Self explanatory still captured from the Dahinden film...

Self explanatory still captured from the Dahinden film...

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

May 17th, 2009, 11:16 pm #1



Titmus IMO was a damn nut skinning one of these creatures with his hands without gloves...then to make things worse...he hasn't washed the blood off of his hands as of yet...no way in hell would I handle one of those nasty rascals without hand protection...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

May 18th, 2009, 12:06 am #2

wonder if anyone asked Gimlin how the red jeep got down to the Bluff Creek area?...and BTW...anyone heard from John Green the past few months?...
Quote
Like
Share

Rummy
Rummy

May 18th, 2009, 2:59 am #3

COuld they have been doing some sort of service for a timber company?
Quote
Share

scott from philly
scott from philly

May 18th, 2009, 3:09 am #4

wonder if anyone asked Gimlin how the red jeep got down to the Bluff Creek area?...and BTW...anyone heard from John Green the past few months?...
he is on there daily

I read couple weeks ago where he said he was no kill now....
Quote
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

May 18th, 2009, 3:03 pm #5

He should have been no-kill 40 years back "if" they were not killing for discovery...this muddies the water even more with his stance of no-kill...why change now?...IMO there are several answers....first at his age it is unimportant at this stage in his life...or two...the noose is tightening around his neck...

What pixxes me off....the xxxxxxxxx killed one or more of these creatures and then hid, buried or discarded the corpses...why do this?...if these were simply ape like creatures why hide, crop, manipulate and change the appearance of frame 352...the face of Patty?...we all should understand there was something to hide or the films wouldn't give up the evidence they have that was over looked by the editors...

The below still captured from the Patterson film demonstrates the dog prints were cropped out other then what the editor over looked...this bloody print puts Patterson and Gimlin there with John Green and his party...



Now, with me being pro-kill...one thing none of us want to be associated with is killing a creature that may be some type of primitive human...sure what I have seen looks nothing like the Patty creature but does or would that mean there is not human DNA running in their biological make up?...I do firmly believe there are human like creatures that live in the PNW the Indians have told about for years...it's called the Sasquatch...look at the foot prints cast...look human to me and nothing like what I have here...

Patterson and his casts...which cast doesn't look similar if not exactly human other then size?...



It's quite alright to believe Green and Gimlin's saint hood if you want...but after reviewing the evidence I'll have to disagree...by evidence I know the reports given are half truths and fabrications...

The below collage is some of the evidence that has me convinced...

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

May 18th, 2009, 3:18 pm #6

COuld they have been doing some sort of service for a timber company?
I have no idea Rummy...I do know the creature tracks were present back when they first started building the roads back in, I believe, 1957...there are reports that something was tossing full 55 gallon barrels around....I can't recall or maybe haven't read if any equipment was damaged or men were scared for their safety...if the men working in that area were terrified by these creatures I suppose it would be possible the timber companies could be responsible for hiring Titmus to kill them out...I do know Green flew back home but returned immediately when he received a message..."what you are looking for is here."...Green flew back bringing the dog and handler from Canada with him...

BTW...Green and Titmus were long standing friends...

Quote
Like
Share

Ruby Red
Ruby Red

May 19th, 2009, 2:16 pm #7

in your post about how road builders and/or loggers may have hired Bob Titmus (or whoever) to "remove" Sasquatch from their area is the most logical explanation for actions taken by a group that included John Green, Rene Dahinden, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin I've heard in a long time. Perhaps when word of the Sasquatch "hunting trip" reached John Green's ears, he asked to be included so he could film any evidence before it was lost forever. Should the Patterson/Gimlin film be called the Green film? Could John Green have used Roger Patterson as a front man to secure the release of his 16mm film made that day in 1967? These are questions worthy of an answer but probably they will never be answered. If someone who knows the true story would just speak up...
Quote
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

May 19th, 2009, 2:50 pm #8

Time lines make this ordeal difficult to find anything more then speculation...but then again...when investigating anything you have to consider possibilities...
Quote
Like
Share

Ruby Red
Ruby Red

May 19th, 2009, 11:57 pm #9

said "when one has eliminated all other possibilities, what one is left with has to be the truth?" Someone who knows the quote better than do I may need to correct me (Pywacket, are you out there?) because I'm sure I said it wrong. CRS creeps up on me in horrible ways, although (she crosses her fingers) Alzheiners is not in MY family gene pool but we'll need to watch Silver Fox. His dad's in probably in the early stages of it as I type this message.
Quote
Share