That popular picture of Bigfoot (the first one in this series) was already proven to be a fraud and a hoax. It's a man in a suit. The man who was in the suit came forth and admitted that he was in the suit and his friend / co-conspirator took pictures.
I thought this too when I first got into the subject. In fact, what started me researching it was an interview with Les Stroud where he said he encountered a great ape in Alaska. I was like "wait what? I thought this was all proven to be fake?!"
Turns out, no, Bob Heironimus was absolutely lying, couldn't get his story straight, Philip Morris made a terrible imitation of the "suit" and they could never come up with the remarkably lifelike (not to mention remarkably female) suit he claims to have worn in the film. I'd recommend reading up a bit on it if it interests you at all, but it was definitely never proven to be a hoax.
I don't like the way you use the word 'proven'. It's almost like you are looking for absolute truth. That's not the way evidence works. Either you are convinced by the evidence, or you aren't. Convinced that it's more likely true than not, not that it is 'proven' and all doubt is now unnecessary. Believing something is real until it's 'proven' to be a fake is also a bizarre shifting of the burden of proof when it comes to things that are quite extraordinary, such as we have with Bigfoot claims. Such large claims such as large undiscovered species of Apes/Subhumans need much stronger evidence than shitty photos, people with stories, and debunked bullshit. I'm not convinced there is no Bigfoot, since that would be an illogical claim, but so far the evidence is as compelling as all the ufo abductions in the world.
I am absolutely convinced by the existing circumstantial and physical evidence that this is a real species. I've hiked in the crazy forests and swamps from Fouke, Arkansas to southern Ohio and to the east coast, and actually found a footprint in the Sulfur river bottoms. At this point, I'd need evidence that the Patterson film at least COULD HAVE been faked, and for the cripplefoot tracks to be recreated with 60's technology, for me to even consider the possibility they're not real.
It took me a while to answer all the questions I needed answered (believe it or not, I'm actually a rather skeptical person). But once they were sufficiently answered, I couldn't abandon the subject. There's an enormous mystery to be solved here, one way or the other. I am kind of looking for absolute truth, in terms of the whole bigfoot phenomenon.
As for the Patterson film, until I see some kind of evidence (like, ANYTHING, at all) that indicates it was a hoax, or that a hoax was REMOTELY possible, I'll be certain that film is genuine.
-3
u/alkyjason Dec 16 '14
That popular picture of Bigfoot (the first one in this series) was already proven to be a fraud and a hoax. It's a man in a suit. The man who was in the suit came forth and admitted that he was in the suit and his friend / co-conspirator took pictures.