The following is a timeline of events, articles, TV shows etc related to the PGF.

This is intended to be a "work-in-progress" so please add any information you have. For example, I don't currently have the date that Green shot the McClarin film and there are indications that it was not his first visit to the site.

Early October, 1967 Start of Patterson/Gimlin Bluff Creek trip
10/20/1967 Film Made
10/21/1967 1st Newspaper account, Times-Standard, Eurkea California
10/22/1967 Film Viewed at DeAtley’s House
10/23/1967 Laverty finds & photos tracks at film site
10/24/1967 Walt Kurshman goes to film site
10/25/1967 Article, The Province
10/29/1967 Titmus goes to Bluff Creek area
10/30/1967 Titmus finds film site
10/26/1967 Film Viewed in BC

11/1/1967 Radio Interview - Vancouver CA Jack Webster

NOTE: The following info is based on the "Pursuit" Magazine article by Ivan Sanderson, June 1968

"three weeks later" Roger is in New York. Presenting to LIFE and/or LOOK magazines - RP, DeAtley and a "Hollywood Agent"
The next day Film viewed at American Museum of Natural History (set up by LIFE magazine)
That night signed with Argosy
??? film flown to Yerkes Primate center in Atlanta - Prof W.C. Osman Hill
??? Closed showing at Washington DC
??? Copy of film given to Dr. Napier of Primate Biology Division of Smithsonian
??? Patterson and DeAtley spend "no less than 7 weeks" in Hollywood negotiating for a feature film
??? Paterson signs deal with BBC for UK and Commonwealth rights
2 weeks later Ron Webster starts work with Chicago Films, Inc
within 2 weeks finished film and flew home with "Tens of thousands of feet in the can"
??? copy of BBC documentary given to Patterson for private showing or sale.

2/1/1968 Argosy Article

Apr/May 1968 National Wildlife,Vol 6, No 3, Bob Kirkpatrick

6/1/1968 ARTICLE Pursuit Magazine, Ivan Sanderson

8 - 9 months later Green goes to Bluff Creek site.

12/15/1968 1968 BY JAMES B. SHUMAN. WEST MAGAZINE
(DECEMBER 15, 1968) PUBLISHED BY THE LOS ANGELES TIMES MIRROR SQUARE
LOS ANGELES, CALIF. 90053 Re-published in Readers Digest Jan, 1969

???? Creation of "Northwest Reasearch Association - Pat Mason

??? Dahinden purchases film rights
??? Dahinden shows film in Russia

??? Ron Olson, Americn National Enterprises, Salt Lake City makes film w/ PGF

March 11 1969 Article, Oregon Journal, Marge Davenport

1970 ANE Hires Patterson

1971 Dahinden visits site - finds pc of wood

1972 Byrne & Hodgson visit site

4/28/1977 In Search Of: Bigfoot - TV

9/23/1980 Arthur C Clarke's Mysterious World, TV Documentary

3/29/1992 Green Interview w/Gimlin

4/26/2005 Acient Mysteries: Bigfoot, A&E - TV

1/31/1999 The Sunday Oregonian, "Yakima Man claims to be man in suit"
Hieronimus claims to have worn suit

1/1/2005 Fortean Times article - Daniel Perez
1998 NASI report

??? BBC Interview w/ Gimlin

1/31/2005 "Behind the Mysteries: Bigfoot" Premiere Broadcast on January 30-31, 2005 National Geographic Channel

6/23/2005 Is It Real: Bigfoot? National Geographic Channel

9/30/2007 Legend Meets Science –

5/15/2009 Munn’s Report

There was a Discovery Channel program called ' Best Evidence ' - I believe it first aired in 2007 - don't know the date ...

P.S.
I am now coming up with a date of Feb 1, 2007

Ron Olson: Sasquatch, the Legend of Bigfoot 1973
Robert W Morgan: Bigfoot: Man or Beast 1972

both showed the PGF.

dav

The documentary, A&E "Ancient Mysteries" - Bigfoot, is copyrighted 1994, narrated by Leonard Nemoy.

Bill

Don't forget that they were going to bluff creek in the first place because someone had found 3 sets of prints during the Memorial Day Weekend.

Don't forget the loan documents Roger borrowed money on.

Don't forget Bob Gimlin borrowing Bob Heironymous' horse Chico for the trip.

Also remember the trip to Disney to make sure the film looked real.

Then recently add: Bigfooters find out that Bob Gimlin was riding Bob H's horse during the whole trip.

Oh. Ray Wallace's son tells newspaper that his dad has been hoaxing footprints in the Bluff Creek area for years. Produces feet that match many of the famous tracks.

Thanks, do you have dates or sources? Ive heard about a trip to Disney or Hollywood, but I don't know the source or dates, but that is the type of info I'm looking for.

I will post an updated version at various times.

Update:

PGF – TIMELINE
Monday, 9/4/1967 - (Labor Day weekend) Tracks found at Bluff Creek
??? – Gimlin borrows Bob H,s horse “Chico” for trip
Early October, 1967 - Start of Patterson/Gimlin Bluff Creek trip
10/20/1967 1:30 - Film shot at Bluff Creek
10/20/1967 - Per Patterson: “Air mails” or “ships on private flight” film to DeAtley (Before going to Hodgson’s store)
10/20/1967 – 8:00 -9:30 At Hodgson’s store – phone calls, Newspaper Interview
10/20/1967 - Per Gimlin: Drives to Post Office to mail film to DeAtley (After being at Hodgson’s Store)
10/21/1967 - 1st Newspaper account, Times-Standard, Eurkea California
10/22/1967 - Film Viewed at DeAtley’s House
10/23/1967 - Laverty finds & photos tracks at film site
10/24/1967 - Walt Kurshman goes to film site
10/25/1967 - Article, The Province
10/29/1967 - Titmus goes t Bluff Creek site
10/30/1967 - Titmus finds film site
10/26/1967 - Film Viewed in BC
11/1/1967 - Radio Interview - Vancouver CA Jack Webster
??? - trip to Disney to review film ???
NOTE: The following info is based on the "Pursuit" Magazine article by Ivan Sanderson, June 1968
"three weeks later" - Roger is in New York. Presenting to LIFE and/or LOOK magazines - RP, DeAtley and a "Hollywood Agent"
The next day - Film viewed at American Museum of Natural History (set up by LIFE magazine)
That night - signed with Argosy
??? - film flown to Yerkes Primate center in Atlanta - Prof W.C. Osman Hill
??? - Closed showing at Washington DC
??? - Copy of film gven to Dr. Napier of Primate Biology Division of Smithsonian
??? - Patterson and DeAtley spend "no less than 7 weeks" in Hollywood negotiating for a feature film
??? - Paterson signs deal with BBC for UK and Commonwealth rights
2 weeks later - Ron Webster starts work with Chicago Films, Inc
within 2 weeks - finished film and flew home with "Tens of thousands of feet in the can"
??? - copy of BBC documentary given to Patterson for private showing or sale.

2/1/1968 - Argosy Article
Apr/May 1968 - National Wildlife, Vol 6, No 3, Bob Kirkpatrick
6/1/1968 - Pursuit Magazine, Ivan Sanderson
8 - 9 months - later Green goes to Bluff Creek site.
12/15/1968 - BY JAMES B. SHUMAN. WEST MAGAZINE PUBLISHED BY THE LOS ANGELES TIMES MIRROR SQUARE - Re-published in Readers Digest Jan, 1969
???? - Creation of "Northwest Reasearch Association - Pat Mason
??? - Dahinden purchases film rights
??? - Dahinden shows film in Russia
??? - Ron Olson, Americn National Enterprises, Salt Lake City makes film w/ PGF
March 11 1969 - Article, Oregon Journal, Marge Davenport
1970 - American National Enterprises Hires Patterson
1971 - Dahinden visits site - finds pc of wood
1/15/1972 – Roger Patterson passes away
1972 - Robert W Morgan: Bigfoot: Man or Beast 1972
1972 - Byrne & Hodgson visit site
1973 - Ron Olson: Sasquatch, the Legend of Bigfoot 1973
4/28/1977 - In Search Of: Bigfoot - TV
9/23/1980 - Arthur C Clarke's Mysterious World, TV Documentary
3/29/1992 - Green Interview w/Gimlin
1/31/1999 - The Sunday Oregonian, "Yakima Man claims to be man in suit"
Hieronimus claims to have worn suit
- Fortean Times article - Daniel Perez
1998 - NASI report
- BBC Interview w/ Gimlin
1/31/2005 - "Behind the Mysteries: Bigfoot" Premiere Broadcast on January 30-31, 2005 National Geographic Channel
4/26/2005 - Ancient Mysteries: Bigfoot, A&E - TV
??? – Ray Wallce’s son admits to father faking tracksin Bluff Creek Area and produces feet matching some tracks.
6/23/2005 - “Is It Real: Bigfoot?” National Geographic Channel
2/1/2007 - “ Best Evidence” - Discovery Channel
9/30/2007 - “Legend Meets Science” –
5/15/2009 - “Munn’s Report”

Looking good except that right after the


We need to put in a couple other things.



and then the next morning remember to add

I like what you are doing. One suggestion: you might add the source of the information next to each fact added to the time line.

One fact that I would add, which contradicts one you have in the timeline, is that Bob Gimin told me in personal conversation that they drove to the airport to mail the film before they went to Willow Creek. He said it was getting dark when they left the Louse Camp and it was good and dark (and raining) when they got to the airport. Bob fell asleep in the truck while Roger went in and mailed the film. Then they drove to Willow Creek.

Ahh yes the one person who could possibly give an actual timeline has told you how he and Roger mailed the film at the airport. But please you have to understand that even if god came down and confirmed the timeline that Bob Gimlin personally gave you it would still not be enough to satisfy those nasty old uber skeptics. Sooooo let them have their way there is nothing you me Bob Gimlin and god can do to way the issue.

Try the chapter on Jerry Merritt in Greg Long's book. Jerry had connections in California. He also said Roger wanted him to go to Bluff Creek with them.

That was just one version of Gimlin's story, here's another one he gave John Green in 1992;
Link

Bolding mine.

So which was it, before or after?

The problem with trying to establish a time line is that both Patterson and Gimlin changed the content of their stories more than once.
I don't think the "nasty old uber skeptics" can be blamed for being suspicious, I think you'd have to be wearing blinders not to be.

Do forget that. They went to California after prints were found in late August on a Ryerson site. Al Hodgson called about them. They were the OM/BCM prints.

Come on LAL, which Bob Gimlin story is it?
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/john.htm John Green 1992 Interview w/ Bob Gimlin.

How does what you posted contradict what I said? Labor Day, not Memorial Day. Gimlin said, "well, let's go back a little bit here...it started raining real heavy over there and this was in the last part of August and the first part of September. When we got back to the Yakima area, somebody in California had phoned Roger's wife and left a message that there had been tracks sighted on new roads they'd been pushing back into the Bluff Creek area that they were building logging roads into. So that is the reason we went down in to that area."

Looks like my memory was better than yours on that. The "somebody" was Al Hodgson and Patricia Patterson took the call

What does it matter if there were inconsistencies?

There's no better example of unreliable witness testimony than the Kennedy assassination, especially 35 years after the event.

"Likewise, the Final Report of the ARRB stressed the problems with witness testimony:

The deposition transcripts and other medical evidence that were released by the Review Board should be evaluated cautiously by the public. Often the witnesses contradict not only each other, but sometimes themselves. For events that transpired almost 35 years ago, all persons are likely to have failures of memory. It would be more prudent to weigh all of the evidence, with due concern for human error, rather than take single statements as "proof" for one theory or another."

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/memory.htm

It would be suspicious if there were no inconsistencies. That might point to a memorized script. The memory closer to the event is probably more accurate but there's no guarantee of that. Bob was demonstrably wrong in November, 1967 when he recalled her hands were below her knees.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interview...iopatterson.htm

"Researchers do not give enough consideration to memory factors. Often there is a naive belief that witnesses saw what they saw pure and simple. If skepticism is applied to eyewitness accounts, it is only to dissenting witnesses. Yet memory research has shown that memory is not a copy of an event but a reconstruction. Eyewitness reports are unreliable; contrary to common sense, stress constricts the focus of attention and reduces memory. People remember what they want. People remember what is plausible. People remember a blend of observation and conversation about the observation. People remember what interviewers put in their heads. ("Assassination Research and the Pathology of Knowledge," The Third Decade, July 1992, p. 13, emphasis in original.) " - Dennis Ford, Ph.D

Gimlin also said they were there about three weeks which contradicts the reporting in the Times Standard. I still think the reporter got it wrong.

The Argosy article (February, 1968) refers to the trip to Universal but doesn't give dates. Sanderson makes it sound like this was before the showing i BC. He also says the original was locked up in a vault. That doesn't sound like it was carelessly lost.

"Well, these young men had the sense to get their film carefully processed, under guard, a copy made, and the original locked up in a vault so that it could not be scratched, stolen or destroyed. Then they went to the one group of people who really know about "faking" things — especially like "King Kong," "apemen" and other phony monsters — namely, Universal Pictures in Hollywood. There they met Dale Sheets, head of the Documentary Film Department, and top technicians in what is called the Special Effects Department, who are the men who have actually made such things for the movies. They asked the technicians, in effect: "Look at this strip of film. fellows, and then tell its if you could reproduce that for us." "No," the experts answered. "Maybe if you allotted a couple of million bucks, we could try, but we'd have to invent a whole set of new, artificial muscles, get a gorilla's skin and train an actor to walk like that. It might he done, but offhand we'd say it would be nearly impossible.""

http://www.pattersonfilm.com/page6/page6.html

The trip with Jerry Merritt to see Newty Cohen was prior to the filming but I'm not finding dates (pg. 110, The Making of Bigfoot).

Say, that's the same article where Patterson says they tracked Patty for about 3.5 miles.

"Well, these young men had the sense to get their film carefully processed, under guard, a copy made, and the original locked up in a vault so that it could not be scratched, stolen or destroyed."

Yet they apparently didn't have sense enough to remember whether they drove the film to an airport or shipped it from the post office, where the film was processed, or by who.

And, other evidence points to the original film being either stolen, misplaced, or destroyed. So much for having it safely locked up in a vault.

RayG

.

I'll try to do better with that. I can add quotes from the articles, interviews etc, but it may make for long posts. I'm also up for suggestions on how to enter multiple versions of the story?

I will try to indicate what is new in each update also.

FOR EVERYONE, please add anything you have, hopefully with quotes and sources. I don't have all the books, etc so If you do, HELP! I hope this is something that can keep growing. There will always be questions, especially about "THE DAY" and the film processing timeline, but I hope this may help clarify some things.

For instance: "the Yakima men were doing business as Bigfoot Enterprises in the movie capital of the world. The company was formed Nov.1, 1967, with the help of Beverly Hills lawyer Walter E. Hurst.” - This would tend to confirm Roger was in the Hollywood area on Nov. 1, giving more creedence to the story of showing the movie to Universal and/or Disney during the same time period.

I don't begrudge people that see discrepancies or point out contradictions, and I agree both representaions should be put in the time line. I believe the totality of the facts will prove the truth.

10/20/1967 8:35pm Hotel in San Francisco receives call for Rene Dahinden from John Green telling Dahinden to call Al Hodgson about happening in Willow Creek Source: From photocopy of original note supplied by Rene Dahinden and in my possession.

UPDATE:

PGF – TIMELINE

Monday, 9/4/1967 - (Labor Day weekend) Tracks found at Bluff Creek
??? – Gimlin borrows Bob H,s horse “Chico” for trip
Early October, 1967 - Start of Patterson/Gimlin Bluff Creek trip
10/20/1967 1:30 - Film shot at Bluff Creek
Roger and Bob follow the trail 3 miles.
Roger and Bob Return to the film site.
Roger and Bob go back to camp to get plaster
Roger and Bob return to the film site to cast footprints
Roger and Bob Cast footprints
Roger and Bob return to the campsite before heading out to mail the film
10/20/1967 - Per Patterson: “Air mails” or “ships on private flight” film to DeAtley (Before going to Hodgson’s store)
10/20/1967 - Per “Holdmybeer – BFF” – “Bob Gimin told me in personal conversation that they drove to the airport to mail the film before they went to Willow Creek. He said it was getting dark when they left the Louse Camp and it was good and dark (and raining) when they got to the airport. Bob fell asleep in the truck while Roger went in and mailed the film. Then they drove to Willow Creek.”

10/20/1967 – 8:00 -9:30 At Hodgson’s store – phone calls, Newspaper Interview
10/20/1967 - Per Gimlin – 1992 Interview: Drives to Post Office to mail film to DeAtley (After being at Hodgson’s Store)
10/20/1967 - P & G return to camp for the night.
10/21/1967 - 5:30 am. Rains so hard, Bob G. is afraid trucks might get stranded.
Bob G. goes and covers some of the tracks with bark.
10/21/1967 - 1st Newspaper account, Times-Standard, Eurkea California
10/22/1967 - Film Viewed at DeAtley’s House
10/23/1967 - Laverty finds & photos tracks at film site
10/24/1967 - Walt Kurshman goes to film site
Between 10/22 and 10/26 – Shows film to Dale Sheets and others at Universal Films in Hollywood. Before showing at Univ of BC. (Based on Argosy article)
10/25/1967 - Article, The Province, Interview conducted over the phone “Contacted at his home in Yakima, Washington, Roger Patterson told The Province the story of his epic film-making trip:”
10/26/1967 - Film Viewed at University of British Columbia (footage of tracks are included in this showing per Green-Gimlin Interview, 1992)
10/26 /1967- Radio Interview - Vancouver CA Jack Webster – interview is after UBC viewing. BC viewing is referred to as “What we saw tonight” in interview
10/29/1967 - Titmus goes to Bluff Creek site
10/30/1967 - Titmus finds film site
11/1/1967 “Just 12 days after filming what they said was a startled sasquatch retreating across a streambed into the Northern California woods, the Yakima men were doing business as Bigfoot Enterprises in the movie capital of the world. The company was formed Nov.1, 1967, with the help of Beverly Hills lawyer Walter E. Hurst.” (February 4, 1999
By David Wasson - copyright YAKIMA HERALD-REPUBLIC)

NOTE: The following info is based on the "Pursuit" Magazine article by Ivan Sanderson, June 1968
"three weeks later" - Roger is in New York. Presenting to LIFE and/or LOOK magazines - RP, DeAtley and a "Hollywood Agent"
The next day - Film viewed at American Museum of Natural History (set up by LIFE magazine)
That night - signed with Argosy
Argosy pays for Patterson and DeAtley to fly back to Yakima “for a couple of days for Thanksgiving”.
Ivan Sanderson and Desmond Slattery drive to Washington D.C to arrange showing. Later, ARGOSY editor Milt Machlin flies film to D.C. along with his son Jason.
??? - film flown to Yerkes Primate center in Atlanta - Prof W.C. Osman Hill
??? - Closed showing at Washington DC
??? - Copy of film given to Dr. Napier of Primate Biology Division of Smithsonian
??? - Patterson and DeAtley spend "no less than 7 weeks" in Hollywood negotiating for a feature film
??? - Paterson signs deal with BBC for UK and Commonwealth rights
2 weeks later - Ron Webster starts work with Chicago Films, Inc
within 2 weeks - finished film and flew home with "Tens of thousands of feet in the can"
??? - copy of BBC documentary given to Patterson for private showing or sale.
??? – DeAtley takes film to Seattle to show Green and Dahinden, footage of tracks are missing (1992 Green-Gimlin Interview)
2/1/1968 - Argosy Article
Apr/May 1968 - National Wildlife, Vol 6, No 3, Bob Kirkpatrick
6/1/1968 - Pursuit Magazine, Ivan Sanderson
8 - 9 months - later Green goes to Bluff Creek site.
12/15/1968 - BY JAMES B. SHUMAN. WEST MAGAZINE PUBLISHED BY THE LOS ANGELES TIMES MIRROR SQUARE - Re-published in Readers Digest Jan, 1969
???? - Creation of "Northwest Reasearch Association - Pat Mason
??? – Green purchases film rights.
??? – Green takes film to Canawest for analysis and copying.
??? - Dahinden purchases film rights
??? - Dahinden shows film in Russia
??? - Ron Olson, Americn National Enterprises, Salt Lake City makes film w/ PGF
March 11 1969 - Article, Oregon Journal, Marge Davenport
1970 - American National Enterprises Hires Patterson
1971 - Dahinden visits site - finds pc of wood
1/15/1972 – Roger Patterson passes away
1972 – Fabulous Animals - BBC
1972 - Robert W Morgan: Bigfoot: Man or Beast 1972
1972 - Byrne & Hodgson visit site
1973 - Ron Olson: Sasquatch, the Legend of Bigfoot 1973
4/28/1977 - In Search Of: Bigfoot - TV
9/23/1980 - Arthur C Clarke's Mysterious World, TV Documentary
3/29/1992 - Green Interview w/Gimlin
1/31/1999 - The Sunday Oregonian, "Yakima Man claims to be man in suit"
Hieronimus claims to have worn suit
- Fortean Times article - Daniel Perez
1998 - NASI report
- BBC Interview w/ Gimlin
1/31/2005 - "Behind the Mysteries: Bigfoot" Premiere Broadcast on January 30-31, 2005 National Geographic Channel
4/26/2005 - Ancient Mysteries: Bigfoot, A&E - TV
??? – Ray Wallce’s son admits to father faking tracks in Bluff Creek Area and produces feet matching some tracks.
6/23/2005 - “Is It Real: Bigfoot?” National Geographic Channel
2/1/2007 - “ Best Evidence” - Discovery Channel
9/30/2007 - “Legend Meets Science” –
5/15/2009 - “Munn’s Report”

Haven't we been over this before? The confusion seemed to come in when skeptics decided Roger meant "mailed" when he said "air mailed". I don't know how this proves Patty was built by the Wah Chang team with help from John Chambers and Janos Prohaska, but, heck, I'll play.



Is there some reason it couldn't have been safely in a vault before Bob Gimlin sold his rights to Dahinden and the thing got tied up in legal issues and ended up, reportedly, in Florida? What evidence is there Roger was careless with the film? The BBC apparently lost the second roll, not the Pattersons or Al deAtely.

Ray, you have sources. Why not contribute to building the timeline with references instead of digging up much-worn minutae that have been discussed to death elsewhere?

Actually, it was because Gimlin said in a video taped interview that it was "mailed". Not air-mailed, or shipped by plane, but "mailed". Its also because Roger Patterson told a reporter that he had the film air-shipped that afternoon (oct 20th) in eureka. (when Gimlin says they were at the filming site until "well after dark" and didnt arrive into town at hodgsens store until around 8:30 or 9:00 pm!) Its also because he called the reporter (likely from the payphone at hodgsens store, the time is corroborated by Gimlins statement *on video* of when they arrived at hodgsens store) and told the reporter that "its already on its way" around 9 pm that night.

This is a page of clips from Best Evidence: Bigfoot.

http://videos.howstuffworks.com/discovery/...-film-video.htm

I've found TV shows to be pretty innacurate, especially A&E's with Leonard Lemoy. When I got more familiar with prints and casts I couldn't help but notice they be talking about one and showing another - that really spoiled it for me.

The video taped interview with Gimlin was done by Green. Not at a TV station.

Definitely been over this before.

Most people don't drive to an airport to mail a package. The post offices were closed. Where can we see this videotaped interview? When was it done? Or is your source Dennett?

If Gimlin's earlier recollection was correct and they went to the airport first, the reporter was correct. Apparently Bob was exhausted and worried about leaving the horses at camp - not conducive to crystal clear laying down of memory.

If they went to the airport first how would Roger have called deAtley to arrange for the shipment? Al could have cleared this up if he'd remembered that he did charter a plane, not just that he might have.



At what point did I say it was? We've crossed posts here. I was talking about TV documentaries.

Do you mean the 1992 interview conducted by John Green?

Here is a transcript from the interview Green did with Gimlin online. You can ask Green about its validity/accuracy if need be.


http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/john.htm


You're making excuses for the inconsistencies in their stories. Instead of debating them all over again, and listing them all again in this thread... I choose to accept what was documented well, and not someones speculation about what they may have meant, or other excuses about it.


Source for Gimlins "early recollections"? I'm collecting inconsistencies so that'll be another one to add to the pot.

QUOTE(RiverRun @ Oct 6 2009, 05:29 PM) *
Its also because Roger Patterson told a reporter that he had the film air-shipped that afternoon (oct 20th) in eureka.

Are you speaking of the Standard-Times article of 10/21 (which refers to "airmail" and by "air")? or a different article?







edited by hmb for clarification

Per Murphy:

"Patterson was eager to get his film of the creature developed to ensure that he had in fact caught the creature on the film. On this point, Gimlin has stated, "We weren't sure from Roger stumbling and falling down on the sandbar and getting up and running...we didn't even have an idea that we had anything on the film at that time...in fact it was doubtful that we did have anything." They therefore decided to airship the film to Al De Atley, Patterson's brother-in-law in Yakima, for immediate processing. It appears the mens' plan was to wait for word from De Atley as to what, if anything, was on the film. This information would dictate their next move. In other words, if they had not captured the creature on film, they would stay longer and try again. The men decided they would both travel to the airport to make the shipment. This task accomplished, they would then return to their campsite. Leaving their horses tethered at their campsite, the two men started out in their truck for a local airport, probably Murray Field in Arcata. On their way, they stopped at Hodgson's store in Willow Creek to talk to their friend, Al Hodgson. As it was after 6:00 p.m., however, the store was closed. Patterson therefore telephoned Hodgson at his home. Hodgson and other friends, including Sly McCoy, thereupon met with Patterson and Gimlin, presumably at Hodgson's store. Patterson and Gimlin then related their experience to their friends. Also, during this time Patterson telephone Al De Atley to inform him of the pending film shipment. Patterson shipped the film to the Seattle, Washington airport for pick-up by De Atley the next day.

Patterson and Gimlin then headed out to an air shipping facility and shipped the film to Al De Atley. As far as we know, only one film roll was shipped to De Atley. It is reasonable to assume Patterson still had the second roll in his camera with sufficient unexposed film for a possible second sighting. The two men then contacted a reporter for The Times-Standard newspaper at Eureka, to whom they related their experience in considerable detail. It is not known if this was a telephone contact or a personal contact. We do know, however, that it took place at about 9:30 p.m. The article appeared in the newspaper the following day, October 21, 1967. The men then immediately headed back to their campsite. By the time they arrived, bad weather was closing-in. By about midnight, it was raining heavily.

In the meantime, at Patterson's request, Al Hodgson telephoned Dr. Don Abbott of the British Columbia Museum of Anthropology and asked him to come down to the film site with tracking dogs. Abbott, however, declined stating that he would wait to see the film. After talking with Hodgson, Abbott informed John Green of events. Abbott also telephoned Al De Atley and requested that the film be brought to Vancouver, B.C., for viewing by scientists at the University of British Columbia. De Atley promised he would discuss Abbott's request with Patterson."

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/biology/pgf_history.htm

Yes, I've read and posted it many times. Please read what I've posted about the fallibility of memory, especially over time. The important thing is the roll was sent by air.

I suggest you read Chris Murphy's Bigfoot Film Journal. It addresses many of these points.

Source for Gimlins "early recollections" as you said he stated they went to the airport in the afternoon please? Was he video taped saying this or recorded? Or is it just someone elses recollection of what he said? I'm not about to buy a book about a film I think is a hoax in order to confirm your statement.


I'd much rather have a reliable source for it. If its in the book, which page etc, and what was his source? Hard to dispute someones videotaped statements concerning the timeline. Although Gimlin refutes many things Patterson said in the Green interview.

Roger was planning another expedition for May, 1968, according to National Wildlife:

I hope this is taken in the way it is meant. Chris Murphy's story makes for good reading but I really would like to see the sources for many of the facts presented. I have met Chris and have all the respect for him. He may well have the citations; I just haven't seen them. The PGF has spun its wheels for decades because many of the critical facts have never been sourced to anything other than other publications that also lack sources.

I didn't say that. That was HOLDMYBEER who seems to know a lot about this and has at least one document in his possession.

Murphy did a lot of research on this and even went to the airport to inquire about the state of chartering in !967. If you don't want to read the book, don't, but don't expect me to type it all out for you. I got tired of that on "crass" JREF.

Do you consider a newspaper story a primary source?

Roger could easily have said, as Bob Gimlin did in the 1992 interview, that they were on their way on over to "whatever town that was" and the reporter (who wasn't named) thought he said the film was on its way. Bob said in 1992 they were there about three weeks, not since the previous Saturday. Best Evidence says two weeks. Bob Gimlin didn't remember some names or how the BC Museum thing went. This is NORMAL.

Inconsistancies don't mean it was a hoax any more than the Radford's $700 did. It's unfortunate they didn't take field notes and the scene wasn't roped off, but they were amateurs. It's more unfortunate the scientists didn't see fit to follow up. They might have found something more compelling than film footprints and a two-witness sighting.

Can we get back to the timeline now?

= blah blah blah no source quoted, or confirmation of the source. I linked to my source of a transcribed video taped statement verifying what I said. Sure lets get back to the timeline as I agree this amounts to nothing more than you saying Gimlin recollected something, when he states otherwise in a video taped statement. Also let it be noted that Murphy didnt become interested in the bigfoot field until 1993. (after Gimlins video taped interview) As noted in his "sample chapter" of the book at this source.

http://www.hancockhouse.com/products/pdfs/BigFilPODSC.pdf

Guess that means Gimlins "early recollections" were not from a direct interview with Murphy. ;-)

Now back from that station break.....

How does that help your case?
Other than the film the only thing we have to go on is witness testimony and by your reasoning all the testimony should be tossed out.


Again all we have is testimony, no reciept, no bill of lading, nothing.
Remember what you said about "the fallibility of memory"?

You can't cherry pick what fits your version of the events, all that matters is what really happened, and I doubt we'll ever really know.

Unless, you know, Gimlin confesses.

I wondered how long it would take for someone to say that.



Not at all. I think it should be considered, but carefully. If I say I had Kellogg's cereal for breakfast but can't barf it up to prove it does that make me a liar and a hoaxer? I had an egg and sausage with mozzarella yesterday, I think, and am really not sure about the day before. I'm positive about where I was and what I was doing and even what I was wearing when I heard about Kennedy being shot, but can no longer remember for sure which TV show was interrupted.

It's good to crosscheck wherever possible. I'd be unrealistic to assume all the eyewitness testimony regarding events was accurate, let alone recall decades later. It just doesn't work that way.

There are also casts and photos of the trackway. There's a picture of Roger casting that was used as a sundial here somewhere, posted by Gigantofootecus (as I recall ). Can anyone find it? It helped to establish the time of day.

There's no proof what made the tracks or when they were cast.

AGAIN, I did not say that. The source for an earlier trip to the airport is right here. I did not know about this glaring, oh-so-important, inconsistancy until you brought it up on the other thread. That's why I asked you for a source. I thought Roger made his calls from Hodgson's store and then they went to the airport. It makes more sense that way, unless Roger was able to call Al from the airport. He could have called collect, I suppose. I don't see him having a pocket full of change on a camping trip.

I don't remember Murphy saying anything about Gimlin's "early recollections". It's an interesting book. At least the airport is (probably) identified.

Either way, before or after the store, I don't think it amounts to a hill of beans.

Without clogging this thread up with debate about it, I'll leave this conversation with this point about it. Theres a big difference between "afternoon" and "well after dark" "around 8:30 or 9:00 pm. Especially when the person quoted as saying they left after dark drove that day. It does amount to more than a hill of beans because the timeline is crucial considering the film was shot on a friday (two states down) and showed on the following sunday. Doesnt leave much time for sending/developing and doesnt make much sense at all for them to "air-ship" anything considering they left back for Yakima in less than 12 hours after supposedly sending it via airplane. (depending on whos account you believe on the timing issue since there are obviously conflicting stories about it) I consider inconsistent accounts important when evaluating witness testimony. Especially when they claim to have filmed an unknown hominid, and make statements about the evidence that clearly make it impossible for the subject seen on film to have left the tracks that were documented. (among other things) If you add up all of the inconsistent statements, its pretty damning. Clearly there are a lot more questions than answers at this point in time as well.


Sorry for the off topic discussion comncents. (even though it is related to the timeline, its not in the format you are looking for)

Actually I do have that book and will reread the part about 10/20/67 again.

But another thing, a major problem I see with this debate about testimony and changes in testimony is the fact that most of the witnesses have been interviewed so many times about details they took no notes on, mental or otherwise, over such a significant period of time they really no longer have independant recollections. Much of what they say today is what they have been told they have said in the past. I put my money on circumstantial facts, hence the value of a documented collection of circumstantial facts. There is no substitute for vetting this stuff when it happened.

.....And at that late date is virtually useless in determining anything but things the way Mr. Gimlin later remembers them. This is very common when long periods of time elapse between incidents and reports or interviews.
An example would be that in the later interview with Green, I believe Gimlin states rather definitively that Patterson's horse never fell on him, but in the 1967 interview, Gimlin didn't bother to correct Patterson while he was making the statement and he certainly had the opportunity to do so.



Edited to add: Essentially HMB is correct, and I might add that initially interviewing Patterson and Gimlin together was a very bad idea.

Comncents,

Excellent topic. Despite all the differing opinions on what may have really happened it's very imformative. If you don't mind me asking, what is your ultimate goal and what do you hope to achieve with your timeline?

Reading this thread has me wondering.......Did Patterson/Gimlin actually film a female sasquactch that day, AND purposely alter some of the facts, events and timelines surrounding said film? How and/or why this would happen I don't know, but the fact is that after 40+ years myself and many others still believe there is a very good chance Patty is real, and yet we also can't deny the various discrepancies in the events that unfolded before and after....

How about these two different stories apparently told to the reporter the day of the filming, and then the second version told in november (only a couple of weeks after)

This source Nov 1967




Second version this source Oct 20 1967 reported, and published the 21st.




Cant say that so much time had passed that they may have forgotten. Anyhow, lots of inconsistencies. Not just with their stories.

I can say reporter error again. Unless the reporter was taping the phone conversation with Roger he probably wrote the story from memory with the aid of notes. So, that's three errors in the same story so far. Any more?

I once overheard one of my husband's doctors dictating notes into the dictaphone. He completely screwed up what we'd just told him and we weren't even out of the office yet. It happens.

Here's a beaut of an example of reporter error:

"One of the more popular pieces of evidence for the existence of Bigfoot is the "Patterson Bigfoot video," which shows a supposed Bigfoot striding away from an excited and shaky cameraman, the late Roger Patterson. Taken in 1967, no other video has been held in such high esteem and presented as proof of the monster’s existence. "

http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/rogers-video/

We discussed it here.

Dang! I've been misquoted too. I'd completely forgotten that.

You mean you can speculate blindly that it "may" have been reporter error. It also "may" (and more likely was) have been a differing story from the two men involved with the film. ;-) Gee what a novel concept.


You seem to toss away everything you dont like the sound of, but from those same interviews you quote things you like. Awesome. Where do you think an "accurate" timeline is given? Which interview do you choose to pick as "accurate" since you seem to want to discount any conflicting parts of the ones I've used? (that you stated you've quoted some of the interviews as well) Its fine when it serves your point, but when others use the same interviews you seem to think the points you dont like arent accurate and are some how an error being the reporters fault. haha. Fun stuff ;-)

Very typical of believers in the film validity too btw.


What I'm stating (fairly clearly, and with no reporter error! haha) is that these are inconsistent statements about the events of that day. You can choose to discount it at your own discrepancy.

On a radio show? It wasn't an interrogation. What irritated me was the way Jack Webster kept butting in and cutting them off.

Yakima Herald story October 27, 1967.

See the link I just posted. The part on Roger's horse is a bit different too.

Are you speculating blindly that Roger and Bob kept changing their stories? How many times did the Georgia boys change theirs?

Reporters make mistakes. Deal with it.

Article from The Province, October 25, 1967. Hopefully Roger was quoted accurately.

I'm not speculating anything here. I'm POINTING OUT INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS that were documented from the two men involved with the film. "Deal with it" haha. There are quite a few documented too. ;-)

Hoaxers make mistakes too... and they made plenty (Patterson and Gimlin) I noticed no excuses for your cherry picking. Thats good.

Which is too bad because had they ever been interviewed by someone who knew what they were doing, we would likely have much more information on what actually transpired. Interrogation techniques are used during proper interviews, whether that makes one feel warm and fuzzy or not. It goes without saying that a radio show interview was not the best format or venue for getting much needed information. This was a huge opportunity that was missed.
I'm not sure why you posted a link to that article as opposed to the link of the actual reported transcript, that is also on that site. Anything but a first hand accounting from the involved actors is useless and subject to the authors' spin because you are letting an outside source interpret your story.


edited for content and to add:

If some of the inconsistences RR is referring to come from different (and more importantly second hand source) interviews, that is completely consistent with what happens. There is seldom a way, at this late date, to conclusivley prove that the intended information was brought forward correctly, in proper context and sequence....under those circumstances.


Sorry to derail the intended discussion but this area always seems to get brushed aside.