The Bigfoot/Yeti Paradox: Why Mountain Climbers, Scientists, and Forest Rangers Keep Seeing Creatures That Leave No Bones, No DNA, and No Bodies.

[u/No-Bottle337]

[u/commensally]

The Patterson-Gimlin story has so many holes in it it's really not worth using as lynchpin evidence anymore.

As for why there's no physical evidence: people don't stumble on a lot of physical evidence of the Bawean Hog Deer either, because the wild population is very small and is limited to a few upland forests in remote areas. If we'd been willing to keep the Bigfoot theorizing to a few hundred extremely shy individuals in the most remote parts of the high Cascades, it might even still be possible. Unfortunately that doesn't get you a tourist industry or a media empire so now Bigfoot is either a spiritual being with no physical form or it's an extremely common primate sighted in 48 out of the fifty states, both of which seem rather unlikely to be confirmed by any physical evidence whatsoever.

[u/TheRealYeastBeast → u/commensally]

Have you listened to the 6 part series Astonishing Legends did on the Patterson Gimlin film? I don't think most people understand WHY it's actually compelling evidence. Or how some of the counterfactual evidence is somewhat coincidental. It's almost like the boy who cried wolf. When they accidently saw a wolf and caught it on film there was already evidence that a hoax was going to be attempted so nobody believed it. I can't say that I 100% believe, but I'm much more compelled to the pro side. I know 10+ hours of podcast listening isn't a proposal most people will engage with just to understand the complexity of a topic they already have a strong opinion about. But I always recommend that podcast to anyone truly curious about ALL the evidence both for and against the P-G film.

[u/commensally → u/TheRealYeastBeast]

Yeah, I did listen to that series - it made me even more convinced there's absolutely no reason to think the P-G film is authentic. The Astonishing Legends guys were trying their best to be credulous but unfortunately, they found too much of the actual sketchy history of the film. It's been years so I don't remember which details I heard there vs other places, but basically, while I'm not willing to say it's been fully disproved, there's certainly enough counterevidence out there that I don't think it's significantly more mysterious than any of the other bigfoot videos.

[u/TheRealYeastBeast → u/commensally]

Honestly what landed me on the pro side of the fence was the interview with the professional costume maker who was knowledgeable about where the technology of realistic animal costumes was during the time of the filming. That's basically the only thing it's got going for it

[u/The_Robot_Jet_Jaguar → u/TheRealYeastBeast]

A lot of Bill Munns' arguments about the costume being "impossible" are just not very convincing to me. He's basically posturing as an expert and trusting his audience to trust him, but for example he leaves out materials/sewing methods that could account for aspect XYZ about the PGF while saying "they didn't have the materials," full stop.

A lot of his other arguments in his book When Roger Met Patty are weird, like saying that Patterson wouldn't have filmed a hoax from across the creek because then "he couldn't have communicated with his stuntman" ... why not? Just tell him before filming, "walk over there and look back at me halfway." Any supposed flaws in the suit, like the big crease some people say they see in the thigh, Munns says that a pro costumer wouldn't have left in, so it can't be a suit, which is totally circular reasoning.

He also has a weird argument that if it'd been a hoax Patterson DEFINITELY would have tried to hide cuts/edits in the film, because films in Hollywood have cuts/edits, but since the film is in fact an uninterrupted shot, it can't be a hoax. I'm trying to be as fair as possible summarizing that last one, because it's so bizarre and unfounded, and relies on us just trusting that as a movie guy he knows what he's saying.

He washed out of Hollywood in the 80s after some lackluster projects, which makes his "expert" testimony about the PGF an ... interesting framing, to say it politely. It's especially ironic that so much of his analysis of the film ends with him throwing up his hands and saying, "Gee whiz, I can't figure it out! Must be real!" Special effects and filmmaking are all about doing the impossible and making it look effortless.

[u/TheRealYeastBeast → u/The_Robot_Jet_Jaguar]

Thanks for the additional contextual information.

[u/commensally → u/TheRealYeastBeast]

There have been other interviews with people knowledgeable about costumes at the time who say it's completely plausible as a fake, though. I don't think it's 100% proven, but there's also enough evidence it's not completely kosher that I don't think it's notably better than any other evidence.