footage for 2009″.

  35. DWA responds:

    bamsbocce:

    “This seems a bit short sighted DWA…I never claimed that this was BF…but a better transfer than a hanging bedsheet and a handheld camcorder can make a clearer picture and then more options for digital manipulation.”

    This is my point: digiital manipulation gets you nowhere if the original has no data in it.

    There seems to be a lot of thinking out there that you can pull truth from nothing. Look at the Patterson/Gimlin film. There is NO QUESTION WHAT THAT IS. It’s a bipedal animal, probably a primate and an ape from the looks of it, that analysis by experts, when it has pronounced a conclusion, has pronounced only one: that’s an authentic unlisted animal. (There is no such thing as a skeptical analysis of that film. At least I have yet to see one.) If that were one of your cousins you would know which one; if it were any known animal you’d ID it immediately. And it looks like no ape suit known; the figure’s proportions are subtly but definitely non-human; and no shred of evidence for a fake has surfaced.

    And what do we have in terms of confirmation after 42 years? Nothing.

    Why does anyone think crap like this will move us toward an answer if science won’t even search for that?

  36. AliKill responds:

    Oh no!! it’s a farmer :|

  37. Joisey Gene responds:

    Other than the fact that The figure is Moving,and I find the film entertaining,there is not much more to say. I do agree with a previous comment in that the subject’s movements seem ” a little over the Top”. But who knows maybe our hairy friend used to be a vaudevillian. :) Easy now, I’m just kidding. : ) I do feel the film is interesting in that it is hard to say with conviction whether it’s a fraud,or the “Real McCoy”.
    BTW. does anyone know where that phrase comes from? (“The Real MacKoy”) or is it McCoy?



Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|


Cryptomundo Merch On Sale Now!

CryptoMerch

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest

Advertisers

DFW Nites


Creatureplica Monstro Bizarro Everything Bigfoot



Advertisement




|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.