Couldn’t get the clip to embed, so I’m providing a link to it at Animal Planet.
The big mistake the BFRO crew make is in not providing any thing in the way of a marker the impression can be compared to. In short, they need to take classes in forensics.
The photography could be better as well.
Do I believe in bigfoot?
Better believe it.
I saw the Patterson film on the local news when I was 13. I saw an animal walking across a clearing. I did not see a human in a costume, didn’t even think of a human in a costume until I read about the idea later. The quality of the footage shown was not good. It was watched on a 25″ black and white screen, and apparently the copy the station got was not the best quality. It was later when I saw a better copy, in color and at higher resolution.
All the times I’ve watched it I have never seen any human in a costume, or any sign of a zipper running up the back.
It is simply too detailed to be a hoax. If it is, it was a make up job. Then you have the head, with an expressive face, and the hernieted muscle in the right thigh. likely other things I’m missing. Too much detail to make for a plausible hoax. You just don’t go into that amount of work for a hoax.
And let us not forget her breasts. Did Patterson or Gimlin know any women of that size, those proportions, who had an injury apparent to her right thigh? A woman willing to put on such an extensive, and detailed make up job. Especially the protheses necessary to produce the mask simulating a sasquatch’s head?
I believe because I saw a film that convinced me, and nothing I’ve seen has persuaded me other wise. Until somebody comes up with convincing evidence showing that the Patterson film was a hoax, I will continue to be a believer.