 |
| Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin |
(Here's a skeptic's point of view regarding the famous Patterson-Gimlin
film. These opinions do not necessarily express the opinions of Rick Dyer or any
Team Tracker member. Again, These are the opinions of a skeptic and his point of view of
the PG film.)
You've seen it a hundred times: the iconic picture of Bigfoot striding
heavily through the clearing, arms swinging, head and shoulders turned slightly
toward the camera. This famous image is frame 352 of a 16mm silent color film
shot in 1967 in northern California by rancher Roger Patterson, accompanied by
his friend, Bob Gimlin. The impact that this film has had on Bigfoot mythology
is inestimable; and correspondingly, so has its impact upon paranormal,
cryptozoological, and pop culture mythologies in general. I might well not be
doing this if the 1967 Patterson-Gimlin film had not turned legend and fancy
into concrete, tangible, see-it-with-your-own-eyes reality.
Whether or not Bigfoot exists is one question — the answer to which has not
exactly whitened the knuckles of science — but the authenticity of the
Patterson-Gimlin film is something else. If Bigfoot were known to be a real
animal, an investigation into the authenticity of the film would make sense. If
Bigfoot were known to
not exist, then it would be logically moot to
study the film at all; it
must be a fake. But for today's purpose,
we're going to brush aside the larger question (which should never be done in
real science) and focus only on this detail. We'll assume that the existence of
Bigfoot is an open question (a big assumption), and just for fun, let's see what
we can determine on whether this famous film clip is a deliberate hoax, or
whether it shows a real animal, or whether there might be some other
explanation. Maybe it's a misidentification, or an elaborate film flaw, or an
unknown third party hoaxing Patterson and Gimlin. There are many
possibilities.
Roger Patterson died of cancer only a few years after the film was shot, and
never offered any clue other than that the film was genuine. Bob Gimlin remained
silent for 25 years, and ever since he began speaking about it in the 1990s he
has firmly stated that he was unaware of any hoax, but allowed for the
possibility that he may have been hoaxed himself. Nobody else is known to have
participated, and so the only two people whom we can say for certain were
present when the film was shot are both stonewalls. So we must look
elsewhere.
The original film no longer exists (only copies), and there is no record of
anyone ever having possessed the original print. We don't know why, but we're
left without the original film's leader, which would have included the date when
it was developed. Thus, we have only Patterson's word for when it was developed,
so we can't verify that the film was shot and developed on the days he claims it
was. The original also would have included any other shots that were taken, such
as possible alternate takes. If these were ever seen, we'd know for a fact that
it was faked. So that's one more line of evidence that is unavailable to us.
No one has ever produced documentation like receipts showing when and where
the film was developed. We know when and where Patterson rented the camera, but
that's not really in dispute. He had it in his possession for plenty of time
before and after the alleged date of the filming. So that's yet another dead
end. Patterson covered his tracks very effectively (no Bigfoot pun
intended).
(Part two to be contined)
