• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Debunking the Patterson Bigfoot Film (as if it needed to be debunked)

T.G.G. Moogly

Traditional Atheist
Mar 18, 2001
Basic Beliefs
I ran across this video. Pretty much clinches the hoax.

Bigfoot Patterson film hoax solved 2005

Everything in the film makes sense, including the gait of the Bigfoot and Bob Heironimus . No mistaking the size and the stride, they're identical. But devout believers will always remain unconvinced. I liked Bob's account, quite convincing.
Fake images go back to the early photographs.

The Cottingley Fairies appear in a series of five photographs taken by Elsie Wright (1901–1988) and Frances Griffiths (1907–1986), two young cousins who lived in Cottingley, near Bradford in England. In 1917, when the first two photographs were taken, Elsie was 16 years old and Frances was 9. The pictures came to the attention of writer Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who used them to illustrate an article on fairies he had been commissioned to write for the Christmas 1920 edition of The Strand Magazine. Doyle, as a spiritualist, was enthusiastic about the photographs, and interpreted them as clear and visible evidence of psychic phenomena. Public reaction was mixed; some accepted the images as genuine, others believed that they had been faked.

Interest in the Cottingley Fairies gradually declined after 1921. Both girls married and lived abroad for a time after they grew up, and yet the photographs continued to hold the public imagination. In 1966 a reporter from the Daily Express newspaper traced Elsie, who had by then returned to the United Kingdom. Elsie left open the possibility that she believed she had photographed her thoughts, and the media once again became interested in the story.

In the early 1980s Elsie and Frances admitted that the photographs were faked, using cardboard cutouts of fairies copied from a popular children's book of the time, but Frances maintained that the fifth and final photograph was genuine. As of 2019 the photographs and the cameras used are in the collections of the National Science and Media Museum in Bradford, England. In December 2019 the third camera used to take the images was acquired and is scheduled[needs update] to complete the exhibition.[1]
Bigfoot does indeed exist? He was in my high school chemistry class. Size 18 shoes.
Reading Lemons with my daughter right now, so this is an interesting coincidence.
Permit me to introduce you to the inaugural tenet of Ixabertian Radical Scepticism: the very notion of ‘debunking’ anything is a futile & ludicrous pursuit. Be as sceptical of the ‘debunking as you are of the bunk.
 The approach of the ‘debunker, indeed, stands in opposition to the philosophical outlook, which presumes to challenge the conventional norms & invites us to entertain a realm of intellectual incertitude.
 The perspective of the professional ‘debunker,’ on the other hand, may be aptly described as counter-philosophical. It is worse than pseudo-scepticism, for it ventures into the folly of being inherently antisceptical in nature.
 The pseudoscepticism wielded by the professional debunker is but an inverted facsimile, or mirror-image, of the very folly it purports to vanquish. The professional debunker thus engages in an ironic dance with the same ludicrosity he believes he is dismantling.
 Radical Scepticism is the only correct course in these matters.

 And such radical scepticism, in all its audaciousness, necessitates an unwavering open-mindedness & insatiable intellectual curiosity.
The Japanese Giant special effects in this clip, . were quite advanced back then in 1890, even better than the special effects done in films much much later in the 20th century.

Japanese big feet, beats Pattersons hoax.

Last edited:
Top Bottom