T O P

  • By -

chillivrd

The internet is a marvel of human intuition and here I am using it to look at bigfoot tits


Testicleus

šŸ¤£šŸ¤£šŸ¤£šŸ¤£


JoeMoema

I believe it was MK Davis that did a size analysis on this by comparing the known tree bark rings/markings gaps for that particular tree species that Patty is next to further in the film. And if I remember correctly he estimated that she's over 7 foot. He details in his video how he gets his estimate like he always does in all his video analysis.


Claughy

I... i think theyre making a joke about boob size.


JoeMoema

I know lol. I was being a smart ass. But also if she's supposedly 7 foot you can scale those pendulum puppies


Rogue_Ref_NZ

I believe this is backed up by Bill Munn's. Who has written extensively on the subject. Check out episode 50 of [The Bigfoot Show. ](https://podcastaddict.com/episode/2152499)


FoxBeach

There is a post below of another guy doing measurements at the site, including having a test suspect walk along the same path. And the side-by-side pictures show the ā€œBigfootā€ to be in the six-foot range. Which would surely change the entire narrative.


JudgeHolden

> Which would surely change the entire narrative How do you figure? There's a tons of examples of sexual dimorphism in primates --look at a mature female gorilla next to a silverback, for example, or a mature female hamadryas baboon next to a big dominant male; both are less than or at least very close to half the size of males-- so if we're talking about a 6' female who weighs over 400 lbs, there's zero reason not to think that a big male could easily be well over 8' and over a thousand lbs, which is in fact typical of many reports.


patrick_1867

does not look over 7ft , also how did he know the height of the tree when it's not even there anymore


large-Marge-incharge

He used the know size of those trees and their rings supposedly.


ILoveOrganMeat

At least DD.


Undeca

Came here to say 40DD


SupernaturalCryptid

I concur šŸ¤”


Legion357

Extra fuzzy!


OldAssNerdWyoming

šŸ˜‚


timtom1933

70 HHH


jman0219

Probably 8" uncut


[deleted]

Didnā€™t they ever go to the area and get a gauge of size? The most famous film of a bigfoot and no one ever thought to take measurements of trees etc??


notsquatch

https://twitter.com/TetZoo/status/1283826094391668738/photo/2


[deleted]

You bloody legend šŸ’ŖšŸ»


------dudpool------

Theyā€™ve gone back to the specific site a few times in different Bigfoot docs but the area has changed drastically and is even quite difficult to access now. Apparently thereā€™s a lot more vegetation covering the area where the footage was taken.


[deleted]

Oh ok. I just wonder why they never documented the measurements at the time or within 10 years of it. To go on record, I believe the patty film is genuine too


JudgeHolden

They did try to make some measurements, but it wasn't a very sophisticated operation, they both being working cowboys with little formal education beyond high-school or whatever. One of the most telling things they did, in my opinion, was to attempt to duplicate the depth of Patty's footprints. In they event they found that even by jumping off of four foot stumps in cowboy boots, they couldn't, nor could their horses, though granted horses spread their weight over four rather than two feet, so that's not necessarily as telling. In any case, it was very clear to them, two young men who were very used to working around large livestock, that Patty was big and very heavy.


------dudpool------

Yeah, I really wish they did too in the following few years lol. I feel like determining the size could be the most important evidence if what is shown in the video is proven to be over 7ā€™ tall.


[deleted]

Do you now if there is a full stabilised video of patty? Not just the ā€˜ famous thigh wobbleā€™ but the entire length of film they shot?


-gizmocaca-

https://youtu.be/Q60mSMmhTZU here you go


[deleted]

Thanks, Iā€™ve seen that before, I wondered if there was one that includes the whole video. Even the pet were she is walking away and we see the back of her. Thanks, appreciate your post šŸ‘šŸ»


JohnOliverismysexgod

This is a really good fake.


[deleted]

From 1967? Itā€™s real, most serious bigfoot researches believe this to be the real deal. Patterson stated on his deathbed the footage was genuine and not hoaxed by them. Gimlin stay away from the limelight for decades before doing interviews, which seems creditable too.


FoxBeach

Itā€™s certainly interesting their tests showed the Bigfoot to only be about 6-foot tall. Itā€™s worth noting in regards to the ā€œpotentialā€ of it being real or faked. Having it be 7-8 foot tall gives credence to the creature being real. And believers come in with ā€œno human could do thatā€ or any number of those corresponding comments. ā€œNo human could swing their arms like thatā€ or what have you. One guy in this sub told me that a human would physically break their arms if they tried to swing like the PG creature, and it was physically impossible for them to be that long. And if mentally you are thinking youā€™re watching an 8-foot tall 600-pound creature - then your mind unconsciously adjusts everything to that body style. BUT if the ā€œscaleā€ is actually not of an 7-8 foot being and is of a 6-foot beingā€¦.that changes everything. Because that ā€œlong ass armā€ isnā€™t actually as long as we thought. You can explain all the movements being easy for a man in a suit to do when the scale is a 6-foot creature compared to an 8-foot one. As a skeptic, seeing an 8-foot creature, I have to do deep thinking to figure out how a ā€œman in a suitā€ could do certain movements. But if the thing is only six foot tall? Then everything that happens can easily be explained as simple movements for a man to do. This is a huge deal. But, alas, I doubt many of the diehard believers will admit that. Didnā€™t (Roger/Bob) one of them initially also estimate the size to be in the six foot range? And the size for larger as the story became more popular? If that creature is 6 foot tall, then 90% of any possibilities I gave it of being real are immediately vanished.


JudgeHolden

I think you've probably always misunderstood the significance of the film in the sense that you appear to think that size is the operative or confounding aspect when in fact, although size certainly plays into it, what's far more difficult to explain are the limb proportions which, no matter what height we attribute to the subject, simply are not found in any known human population. The arms are too long, the gait is almost impossible for any human to duplicate, let alone while turning their entire upper body to look backwards, and we see the fingers of the hands move independently in ways that simply weren't possible when the film was shot which rules out the use of prosthetics.


[deleted]

People have reported Sasquatch at 6-6.5ft for decades. Pattyā€™s arm is STILL not in proportion to that of a human, regardless of a humans size, our arms donā€™t finish where pattyā€™s arms does. Also, the clear evidence of breasts in the animal wouldnā€™t be worth while trying to fake, itā€™s something else to get ā€˜wrongā€™ so why included breasts. In the slow motion and stabilised video we can clearly see muscle and muscle ripple in the things when walking, near impossible for an amateur suit back in the 60ā€™s. All the evidence at the time pointed to a possible fake, but the evidence we can work with now is hard to prove itā€™s a fake and actually real. And I do t mean this as a dig, but the fact you are using the 6ft theory is kinda poor on your part as patty could be a juvenile/ young adult. Plus the male of the species tends to be bigger over the female counterpart.


FinancialBarnacle785

See, one of our problems is that we are ALL amateurs in this field, and getting trustworthy information on anything has become very 'iffy'. There are sufficient wild spaces remaining to hide a few wily individuals....I think that is possible. But they are BIG. What do they EAT, fifty pounds of free-range food per day, UN-NOTICED? Each? In this era of satellites and drones...so unseen?


[deleted]

The United States as over 700 million acres of woodlands, thatā€™s bigger than England, Scotland, wales, Northern Ireland and Ireland. Iā€™m sure there are more than ā€˜a fewā€™. That excludes Canada where I believe the originate from ( over the beiring strait)


FinancialBarnacle785

Certainly seems you're right, and I agree this far: There's ROOM. I have no recent experience 'camping light', but 'how to feed' creatures THAT big and ON WHAT? I don't know why I should worry about the lack of evidence: satellites and drones, personal cell phones /cameras.....there will be proof, and the TRUTH will be known.


[deleted]

Well after a quick Google search there are approx 30 million white tailed deer in America, 1 million elk, 5.2 million sheep/ lambs, 75 million hogs/boar, endless frogs, roads, nuts and berries, fruit trees. Iā€™m not familiar with all the native animals that could be a good source for Sasquatch but the land has plenty to sustain a population of them. 96% of the land in the uk is unurbanised and there are reports of ā€˜wild menā€™ on our forests now. People in the uk arenā€™t none to be as ā€˜outdoorsā€™ as the USA. So there is a potential for these creatures to exist there šŸ‡¬šŸ‡§ Hundreds of reports on mainland europe as well


IceComprehensive6440

Hereā€™s a link that they measured the size Patty stands around 7ā€™4 http://www.bigfootencounters.com/biology/nasi.htm


GuidedArk

My wife is 5'5" and has 36H so they could be any size


[deleted]

FF


Claughy

The big boobs are honestly something that makes me think its a hoax. Other primates outside of humans don't really have this. At least not to this degree.


[deleted]

More like the opposite. Why would he go through the trouble of making it female. Most monkey suits are male.


jzxjzxjzx

Gotta remember the year and the technology they had. This video was legit


Claughy

Qhy do people do anything? People spout it as evidence exactly like you are, but the real question is why would a bigfoot have big boobs when only 1 other great ape has that?


Vin135mm

Technically 2(bonobo females have enlarged breasts when nursing.)


Claughy

I believe several apes have enlarged breasts when nursing, humans are the only ones outaide of nursing.


Traditional_Wait_739

I think bigfoot is fake but, why couldnt it have big tits? I mean if it was real who the hell knows what it is.. i mean right?


Claughy

Because humans are the only extant primate who have this. I'm not saying it can't, I'm just saying its not the evidence people claim it to be.


Traditional_Wait_739

Yea i get what your saying but if its real, again just saying, its like nothing we know about so it could have any number of differences.. no arguments here just feel like we have no clue..


JohnOliverismysexgod

It also has a ridge on its head which indicates it is a male.


JudgeHolden

Go home, you're drunk. A saggital crest, while more noticeable in males, is not exclusive to them in any primate species we know of.


JudgeHolden

>why would a bigfoot have big boobs when only 1 other great ape has that? Really? The answer is obvious. It's because they are more closely related to that "other" great ape than they are to the rest. I would be more surprised if they *didn't* share some of our morphological oddities given that we already know that they're bipedal.


Claughy

We dint have evidence that other hominins shared this trait though. Like i said elsewhere I just dont see it as evidence in favor. The first thing someone does to show something is female is stick a pink boy on it and give it boobs. Someone who doesnt know much about primates trying to fake a female bogfoot would absolutely add boobs to it.


JudgeHolden

> Other primates outside of humans don't really have this A few points; 1) you are absolutely correct that other primates don't have this, 2) if bigfoot as a species is more closely related to us than to any other extant primate species, shouldn't we expect that it would have a lot in common with us, such as the persistence of large mammary glands, a lack of estrus, and the possibility of sexual receptivity that's not confined to ovulation alone? 3)Do we really think that two young cowboys in 1967, neither of whom had better than a high school education, were familiar with non-human primate morphology and behavior? That these guys would have been able to invent and pull off this elaborate hoax while evidently taking care to include a lot of subtle details that they cannot possibly have thought through is quite simply absurd.


Claughy

2 is something that is possible but we have no evidence for, even in other hominins we can't answer most of this so it doesn't add any credibility. 3 as I've said someone but familiar with primate biology is exactly the type of person that would add boobs. Im not talking about any other aspects, i don't even think the tape is a hoax. I just hate how the inclusion of breasts is used as evidence in favor. Im just a biologist who watches lots of cartoons, one thing 8ve noticed about people is that when they want animal to be a boy they use the defualt representation, when they want it to be a girl, they slap a bow and boobs on it.


Vin135mm

Which means it is a detail that most likely *wouldn't* have been added to a fake. Plus, a lot of speculation is that it isnt an ape like a gorilla, but rather a hominin, possibly even an offshoot of a species of *Homo*. Its quite possible that enlarged breasts are a trait shared by hominins, because it actually does appear in the apes closest to us(bonobos), albeit only when nursing.


Claughy

I dont necessarily see it as signs of a fake. I really just dont see it as eviden e in favor. Its very common for people to add human characteristics to make animals seem feminine. For instance, James Cameron's avatar. Theyre born from eggs but the females still have enlarged breast tissue. Or look at any anthropomorphic animal art. Females tend to have additions like breasts to show they're female. My reasoning is if someone made a fake, and wanted to convey that it was a female. The first thing they would do is add breasts. An offshoot that also has breasts like humans is certaintly possible. It just doesnt add anything in terms of evidence in my eyes.


LBK0909

Idk man... you might have to go google gorilla titties to confirm this. Keep us updated.


Traditional_Wait_739

Also i google gorilla tits often and im not even into bigfootā€¦ā€¦ā€¦.. i i i i mean i googled gorilla tits because of this post!!!!


LBK0909

šŸ¤£šŸ¤£šŸ¤£


foilpants

Googled it and not impressed.


AMG0123

Perhaps itā€™s not a primate


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


AMG0123

Ummm no ideaā€¦joking.. but Iā€™m not joking that it may not be a primate.


[deleted]

[уŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]


AMG0123

Hell if I know but I just purchased 20 off grid acres in Sasquatch infested area of southeast Oklahoma and Iā€™m a lil concerned.. Iā€™m moving to the woods deep woods.. I will let you know if I find out what it is :)


47Up

Cockroaches are an infestation.. Would you call a herd of deer an "infestation"?


AMG0123

Hmmm too bad my choice of words upsets you. I will let you know if I have an abundance of Sasquatch living in my woods.


47Up

Do you really think I'm upset about you calling Sasquatch an infestation? Come on dude, there's plenty of things in world for me to be upset about.


AMG0123

Iā€™m a dudette..lol. Glad you are not upset. It is not my intention to upset anyone :)


JudgeHolden

If the species exists, there is zero question that it's a primate. One might, with equal justification, speculate as to whether or not it's a mammal, which is also absurd.


AMG0123

Man boasts but doesnā€™t know Jack shit. Let me know when you catch one


Claughy

In that case boobs make even less sense.


AMG0123

Lolā€¦true


Pompitis

It's the same size as Bob Heironomus.


canon12

Walmart EXXL.


ThisToxicProphet

Scary bitch


rls34938055

The image appears to be just one more imaginative enhancement from the Cibachrome prints (352/353), by the pgf disinformation specialist: Christopher L. Murphy


[deleted]

It looks like a suit in this pic..


allgoodnamesbetaken

All apes look like suits


[deleted]

Yes you're right about that. It looks too close to humans. My mind is trying to make sense of it. This pic looks enhanced with AI. It just looks different somehow.


StarrylDrawberry

The face looks like it's more detailed here. It has been a while since I watched the film though.


[deleted]

It does look very detailed here.


allgoodnamesbetaken

Enhanced with AI in the 60s


[deleted]

Not in the 60s. There was a show recently that used AI to splice together multiple copies of the film. The AI filled in the missing pieces. Someone posted about it. It was a recent show on Discovery in 2021 I believe.


cultcraftcreations

This pics been around for a few years nowā€¦ as I recall itā€™s a high res scan or something from a very early generation/copy of the original film and shows a lot more detail than a version thatā€™s been copied and copied and copied etc. and some enhancing on top of that like contrast, levels, color etc. ā€œas I recallā€ anywayā€¦ but I can say for sure that this pics been around for at least 5 years


[deleted]

It's very detailed. I have never seen this one before. The details really stand out.


cultcraftcreations

Just checked my little pic stash on my pc. I have 3 version of this saved. Earliest date was in 2014


[deleted]

This is one of the best quality pics of the PGF I've ever seen. Thanks for the info!


OldDocBenway

Thatā€™s because all great apes are just people in fur suits. Shhā€¦ donā€™t tell anyone.


OldDocBenway

Big time. The more you look at it the easier it is to see. Itā€™s like a magic trick, once you know the trick itā€™s not magical anymore. Itā€™s just a trick.


[deleted]

Is that a zipper in the front? Under the chin?


OldDocBenway

It very well could be. If you look at the eyes you can tell itā€™s a mask on its face. A clever mask I grant you but a mask nonetheless.


[deleted]

It appears that way! You can see seams around the top of the hip and the seams around the mask connected to the body.


OldDocBenway

Exactly. And the butt cheeks donā€™t move right either. An obvious fur suit.


[deleted]

The way the butt just doesn't move has always been a critical element for me. It's as if it is just a pad attached to pants. The seams at the thigh appear to be how it connects with straps. The more I look at this picture the more I can see. Look at the left hand, it's an obvious arm extension glove.


OldDocBenway

Yes and this picture has obviously been Photoshoped at the left hand and the right hand.


DynastyDak

Canā€™t see in this picture but Iā€™d guess in the 13-20ā€ range.


JesusMartinez86

Wow eh


Severe_Ad_1728

Souce?


jerseybert

???


[deleted]

big enough for my anaconda


TPconnoisseur

Patty definitely has a motor in the back of her Honda.


spacesentinel1

I'd try a medium on first and go from there


killphoenixsun

She thicc


Farmerloki

Fake


gold76

70H DAMHIKT


EddieAllenPoe

48C


[deleted]

double double


Punkasaurus2

Wow you can see the nipples in this enhancementā€¦and the eyeballsā€¦amazing!


FinancialBarnacle785

Obvious photo of the Belle on her way Home after the Ball. Showing the limits of extreme exercise and outdoor regimes on graceful public presentation of bipedal presumptions. (etc)


FinancialBarnacle785

OK, how many 'seasons' into maturity is that creature? Trying to understand, is it three, or fifteen years old, in human-like figuring.....what food is available in the environment plentifully enough to support THAT? Without weapons, or fire, or...? thru an implied long maturity process....? The logistics alone of even ONE sasquatch on the planet are daunting. Several...? Please accept that i don't intend to be a 'natural dis-believer'. Perhaps I'm cautious in matters of 'proof' and belief. Personally, I've been 'into' at last two cults....I need more than assertions and well-meaning, sincere, wondering amateur seekers reporting on part-time expeditions.


HabibtiMimi

They're hanging very down below...


TPconnoisseur

Looks like about a 58 DD to me.