If You Believe the Erickson Footage of the Bigfoot “Matilda”
is a Person in a “Chewbacca” Mask then You Must Believe the Following:
1
1. The owners of the property had the technical
ability and financial means to:
a. Purchase a cheap Chewbacca mask, modify the mask
by dying the hair red and breaking down the thick fibers to make thin wispy
hair.
b. Scuffed the nose to make it look gray and dry.
c.
Modify the lips of the mask to make them appear
weathered and chapped.
d. Painted the gums of the mask black.
e. Changed the arrangement and size of the teeth
from the original mask.
f. Painted their own tongue black and gray
g. Have the ability to disjoint their lower jaw so
it juts out at least four inches.
h. Fitted the mask with expertise that rivals top Hollywood
special effects artist.
i. Located, purchased, and altered the color of
special effects contact lenses
j. Found and purchased a full body suit, colored
the hair to match the mask, and fitted it so well that if fooled the following
individuals: John Bindernagle, Adrian Erickson, Dennis Pfohl, Troy Hudson, Matt
Moneymaker, Mary Green and dozens of others.
2. Adrian Erickson spent thousands of dollars
purchasing this video and the land from the original land owners knowing this
was a hoax.
3. The Erickson Project Team spent over five years perpetrating
this hoax making hours of videos of this hoaxed subject and another larger
subject.
4.
Adrian Erickson, John Bindernagle, Dennis Prahl,
Troy Hudson, and Mary Green are Hoaxers, Liars, and/or completely incompetent.
5.That the video ends with the close-up of the
face and does not show the Bigfoot’s full body and that later in the video
before walking off, looking at the lady filming the video and growling.
6.
Adrian Erickson, Dennis Prahl, Troy Hudson, and
Dr. Melba Ketchum perpetrated a planned hoaxed to film the subject, collect blood
from the hoaxed subject, and falsify DNA results of said hoaxed subject.
7. That the multiple reports over the last forty
years of some Bigfoot “resembling the Chewbacca character from the Star Wars
movie” are lies, hoaxes, or misidentifications.
Scott, I think that pretty well covers it. Bias in any form does nothing
ReplyDeleteto contribute to a solution. And as a wise man once said " If you are
not part of the solution, you are part of the problem".
I don't have any idea what it is, but some of the statements in the list of what you say someone would also have to believe in order to believe it is a modified wookie mask are contradictory to one another, meaning one wouldn't have to believe all of those things (either the Erickson folks were hoaxed or they were hoaxers if the BF in the film was a fake, but they couldn't have been hoaxed and involved in the hoax at the same time).
ReplyDeletePeople will go to all sorts of extremes to hoax others, and making a good costume is not as difficult as listed in your a-j list (I can't do it, but I've watched those special effects reality shows where up & comers compete for a prize/special effects contract, and I've seen some other low cost costumes that were very convincing). Also, there are a number of cheap video editing software programs you can get.
However, I thought that Erickson team members took the footage that resembles the wookie (I don't really know), so whatever they put out, the credibility of each and every one of them is on the line. That makes it difficult for me to believe they would knowingly fake any evidence at all, so I have to go with innocent until proven guilty in regard to all of the Erickson footage. There are just too many professional reputations on the line for them to produce a hoax or to stand behind hoaxed film Adrian purchased. I believe if he found out any evidence he purchased was fake, he would announce it and distance himself from it. Again, I could be wrong. This is just my 2 cents.
Scott, are the top canine teeth sort of set apart from the teeth in the front the reason you think she might have a double row of teeth?
ReplyDeleteI know Dennis and have met John a few times. They are both researchers in this area. They have spent many years researching this, and know what they are talking about. I myself have been doing investigations in this area for nine years. Everything that they tell here is true. I have run into an animal such as this one when I was living in a remote cabin in WA state.
ReplyDeleteI know Dennis and have met John a few times. These are not people who would fake any thing to do with bigfoot. They are researchers. Both of them have spent years looking into this subject. I would trust what they say to be the truth.
Great article Scott. Some of the points you've presented,I was either not aware of,and/or didn't consider. You know how this community is,lol. There's always someone going to bad mouth,or put down someone,somewhere,sometime. It's appalling,but the truth.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do not know Dennis personally,or even on Fb,lol,if have heard his name many,many times,and I've never heard anything bad. Ever. No kidding. It seems even the radicals that cherish raising a ruckus,and creating drama,say Dennis's work,research and investigations are very well done,and professional as to a point. So that's a rep that's hard to beat,in any arena of study/research.
Personally,I feel the same way,as you,Scott,and a few awesome folks on here,have said latley. This was,and is,a massively huge deal,to Mr Erickson,ESP,and all those involved. A good amount,likely massive as well,lol,of money's was spent on,and during this epic project. I do not see these outstanding people,researchers,etc,even thinking about jeopardizing their effort,with someone that could be busted,or debunk,or whatever the term would be,by including something as hoaxed,staged,footage of any kind.
And,as a comment recently posted here,that was a brillant one btw,and I knew about but it slipped my mind,was the observation of Clayton Mac,of B.C,and how their teeth,and gums looked. The subjects gums in the video are plainly in Veiw,and that's something hard to get around,if you were considering the validity,lol. But,as we all know too well,many folks seem to be fanatic in their ways(wow,that sounds familer,LOL!! As in my fanatics learning and studying all these amazing and mind boggling situations/beings/entity's,and the folklore/histories is even cooler!!)and nothing will ever be the boneified standard of proof.
I think the real issue is much easier. Do you think the videos presented by the Erickson project so far show a real flesh and blood biological creature?
ReplyDeleteI am not convinced. The creature looks fake. Therefore it must be a guy in a suit. Wether it is a wookie suit is not even that important.
I don`t know why you bother addressing the unbelievers...they will not believe regardless of what anybody offers as evidence...so why literally waste your time.effort and words on those that just dismiss them out of hand ? You are aware of the reality...concentrate on that.
ReplyDeleteI can't help commenting that it is not a matter of taking the photographic and film-footage evidence of Bigfoot by itself. There is no need to do that. Sightings and encounters on the American continent by "white folk" go back at least 150 years, while sightings and encounters by Native peoples go back even further. Also, sightings and encounters in Europe go back a very long way, although they are masked by layers of folklore, as I have pointed out elsewhere in my comments on this blog. So to me, the two forms of evidence taken together...modern film and photographic evidence, plus stories of encounters that go back centuries...are all anyone should need to consider that there is something really there, as improbable as it may seem.
ReplyDeletep.s. It seems to me that these creatures are so improbable that no amount of evidence, no matter how good, will ever convince some people. But improbability does not mean impossibility, and I wish that the diehard nay-sayers would keep that in mind.
Hello Scott, I just wanted to thank you on behalf of myself and my husband, Dennis, for giving this video a thorough analysis and not immediately jumping on the bandwagon of dismissal as so many others have done. This video is only one of many taken over many years and by many different people associated with the project. The repeated encounters occurred for more than forty years and was experienced not only by the locals but also visitors to the property without the locals' knowledge. Dennis factored in the culmination of all the evidence collected after thousands of hours in the field and his own personal experiences to make the determination that there are sasquatch in the area. We are looking forward to the eventual release of more of the footage and the back story :)
ReplyDeleteMaybe the reason so many people feel this is fake is because it does look like a wookie. Plus the film quality is so bad. And why all the secrecy? Think about it...If you happen to be in close vicinity of an unknown primate that has been a myth for many years and all of a sudden you come out with film footage and say its real and looks like a wookie... Come on. Since the Patterson Gimlin film, many people have been trying to get a bigfoot on film and this is all you have to show for it? Shitty quality film footage? I've read many many articles about bigfoot and all the research done on this creature and what i dont understand is why hide it...why keep it away from other researchers? Isnt the whole point of researching Bigfoot is to prove he exists? And if this isnt for fame or money, then why isnt this being shared with the rest of the Bigfoot Community. This smells , shockingly, like another hoax perpetuated with all the usual secrecy and unasnwered questions that hoaxs seem to be the basis of. If you want people to take it seriously...I suggest u open up the whole study to other researchers and let them be a part of it too at least then you wont have anyone accusing you of a hoax.
ReplyDeleteThis is a old old story, Adrian Erickson owns the footage, this is a still capture from the snippet he made public, see the DNA Study Press Conference for details. I know who took the footage and I know the circumstances and I know this is real footage. If you choose not to "believe it" that your choice, your "belief" does not change the fact that this is real footage.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEWpLio-Lgw#t=12
Scott there was a video out at the very beginning of when they broke the story,and showed the clip,It was a longer clip,that showed the mouth closing in an oval,
ReplyDeleteand looked similar to an orangutan,but it seems they shortened the clip,that would have shut a lot of people up about the mask theory,Was it Erickson that shortened it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEWpLio-Lgw#t=12
DeleteI see no video of the subject, therefor the list of items given does not apply. There is no reason to believe that this is not a mask. How does one need to move their jaw 4 inches out to fit a mask that does not show movement? These points are nebulous when a simple mask with contacts will suffice. Also the sleeping sasquatch,,,, since when can anyone sneak up that close and film a sleeping sasquatch?
ReplyDeleteFranky I don't care what you believe, hate that the facts get in the way of your opinion, but that's the way it is. No hoax, no mask, but a real, living, breathing creature. If you choose not to believe that's your issue, but that does not change the fact it is real.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEWpLio-Lgw#t=12
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEWpLio-Lgw#t=12
ReplyDeleteWhat happened to Matilda? Are they still tracking it? Have they had any other Bigfoot sightings or encounters in same area? The statement says Matilda growls. I did not hear one. Hoping to hear more and see more on this area. Does anyone think the U.S. Government had involvement in trying to stop video release?
ReplyDeleteAndrew,
DeleteThere is a study going on where the Maltilda video was captured. It is an effort to create a habitation type of situation. As of the progress of this research I do not know.