>> male narrator: THE ENCOUNTERS ARE TERRIFYING. >> IT WAS ALL HAIRY, FROM THE HEAD TO TOE. >> narrator: THOUSANDS HAVE REPORTED SEEING THIS BEAST. >> YOU JUST GOT TO SEE IT TO BELIEVE IT. >> narrator: THE EVIDENCE HAS BEEN ELUSIVE...UNTIL NOW. >> IT'S GONNA BE SOMETHING THAT NO ONE'S EVER SEEN BEFORE. >> narrator:<i> MONSTER QUEST</i> PUTS THE EVIDENCE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE... >> THE PROBABILITY OF THIS BEING A HOAX IS ALMOST NONEXISTENT. >> narrator: LAUNCHING A DANGEROUS SEARCH FOR PROOF... >> THIS DEFIES EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE ELSE HAS REPORTED FOR 41 YEARS. >> narrator: ALL TO FIND OUT IF SASQUATCH LIVES. >> YEAH, A LITTLE THICKER THAN WE WERE EXPECTING. >> narrator: WITNESSES AROUND THE WORLD REPORT SEEING MONSTERS. ARE THEY REAL OR IMAGINARY? SCIENCE SEARCHES FOR ANSWERS ON<i> MONSTER QUEST.</i> THE ACCOUNTS OF AN ELUSIVE AND FEARSOME MONSTER KNOWN AS SASQUATCH HAVE PERSISTED FOR CENTURIES. THEY COME FROM EVERY CORNER OF THE COUNTRY. THE REPORTS HAVE UNEARTHED A WEALTH OF EVIDENCE, FROM TRACKS TO PHYSICAL CLUES, LIKE IMAGES OF THE BEAST. THIS SPECIAL<i> MONSTER QUEST</i> INVESTIGATION WILL ANALYZE THE MOST COMPELLING EVIDENCE FOR THE BEASTS' EXISTENCE. >> IT WAS A BLACK AND BROWNISH COLOR. >> THIS THING WAS HUGE: 8, 9 FEET TALL. >> IT HAD TO BE ABOUT--AT LEAST OVER 400 POUNDS. >> IT ACTUALLY STRUCK ME AS BEING LIKE A GREAT APE OF SOME KIND. >> narrator: EYEWITNESSES DESCRIBE A DARK, HAIRY CREATURE STANDING ON TWO FEET. IT IS SAID TO BE 7 TO 10 FEET TALL AND WEIGH NEARLY 400 POUNDS. THE BEAST IS KNOWN TO BEAT HIS CHEST WITH POWERFUL ARMS AND EMIT BLOODCURDLING SCREAMS. >> WHEN IT HAPPENS TO YOU, YOU'LL KNOW. [low growl] >> narrator: JIM HEBERT AND HIS FAMILY WERE ON VACATION WHEN THEY SAW SOMETHING THAT WOULD CHANGE THEIR LIVES FOREVER. >> I SCREAMED OUT, "WHAT IN THE HECK IS THAT?" AND THE FAMILY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT. >> AND EVERYBODY JUST KIND OF TURNED TO WHERE HE WAS POINTING. >> narrator: IN A CLEARING 60 FEET FROM THEIR LOCATION, THEY SAW A LARGE, FRIGHTENED CREATURE STARING BACK AT THEM. >> WHEN IT POPPED ITS HEAD UP, IT ACTUALLY STRUCK ME AS BEING LIKE A GREAT APE OF SOME KIND. >> IT WAS REAL BIG, REAL TALL. >> WE WERE FREAKED OUT. I MEAN, WE WERE ALL JUST STUNNED. THEY STILL REMEMBER WHAT I SAID. I SAID, "DO YOU REALIZE WE'VE SEEN A SASQUATCH?" AND MY WIFE SAID, "YEAH, I GUESS WE DID, DIDN'T WE?" >> I BELIEVE FOR SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, SASQUATCH IS OUT THERE. [low growl] >> narrator: IN THE LAST 40 YEARS, THERE HAVE BEEN MORE THAN 2,500 REPORTED SASQUATCH SIGHTINGS, YET MANY SCIENTISTS DOUBT THEIR EXISTENCE. >> THERE IS NO GOOD EVIDENCE, IN MY OPINION, FOR THE EXISTENCE OF BIGFOOT. >> narrator: DR. DAVID BEGUN, A PALEOANTHROPOLOGIST AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO IN CANADA, HAS BEEN STUDYING APE AND HUMAN SKELETONS FOR OVER 25 YEARS. >> WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST THE IDEA OF BIGFOOT, AND WE EVEN HAVE FOSSILS THAT TELL US THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING THIS SIZE THAT EXISTED ONLY A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND YEARS AGO. SO THERE'S NO PREDISPOSITION TO REJECTING THE IDEA OUT OF HAND; IT'S JUST THAT AS SCIENTISTS, WE REQUIRE RELIABLE, REPRODUCIBLE EVIDENCE THAT'S CONVINCING, AND THAT JUST DOESN'T EXIST RIGHT NOW. >> narrator: AMONG THE BEST EVIDENCE AVAILABLE: THE CONTROVERSIAL FREEMAN FOOTAGE, RECORDED IN THE BLUE MOUNTAINS, WASHINGTON, IN 1994... >> OH, THERE HE GOES. >> narrator: THE CRIPPLEFOOT TRACKS DISCOVERED IN 1969; AND THE MID-TARSAL BREAK, A UNIQUE CHARACTERISTIC OF MANY TRACKS FOUND IN RECENT YEARS. THE SCIENCE TEAM WILL ALSO MAP THE BIGFOOT SIGHTINGS OF THE LAST 40 YEARS, AS THEY EXAMINE THE LONG-HELD BELIEF THAT AREAS OF LARGE RAINFALL WOULD BE THE BEST HABITAT FOR A LARGE PRIMATE TO EXIST. AND THEY'LL LOOK AT THE MOST FAMOUS EVIDENCE OF ALL: THE 1967 RECORDINGS OF WHAT IS KNOWN SIMPLY AS THE PATTERSON-GIMLIN FILM. THE TEAM WILL REEXAMINE IT WITH THE LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN AN ATTEMPT TO TRY TO DETERMINE ITS AUTHENTICITY. THE FILM AS SHOT BY ROGER PATTERSON AND WITNESSED BY BOB GIMLIN. IT SHOWS A FIGURE WALKING NEAR A CREEK IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA. THE FILM HAS SPARKED DEBATE SINCE ITS UNVEILING. SOME SAY IT COULDN'T BE A HOAX. >> EITHER IT WAS MASTERFULLY TAILORED, OR IT'S SIMPLY NOT FUR CLOTH AT ALL. >> BILL MUNNS HAS BUILT REPRESENTATIONS OF PREHISTORIC ANIMALS FOR MUSEUMS AROUND THE WORLD. HE'S ALSO CREATED MONSTERS FOR HOLLYWOOD HITS, INCLUDING <i>SWAMP THING</i> AND<i> RETURN OF THE</i> <i>LIVING DEAD.</i> >> THAT'S POSITIONED ME, I THINK, IN A VERY, VERY GOOD WAY TO LOOK AT THE PATTERSON FILM AND MAKE SOME TYPE OF AN ANALYSIS OF WHETHER OR NOT WHAT YOU'RE SEEING THE FILM IS IN FACT A CREATURE OR A PERSON WHO WAS ACTUALLY WEARING A SUIT. >> narrator: MUNNS WILL FOCUS ON THE HEIGHT OF THE CREATURE, ITS BODY PROPORTION, AND THE SHAPE OF ITS HEAD. THIS SHOULD ALLOW HIM TO DETERMINE IF WHAT WAS CAPTURED ON FILM WAS HUMAN OR NOT. HE BEGINS BY ATTEMPTING TO ESTABLISH THE CREATURE'S HEIGHT USING AN OPTICAL FORMULA. >> THE BASIS OF THE FORMULA IS THAT THERE IS A RATIO BETWEEN IMAGE HEIGHT, FOCAL LENGTH, ACTUAL HEIGHT, CAMERA DISTANCE. IF YOU KNOW THREE NUMBERS, YOU CAN SOLVE FOR THE FOURTH NUMBER. >> narrator:<i> MONSTER QUEST</i> HAS PROVIDED HIGH-RESOLUTION IMAGES OF THE ORIGINAL FILM TO MUNNS. HE USES THE MEASUREMENTS TAKEN AT THE SCENE SHORTLY AFTER THE EVENT. >> SO WE ARE USING THREE KNOWN NUMBERS THAT ARE REPORTED. ONE IS FIRST THE ACTUAL HEIGHTH OF THE FIGURE SEEN IN THE FILM. THE SECOND WOULD BE THE REPORTED LENS ON THE CAMERA. THIRD IS THE REPORTED DISTANCE OF CAMERA TO SUBJECT. THOSE THREE NUMBERS ALLOW US TO SOLVE THE FOURTH, WHICH IS THE HEIGHTH OF THE ACTUAL FIGURE BEING PHOTOGRAPHED. >> narrator: MUNNS BEGINS HIS INITIAL CALCULATIONS ON THE FILM. >> INTERESTING. WE HAVE SOMETHING THAT IS ONLY 4.579 FEET TALL. SEEMS RATHER SHORT. >> narrator: HE IMMEDIATELY QUESTIONS THE RESULTS. THE FORMULA INDICATES THAT ONE OR MORE OF THE MEASUREMENTS TAKEN BACK IN THE 1960s WAS RECORDED INCORRECTLY. >> IDEALLY, WE SHOULD ATTEMPT TO GO TO THE LOCATION ITSELF, SEE WHAT IS STILL STANDING, TAKE MEASUREMENTS OURSELF. >> narrator: THE<i> MONSTER QUEST</i> EXPEDITION TEAM WILL TRAVEL TO THE SITE WHERE THE ORIGINAL FILM WAS RECORDED: BLUFF CREEK, CALIFORNIA. IT IS AN ELEVATED AREA OF THE SIX RIVERS NATIONAL PARK IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, JUST 50 MILES FROM THE TOWN OF WILLOW CREEK. THE TEAM WILL USE A 3-D, HIGH-DEFINITION SCANNING STATION TO CREATE A DIGITAL REPLICA FOR TESTING. >> THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE TRIP, OF COURSE, IS TO FIND SOMETHING WE CAN RELIABLY SAY IS THE ENVIRONMENT SO THAT WE CAN DERIVE DIGITAL MEASUREMENTS FROM IT. >> DOUG DEVINE, A MEASUREMENTS EXPERT, WILL LEAD THE TEAM. >> IT'LL BE REALLY MIND-BOGGLING. IT'S GONNA BE SOMETHING THAT NO ONE'S EVER SEEN BEFORE, AND IT'LL GIVE ALL OF THE OLD INFORMATION JUST A WHOLE NEW-- WHOLE NEW ASPECT. IT'S GONNA BE PRETTY AMAZING. >> narrator: TO EXPEDITE THE PROCESS, THE TEAM WILL ATTEMPT TO ACCESS THE PATTERSON SITE BY HELICOPTER. >> IT'S DANGEROUS, AND FLYING THOSE--THESE LIGHT HELICOPTERS IN THOSE CANYONS--THE CANYONS ARE SO STEEP, IT CREATES A LOT OF CRAZY WINDS UP IN THERE. >> narrator: JAMES FAY, THE TEAM'S GUIDE, HAS BEEN TO THE SITE WITH BOB GIMLIN, WHO WAS THERE THE DAY THE CREATURE WAS FIRST FILMED. >> I'M JUST GONNA POINT 'EM OUT WHERE HE SAID HE WAS, WHERE ROGER WAS, WHERE ROGER RAN, AND--WHILE HE WAS FILMING, AND WHERE THE CREATURE WAS IN RELATION TO WHERE THEY WERE-- WHERE IT WAS, SO THEY CAN GET SOME MEASUREMENTS. >> narrator: THE CONDITIONS AREN'T COOPERATING. >> THE WEATHER'S SUPPOSED TO BE PRETTY SAVAGE, COMING UP HERE. IT'S A BIG STORM COMING. IT'S A REAL STORM COMING IN. >> IF IT GETS UP INTO THAT 40-MILE-AN-HOUR RANGE, I'M PROBABLY GONNA ABORT THE MISSION, OKAY? THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS. SO IN A CASE OF AN EMERGENCY AND WE GOT TO SET DOWN AND IT'S FAST OR A HARD LANDING, KNOW THAT WHEN YOU EVACUATE THE HELICOPTER, YOU'VE GOT TO PULL THAT LEVER UP PAST 90 DEGREES, OTHERWISE IT WON'T LET YOU RELEASE. [helicopter engine whirring] [dramatic instrumental music] ♪ ♪ >> narrator: THE TEAM ASCENDS QUICKLY TO 2,500 FEET AND REALIZES THEY ARE FACING ANOTHER CHALLENGE. >> I MEAN, LOOK AT THE AMOUNT OF SNOW WE'VE GOT HERE AT THIS ELEVATION, AND WE'RE NOT--WE'RE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO THE ZONE YET. >> narrator:<i> MONSTER QUEST</i> IS CONDUCTING A SPECIAL INVESTIGATION EXAMINING THE BEST EVIDENCE TO DATE OF THE EXISTENCE OF SASQUATCH. AFTER 40 YEARS, THE FAMED PATTERSON-GIMLIN FOOTAGE CAPTURED IN BLUFF CREEK, CALIFORNIA, MAY STILL BE THE BEST EVIDENCE OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE BEAST. THE DEBATE ABOUT ITS AUTHENTICITY, HOWEVER, RAGES ON. >> I BELIEVE ABOUT 99.9% THAT THIS IS A REAL FILM OF A REAL CREATURE. >> narrator: AUTHOR DAVID MURPHY HAS SPENT THE PAST 11 YEARS WRITING A BIOGRAPHY OF ROGER PATTERSON, THE MAN WHO SHOT THE SUPPOSED SASQUATCH FILM. >> I'VE INTERVIEWED OVER 70 PEOPLE THAT EITHER HAD SOME ACQUAINTANCE--WHETHER THEY WERE FRIENDS OR ASSOCIATES--WITH ROGER PATTERSON AND BOB GIMLIN, AND I'VE YET TO FIND ONE PERSON THAT DIDN'T THINK HIGHLY OF BOTH INDIVIDUALS. >> narrator: HE ALSO SAYS PATTERSON NOT ONLY TOOK BUT PASSED A POLYGRAPH EXAMINATION. >> ACCORDING TO<i> NATIONAL</i> <i> WILDLIFE</i> MAGAZINE, THE ARTICLE WRITTEN BY GEORGE HARRISON IN 1970, THE EDITOR OF THE MAGAZINE, DICK KIRKPATRICK, BASICALLY CONTACTED ROGER PATTERSON AND STATED THAT HE NEEDED TO TAKE A POLYGRAPH TEST. [low growl] >> narrator: PATTERSON OFFERED WHAT HE SAID WAS THE FIRST FILM EVER TAKEN OF SASQUATCH TO<i> NATIONAL WILDLIFE</i> MAGAZINE. THE EDITOR, KIRKPATRICK, WORRIED THAT IT MIGHT BE A FAKE AND ORDERED THE TEST. >> THE ARTICLE GOES ON TO STATE THAT ROGER GLADLY AGREED TO TAKE IT. >> NOW, MR. PATTERSON, WHERE WERE YOU ON OCTOBER 20, 1967? >> BLUFF CREEK, CALIFORNIA. >> MR. PATTERSON, IS THE CREATURE IN YOUR FILM REAL? >> YES. >> IT WAS REPORTED BACK TO THE MAGAZINE BY THE EXAMINER THAT ROGER PASSED THE POLYGRAPH TEST WITH FLYING COLORS. [low growl] >> narrator: FRAME IMAGES FROM PATTERSON'S FILM WERE PRINTED IN THE APRIL EDITION OF THE MAGAZINE. PATTERSON DIED IN 1972. HE SWORE TO HIS FINAL DAY THAT THE FILM WAS AUTHENTIC. >> ROGER'S BEEN DEAD FOR DECADES, AND PEOPLE ARE STILL VILIFYING HIM, AND PRETTY MUCH, HE ANSWERED ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT NEEDED TO BE ANSWERED WHEN HE WAS ALIVE. >> narrator: THE<i> MONSTER QUEST</i> SCIENCE TEAM WILL REEXAMINE THE FOOTAGE USING STATE-OF-THE-ART TECHNOLOGY. >> THE CAMERA WAS MOVING, THE SUBJECT WAS MOVING, AND AS A RESULT, YOU HAVE A BLUR OF THE SUBJECT THAT OBSCURES DETAIL. >> narrator: PROFESSOR JEFF SEDLIK IS A FORENSIC SPECIALIST AND A LEADING EXPERT ON IMAGE MANIPULATION. HE MAY BE ABLE TO TELL IF THE FILM IS OF A REAL CREATURE. >> WE'RE NOT WORKING IN COMMERCIAL SOFTWARE, THE KIND OF SOFTWARE THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO A CONSUMER OR EVEN TO A PROFESSIONAL. WE'VE DEVELOPED OUR OWN APPLICATIONS AND OUR OWN SCRIPTS AND ALGORITHMS THAT ARE DESIGNED TO MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF DETAIL THAT WE CAN PULL OUT OF IMAGES. >> narrator: HE WILL BE ENHANCING THE FILM TO LOOK FOR UNDETECTED CLUES. >> WHAT I WANT TO DO IS PROVIDE AN OBJECTIVE OPINION ABOUT THE EVIDENCE THAT'S PUT IN FRONT OF ME. SO I'M LOOKING PURELY AT VIDEO EVIDENCE AND PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE AND COMING TO MY OWN CONCLUSIONS. >> narrator: THE FIRST STEP IS TO ESTABLISH IF THE FILM HAS BEEN TAMPERED WITH. >> FIRST OF ALL, THE FOOTAGE CAME FROM 16-MILLIMETER FILM AND THEN WAS TRANSFERRED TO VIDEO, AND WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE'S MANIPULATION OF THE FOOTAGE HERE. WE'RE GONNA BREAK THE IMAGE DOWN INTO ITS COMPONENT PARTS. WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT ALL THE PIXELS. WE'RE GONNA ZOOM IN CLOSE, LOOK FOR MANIPULATION OF THE IMAGE. WE'RE GOING TO OPEN EVERY CHANNEL, EVERY COLOR CHANNEL, IN THE IMAGE AND ANALYZE IT SEPARATELY BECAUSE SOMETIMES CERTAIN COLOR CHANNELS CAN REVEAL MORE DETAIL THAN OTHERS, IF WE SUPPRESS CERTAIN CHANNELS AND OPEN UP OTHERS. FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE WANT TO GO IN AND LOOK AT JUST THIS BLUE CHANNEL, WE CAN SEE MORE DETAIL IN THE FACE AND IN THE FUR HERE THAN WE CAN WITH ALL THE CHANNELS TURNED ON. AND SIMILARLY, WE CAN ALSO GO WITH OTHER CHANNELS, INCLUDING WIPING OUT ALL THE COLOR, AND ZOOMING IN AND ATTEMPTING TO SEE DETAIL, WHICH WE CAN SEE MORE OF WHEN WE STRIP OUT SOME OF THE COLOR. >> narrator: PERHAPS THE NEXT MOST COMPELLING EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF SASQUATCH ARE THE NUMEROUS EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS. USING MAPPING TECHNOLOGY, MONSTER QUEST WILL LOOK FOR SIGHTING HOT SPOTS. >> WHAT WE'RE EXPLORING HERE IS WHETHER THERE'S A CORRELATION BETWEEN AVERAGE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION AND SASQUATCH SIGHTINGS. >> narrator: FRANK ORR IS A GEOGRAPHIC ANALYST. USING GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS, OR G.I.S., HE'LL BE CHARTING ALL OF THE EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS SINCE THE PATTERSON FOOTAGE WAS SHOT. >> FIRST THING THAT JUMPS OUT RIGHT AWAY--IT WAS SURPRISING TO ME--IS THE NUMBER OF SIGHTINGS ACTUALLY IN THE EASTERN UNITED STATES, SOMETHING I WASN'T EXPECTING. WE SEE A LOT OF SIGHTINGS IN CALIFORNIA, OREGON, AND WASHINGTON. AND THEN AS WE MOVE ACROSS THE INTERMONTANE WEST, YOU CAN SEE THE SIGHTINGS BECOME MORE AND MORE LIMITED. >> narrator: THE MAP SHOWS THE NUMBER OF SIGHTINGS PER SQUARE MILE. THE AREAS IN DARK BLUE HAVE THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION OF REPORTS. AND ONE OF THE DENSEST AREAS IS NEAR BLUFF CREAK. >> WE NOW HAVE A MAP. WE HAVE A SET OF DATA POINTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY THAT WE CAN COMPARE, APPLES TO APPLES, TO THE PRECIPITATION VALUES. >> narrator: ORR ADDS THE NEXT LAYER WHICH SHOWS AVERAGE ANNUAL PRECIPITATION. THIS IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE A HIGH DENSITY OF RAINFALL WOULD BE CRUCIAL FOR THE SURVIVAL OF A LARGE PRIMATE IN THE WILD. THE AREAS WITH THE MOST RAINFALL ARE REPRESENTED BY BLUE AND GREEN; THOSE WITH THE LEAST, BY DARK ORANGE AND RED. >> AND IT REALLY IS QUITE STRIKING THE FACT THAT WHEN YOU PASS THIS LINE, KIND OF THIS 100TH MERIDIAN HERE, WHERE THE AVERAGE ANNUAL RAINFALL REALLY STARTS TO DROP OFF, YOU SEE A VERY LIMITED NUMBER OF SIGHTINGS. IT SEEMS LIKE A VERY STRONG CORRELATION BETWEEN SIGHTINGS AND RAINFALL, AS YOU CAN SEE INDICATED BY THE DARK BLUE AREAS. SO WE'VE SORT OF SEEN, AT LEAST LOOKING AT THE MAP, THAT SIGHTINGS SEEM TO OCCUR WHERE THERE'S MORE ANNUAL AVERAGE PRECIPITATION. >> narrator: ORR EXAMINES THE DATA IN BAR CHART FORM. >> ABOUT 80% TO 85% OF AREAS ACROSS THE UNITED STATES EXPERIENCE SOMETHING LESS THAN ABOUT 50 INCHES OF PRECIPITATION ANNUALLY. IF YOU LOOK AT THE SAME BAR CHART FOR THE SIGHTING LOCATIONS, YOU CAN SEE THAT MOST SIGHTING LOCATIONS ACTUALLY TEND TO BE IN AREAS THAT ARE ANYWHERE BETWEEN 50 AND 100 INCHES OF PRECIPITATION A YEAR. SO IT IS TRUE THAT MOST SIGHTING LOCATIONS OCCUR WHERE THERE IS MORE ANNUAL AVERAGE PRECIPITATION. AND I THINK G.I.S. IS A GREAT TOOL TO USE TO LOOK AT THE DISTRIBUTION OF SIGHTING LOCATIONS TO ATTEMPT TO CORRELATE IT WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS TO HOPEFULLY COME UP WITH SOME SORT OF A PREDICTIVE MODEL TO HELP GUIDE US IN DETERMINING WHERE SIGHTINGS ARE MOST LIKELY TO OCCUR, AND IF THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO MAKE USE OF THAT INFORMATION TO TARGET THEIR STUDIES, I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT USE OF THE TECHNOLOGY. >> narrator: THERE HAVE ALSO BEEN A LARGE NUMBER OF CASTS MADE OF SASQUATCH TRACKS. DR. JEFF MELDRUM WILL EXAMINE THESE FOR SIMILARITIES. >> WELL, I'M OFTEN ASKED WHAT'S THE BEST EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF SASQUATCH, AND, FOR ME, WITHOUT A DOUBT, IT'S THE COMPOSITE CASE MADE UP OF THE FOOTPRINTS THEMSELVES. >> narrator: MELDRUM HAS DISCOVERED A NEW WAY TO EXAMINE THE CASTS TO SEE IF THEY REALLY BELONG TO AN UNIDENTIFIED CREATURE. HE LOOKS FOR A MID-TARSAL BREAK, A FLEXIBLE AREA OF THE FOOT FOUND IN GREAT APES, BUT NOT IN HUMANS. >> WELL, THE MID-TARSAL BREAK CAN BE CONSIDERED ALMOST AS IF THERE WERE A HINGE IN THE MIDDLE PART OF THE FOOT THAT ALLOWS THE HEEL TO MOVE SOMEWHAT SEPARATELY FROM THE FORE PART OF THE FOOT. >> narrator: MELDRUM WILL LASER SCAN THE CAST TO CREATE A DETAILED, ANIMATED MODEL THAT HE CAN EXAMINE TO DETERMINE IF THE MID-TARSAL BREAK IS PRESENT. >> BASICALLY, WE TAKE EITHER THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT SPECIMEN OR A DUPLICATE THAT I'VE GENERATED HERE IN THE LABORATORY, AND WE PLACE THIS ON THE GURNEY, AND IT GOES THROUGH A SERIES OF PASSES IN WHICH A LASER SCANS THE SURFACE IN EXCRUCIATING DETAIL AND GENERATES THEN A THREE-DIMENSIONAL MODEL. >> narrator: THE DATA WILL BE USED TO BUILD AN ANIMATED MODEL THAT WILL SHOW HOW THE CREATURE ACTUALLY WALKED AND DETERMINE ONCE AND FOR ALL WHETHER THE TRACKS WERE MADE BY A LARGE, NONHUMAN PRIMATE. >> IT'S HUGE. IT REALLY IS HUGE, AS FAR AS BOLSTERING THE CREDIBILITY OF THESE FOOTPRINTS. HERE'S A FEATURE THAT IS KNOWN TO MAYBE A HALF DOZEN ANTHROPOLOGISTS IN THE UNITED STATES. >> narrator:<i> MONSTER QUEST</i> IS CONDUCTING A SPECIAL INVESTIGATION OF SASQUATCH, LOOKING AT THE BEST EVIDENCE OF ITS EXISTENCE. THE FREEMAN FOOTAGE, SHOT ON VIDEO IN 1994, IS CONSIDERED TO BE SOME OF THE MOST CONVINCING PHOTOGRAPH EVIDENCE SINCE THE PATTERSON FILM. IT WAS SHOT IN THE BLUE MOUNTAINS LOCATED ON THE BORDER OF OREGON AND WASHINGTON STATE. DR. JEFF MELDRUM IS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE FOOTAGE. >> TRACKS WERE REPORTEDLY FOUND AT A SPRING. PAUL FREEMAN HAD GONE THERE TO FILM THE TRACKS. >> OH, YEAH. LOOK AT THAT. >> WHILE HE WAS IN FACT FILMING THEM, SOMETHING BROKE OUT FROM THE TREE LINE AND MADE A QUICK APPEARANCE IN THE OPEN BEFORE IT RETREATED BACK INTO THE BRUSH AND DISAPPEARED VERY QUICKLY, RETREATED INTO THE DISTANCE. >> OH, THERE HE GOES. JESUS. >> narrator: PAUL FREEMAN, WHO FILMED THE EVENT, WAS A FOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEE BUT ALSO A SASQUATCH ENTHUSIAST. THIS PREVENTED MANY FROM TAKING HIS REPORT SERIOUSLY AND RESULTED IN THE FOREST SERVICE DOING AN INTERNAL INVESTIGATION. >> HIS COWORKERS WITH THE FOREST SERVICE WHEN THEY INVESTIGATED HIS SIGHTING AND THE ASSOCIATED FOOTPRINTS WERE EXTREMELY IMPRESSED. THEY WERE IMPRESSED ENOUGH TO BRING IN A BORDER PATROL TRACKER TO EXAMINE IT TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF IT. THEY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THERE HAD BEEN FOOTPRINTS FOUND IN THE AREA BEFORE FREEMAN EVER ARRIVED ON THE SCENE. >> ABOUT 9 INCHES LONG. >> narrator: DR. MELDRUM WAS ABLE TO MEET FREEMAN BEFORE FREEMAN DIED IN 2003. >> IF I WAS PRESSED FOR AN OPINION ON THE FREEMAN VIDEO, I WOULD SAY THAT THE SCALE TIPS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. I THINK, REGARDLESS OF WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID ABOUT PAUL FREEMAN PERSONALLY, THAT THIS VIDEO CLIP, ON ITS OWN MERITS, DEPICT SOMETHING THAT LOOKS VERY SPONTANEOUS AND VERY NATURAL IN ITS APPEARANCE AND BEHAVIOR AND IS QUITE CONSISTENT WITH DESCRIPTIONS OF SASQUATCH. >> narrator: THE VIDEO IS VERY DISTORTED. IT WAS SHOT ON LOW-QUALITY 8-MILLIMETER TAPE WHICH HAD REPORTEDLY BEEN REUSED MANY TIMES. THE SCIENCE TEAM'S IMAGING EXPERT, JEFF SEDLIK, WILL TRY TO CLEAN UP THE IMAGE TO GET A BETTER RESOLUTION OF THE VIDEO. >> THE ISSUE WITH THE CONSUMER-LEVEL VIDEO CAMERAS IS THAT WHEN YOU MAGNIFY IT, YOU'LL FIND THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME COMPRESSION OF THE VIDEO AS IT'S BEING RECORDED. AND WHEN AN IMAGE IS COMPRESSED, IT BREAKS IT UP INTO EITHER TINY LINES OR TINY BLOCKS LIKE BUILDING BLOCKS, AND ONCE YOU GET DOWN TO THOSE BUILDING BLOCKS, YOU CAN'T GET BEYOND IT TO SEE THE DETAIL THAT WAS ORIGINALLY RECEIVED BY THE SENSOR OF THE CAMERA. >> narrator: SEDLIK RUNS SEVERAL ENHANCEMENTS, SHARPENING AND DEFINING THE VIDEO. IT DOES PROVIDE A BETTER IMAGE. >> WE WERE ABLE TO SHARPEN THE FIGURE SOMEWHAT TO SHOW A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL BUT, FOR THE MOST PART, JUST CAN OUTLINE OF THE FIGURE, MAYBE PART OF THE FACE, BUT NO DETAIL THAT WOULD ASSIST IN DETERMINING WHAT KIND OF BEING THIS MIGHT BE. >> narrator: THE EXPEDITION TEAM IS ATTEMPTING TO FIND THE ORIGINAL LOCATION OF THE PATTERSON FILM IN CALIFORNIA'S SIX RIVERS NATIONAL PARK. THEIR GOAL IS TO TAKE MEASUREMENTS NEEDED TO DETERMINE THE FILM'S LEGITIMACY. THEY NEED TO LAND, BUT THE SNOW IS MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO PICK OUT LANDMARKS. >> THERE WAS THAT LITTLE ISLAND IN THE MIDDLE. THERE'S THE ISLAND. >> OKAY, IT'S 45, 26. YEAH, WE'RE--WE'RE RIGHT THERE. OKAY, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND LOCK IT ON THE GPS HERE, BOTH GPSs. >> narrator: THE ELEVATION IS 1,000 FEET HIGHER THAN ORIGINALLY THOUGHT. >> YOU KNOW WHAT, GUYS? THERE'S WAY MORE SNOW HERE AT THIS 2,500-FOOT ELEVATION THAN I THOUGHT, SO I'M NOT SURE HOW WE'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO DO IT. I'M JUST GONNA TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, THERE'S AT LEAST THREE FEET OF SNOW, MAYBE MORE, DOWN THERE, AND IT'S HEAVY, WET SNOW, AND WE JUST CAN'T GO THERE. >> narrator: THE WEATHER MAKES IT IMPOSSIBLE TO LAND AT THE EXACT LOCATION OF THE FILM SITE, SO THE TEAM ATTEMPTS TO REACH THE LOCATION BY FOOT. >> YEAH, A LITTLE THICKER THAN WE WERE EXPECTING. >> YEAH, RANDY, IT'S TWO FEET. >> YEAH. YEAH, THIS IS-- YEAH, THIS IS EXCEPTIONAL. THAT WAS--IT'S BEEN DUMPING MORE THAN NORMAL. >> narrator: IT'S ALWAYS DANGEROUS TO LAND ON SNOW BECAUSE IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO TELL WHAT IS UNDERNEATH. THE POSSIBILITY OF A DYNAMIC ROLLOVER IS ALWAYS ON A PILOT'S MIND. >> IF SOMETHING CATCHES ME LEFT, RIGHT, OR ON THE SIDE-- IT HOOKS MY SKID--WHICH COULD BE A ROCK OR A SNAG OR SOMETHING UNDER THE SNOW, BECAUSE OF THAT HUGE ENERGY INERTIA, IT WILL FLIP THE HELICOPTER OVER INSTANTLY, AND I CAN'T CORRECT IT. IT DESTROYS THE AIRCRAFT. WE'RE STUCK WAY OUT WHERE RESCUE IS GONNA BE DIFFICULT. >> YEAH, WE TRIED, AND WE HAD AN EXPERIENCED SEARCH-AND-RESCUE-TRAINED PILOT WHO'S NOT AFRAID TO GO INTO RISKY PLACES, AND IT WAS-- IT WAS TOO MUCH EVEN FOR THAT. >> narrator: THE TEAM WILL NEED TO USE A DIFFERENT PROCESS TO DETERMINE THE SIZE OF THE ANIMAL IN THE FILM. >> I WILL HAVE TO APPLY A PHOTOGRAMMETRY-TYPE ANALYSIS TO THE SITE TO TRY AND CONCLUSIVELY DETERMINE WHERE ALL OF THE VARIOUS OBJECTS ARE IN THE SCENE. >> narrator: PHOTOGRAMMETRY USES MEASUREMENTS DERIVED FROM TWO-DIMENSIONAL IMAGES TO CREATE A THREE-DIMENSIONAL, DIGITAL MODEL. THE BASIS FOR THE MEASUREMENT IS THE 25-MILLIMETER LENS THAT PATTERSON USED TO RECORD THE CREATURE. BUT WHEN MUNNS INPUTS THE DATA, THERE IS A PROBLEM. >> THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS, THE CLOSEST TREE OF THE GROUP OF FOUR--THIS PARTICULAR ONE RIGHT HERE WHICH LEANS A LITTLE AND GOES STRAIGHT UP--THIS ONE DOES NOT ALIGN AT ALL IN POSITION OR IN SIZE. I NEVER SEEM TO GET A CORRECT ALIGNMENT USING THE SPECIFICATION OF A 25-MILLIMETER LENS. THE ONLY CONCLUSION I CAN COME TO IS THAT A WIDER ANGLE LENS MUST BE ON THAT CAMERA. >> narrator: MUNNS THEORIZES THAT PATTERSON MAY HAVE BEEN USING A DIFFERENT LENS. >> A STANDARD 25... AND LOOK HERE, WE DO HAVE A 15-MILLIMETER CINE EKTAR LENS. THAT WOULD DO JUST ABOUT PERFECTLY. >> narrator: THE NEW DATA MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE. >> AS SOON AS I SUBSTITUTED THE 15-MILLIMETER VIEWING ANGLE, THE MODEL ASSEMBLED IN A MATTER OF HOURS, AND IT WAS ACTUALLY QUITE ASTONISHING. SO IMMEDIATELY, I WAS CONFIDENT THAT THE 15-MILLIMETER LENS WAS THE CORRECT ONE. NOW, THE FIRST THING THAT CAUGHT MY MIND WAS THAT THIS DEFIES EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE ELSE HAS REPORTED FOR 41 YEARS. WHAT I DID NOT REALIZE AT THE TIME WAS THE RAMIFICATIONS IT WOULD HAVE ON THE ENTIRE ANALYSIS OF THE CREATURE AND ITS HEIGHTH. IT WAS ONLY AFTER I BEGAN TO REVISIT THE OPTICAL FORMULA WITH THE 15-MILLIMETER LENS THAT I REALIZED THAT IT INCREASES THE HEIGHTH OF THE CREATURE TREMENDOUSLY, FOR ANY GIVEN FRAME, FOR ANY GIVEN DISTANCE. AND THAT, IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, WAS THE REAL GAME CHANGER, IF YOU WILL, FOR THIS ENTIRE ANALYSIS. >> narrator: THIS MEANS THAT MUNNS CAN NOW ACCURATELY RECREATE THE SCENE AND, FOR THE FIRST TIME, DETERMINE THE ACTUAL HEIGHT OF THE CREATURE. >> THIS CREATURE IS APPROXIMATELY 7'4" TALL. AND I'M ALLOWING A MARGIN OF ERROR BETWEEN 7'2" AND 7'6". BUT EVEN WITHIN THAT MARGIN OF ERROR, THIS IS SOMETHING QUITE EXTRAORDINARY. IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY TO BE A HUMAN BEING. >> narrator: MUNNS WILL NOW MAKE ACCURATE MEASUREMENTS OF DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE CREATURES BODY TO SEE IF THE DIMENSIONS FIT WITH THOSE OF A PRIMATE. >> AS A PERSON WHO DESIGNS SUITS, ONE OF OUR MOST COMMON CONCERNS IS THE VERY SIMPLE REALITY THAT, IF WE HAVE A DESIGN OR A SHAPE, WILL A REAL HUMAN FIT INTO IT? >> narrator: HE ILLUSTRATES THE ISSUE BY COMPARING THE DIMENSIONS OF HIS OWN HEAD WITH A FULL-SCALE REPLICA HEAD OF A SILVERBACK GORILLA. >> NOW, IF WE TAKE THIS GORILLA HEAD AND WE SUPERIMPOSE IT ON TOP OF MINE, ALIGNING EYES TO EYES, WE NOW SEE THAT EVEN THOUGH THE HEAD IS LARGER, MY FOREHEAD STILL STICKS UP OUTSIDE OF THE HEAD. I COULD NOT WEAR THIS MASK. >> narrator: EVEN BY USING FRAME-BY-FRAME ANALYSIS, IT IS DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE THE EXACT HEAD SHAPE OF THE CREATURE IN THE PATTERSON FILM. MUNNS BELIEVES THAT THE ILLUSION OF THE HEAD CHANGING SHAPE IS PROBABLY DUE TO MOTION BLUR IN THE FILM. >> HERE YOU CAN SEE HOW ASTONISHINGLY POINTED IT IS, HOW FLAT IT IS ACROSS HERE, RISES ACROSS HERE. IT'S MORE OF A ROUNDED DOME HERE. AGAIN FLAT. AGAIN POINTED. THE REASON THAT THIS IS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN IS THAT IF OUR HEAD SHAPE IS SOMETHING LIKE THIS PARTICULAR ONE, AS AN EXAMPLE, IT MAY PROVE TO BE A TYPE OF A HEAD THAT WE ACTUALLY CANNOT PUT A HUMAN INSIDE. >> narrator: MUNNS WILL BUILD FIVE DIFFERENT HEAD SHAPES. HE WILL THEN FILM EACH ONE USING THE SAME MODEL OF CAMERA AND LENS USED FOR THE ORIGINAL PATTERSON FOOTAGE. HE HOPES THE COMPARISON WILL ALLOW HIM TO DETERMINE THE ACTUAL HEAD SHAPE OF THE CREATURE. >> THESE WERE SPECIFICALLY CUSTOM-DESIGNED TO TEST CONCEPTS OF SHAPE AS WE SEE IN THE FILM. >> THE FIRST HEAD IS HUMAN SHAPED, AND EACH SUBSEQUENT DESIGN IS MORE AND MORE APELIKE. >> FOR THIS EXPERIMENT, THE DESIGN OF IT WAS TO ALLOW FIVE DIFFERENT HEADS TO BE EASILY INTERCHANGEABLE ON THIS BASIC RIG SO THAT EACH ONE WILL SIMPLY SLIDE IN PLACE. YEAH, WE'RE SET AT 60 FEET. AND WE'LL MARK OUR POSITION HERE. 16 FRAMES. WE'RE LOOKING AT f/16 FOR 100 ASA FILM. EXCELLENT. EXCELLENT. GOOD DEPTH OF FIELD. >> narrator: MUNNS' EXPERIMENT REVEALS A SHOCKING RESULT. >> IT CERTAINLY WAS A VERY, VERY STRANGE AND INTERESTING DISCOVERY. >> narrator: THIS SPECIAL <i> MONSTER QUEST</i> INVESTIGATION IS TESTING THE MOST CRITICAL EVIDENCE OF THE CREATURE KNOWN AS SASQUATCH. THE SCIENCE TEAM'S DATA HAS DETERMINED THAT EYEWITNESS SIGHTINGS SEEM TO OCCUR DURING SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS. AND SIGHTINGS SEEN BY MORE THAN ONE EYEWITNESS FURTHER CORROBORATE THE ENCOUNTERS WITH THESE FRIGHTENING BEASTS. >> I COULDN'T BELIEVE WHAT I'D SEEN. [low growl] >> narrator: DEAN DEWEES AND DAVID KERNOUL WERE PLAYING CARDS WHEN THEY HEARD SOMETHING OUTSIDE. [metal clattering] >> WELL, IT WAS QUITE A BIT OF RACKET GOING ON IN THE BACK OF THE HOUSE THERE WHERE THE ANIMALS WHERE KEPT. >> narrator: THEY LET THEIR DOGS OUT, AND THE CANINES WENT TOWARDS THE NOISE, BUT ONLY MOMENTS LATER, THE DOGS CAME RUNNING BACK WHIMPERING. >> THEY WANTED BACK IN DESPERATELY, AND WHEN WE LET THEM IN, THEY ALL RUN OVER TO THE ONE CORNER OF THE HOUSE AND JUST COWERED IN THE CORNER. THEY WERE SCARED TO DEATH. >> AND I SAID, "WELL, I BETTER GO OUT AND CHECK," YOU KNOW. AND I HEADED DOWN, AND THEN I SEEN THE CHICKENS FLYING ALL AROUND ABOUT 50 FEET AWAY INSIDE THEIR CAGE. [chickens clucking] >> narrator: HE NOTICED A LARGE HOLE RIPPED IN THE CHICKEN WIRE AND THEN SAW A TALL, HAIRY CREATURE WITH A CHICKEN IN ITS GRIP. HE RAN BACK INSIDE TO GET DEWEES AND A 20-GAUGE SHOTGUN. >> I GUESS, BOY, OH, BOY, I'D NEVER SAW A BIGFOOT BEFORE, BUT, BOY, I SAW ONE THEN. THIS THING WAS HUGE: 8, 9 FEET TALL. >> narrator: THEY FIRED SEVERAL SHOTS OVER THE CREATURE'S HEAD BEFORE IT RETREATED INTO THE DARK. IT WAS WINTER, AND THE FROZEN GROUND LEFT NO TRACE OF THE BEAST. >> THERE'S NO QUESTION IN MY MIND WHAT I SAW, AND YOU JUST-- YOU JUST GOT TO SEE IT TO BELIEVE IT. [low growl] >> narrator: DR. JEFF MELDRUM HAS SCANNED HUNDREDS OF TRACK CASTS, LOOKING FOR A TELLTALE MID-TARSAL BREAK REPORTED TO BE UNIQUE TO NONHUMAN PRIMATES. HE HAS USED SOME OF THESE CASTS TO CREATE AN ANIMATION ILLUSTRATING HOW THE CREATURE WOULD HAVE HAD TO WALK TO BE ABLE TO PRODUCE SUCH TRACKS. >> THE PUSH-OFF THEN COMES FROM THE ENTIRE FOREFOOT RATHER THAN THROUGH THE TOES, AND SO WE SEE THE FOOT SIMPLY LIFT OFF... >> narrator: THE ANALYSIS REVEALS THAT THE MAKEUP OF THE PRINT HAS A DEFINITE BEND TO THE MIDFOOT CALLED A MID-TARSAL BREAK. THIS IS NOT A CHARACTERISTIC FOUND IN HUMANS. >> SO IN SHORT, THE SASQUATCH FOOT HAS FEATURES OF THE SKELETAL STRUCTURE THAT ARE MORE SIMILAR TO THAT OF A PRIMATE THAN TO A MODERN HUMAN. >> narrator: MELDRUM BELIEVES THAT THIS IS CRUCIAL EVIDENCE. THE DISCOVERY, OR THE RECOGNITION, RATHER, OF THE MID-TARSAL BREAK IN SASQUATCH FOOTPRINTS IS VERY, VERY SIGNIFICANT. I MEAN, IT'S HUGE. IT REALLY IS HUGE. PERSONALLY, I THINK THIS IS ALL BUT SHORT OF PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF SASQUATCH. >> narrator: MELDRUM BELIEVES THIS MAY BE THE MOST IMPORTANT REVELATION OF TRACK-BASED EVIDENCE SINCE THE CRIPPLEFOOT TRACKS WERE FOUND IN 1969. THE CRIPPLEFOOT FINDING IN WASHINGTON STATE WAS OF 1,089 TRACKS, MANY OF WHICH INDICATED A DEFORMITY OF THE RIGHT FOOT. DR. MELDRUM CONSULTS DR. DAVID HOWE, AN ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON. >> I THINK THAT'S VERY PLAUSIBLE THAT IT'S A FOOTPRINT OF SOME PERSON, SOME BEING, SOMETHING. >> narrator: HE WILL USE CASTS OF THE CRIPPLEFOOT TRACKS AND A SKELETAL RECONSTRUCTION MADE BY DR. MELDRUM TO DETERMINE THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE TRACKS. >> IN ORTHOPEDICS AND IN EXAMS OF THE FEET AND ANKLES, THERE HAVE BEEN IMPROVEMENTS IN THE LAST 10, 15 YEARS THAT ALLOW US TO LOOK CLOSER AT THE BIOMECHANICS, THE IMPRINT OF A FOOT IN THE HUMAN PATIENTS. >> narrator: DR. HOWE WILL ANALYZE THE GAIT AND SPACING OF THE CRIPPLEFOOT TRACKS. HE WILL PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE IMPRINTS OF THE DEFORMED RIGHT FOOT TO SEE IF IT COULD BE ANY KNOWN MEDICAL CONDITION. >> THE MAIN THING ABOUT HUMANS IS THAT WE'RE BIPEDAL, THAT WE WALK ON TWO LEGS INSTEAD OF FOUR, AND THAT HAS HAD A DRAMATIC IMPACT ON THE STRUCTURE OF OUR BODIES. >> narrator: DAVID BEGUN, A PALEOANTHROPOLOGIST, IS SKEPTICAL. HE'S LOOKING FOR HUMAN CHARACTERISTICS IN THE PATTERSON FILM. >> THIS INDIVIDUAL, YOU CAN SEE, HE'S WALKING JUST LIKE A PERSON WALKS, ONE FOOT AT A TIME. IT'S COMFORTABLE IN THE DAYTIME. IT'S NOT ALARMED BY THE PRESENCE OF HORSES AND HUMANS. NOW, IF ALL OF THAT IS TRUE, THEN YOU WOULD THINK THAT WE WOULD'VE RUN INTO THESE MORE FREQUENTLY THAN WE HAVE. THE KNEES ARE ALMOST FULLY EXTENDED: YOU KNOW, AT THE KNEE JOINT, THE LEG IS COMPLETELY STRAIGHT, OR ALMOST COMPLETELY STRAIGHT. THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE IN MODERN HUMANS. IT'S MUCH MORE OF A BENT-KNEED GAIT, WE CALL IT, WHEN YOU LOOK AT CHIMPANZEES. HE'S ALSO GOT A VERY, VERY VERTICAL POSTURE TO HIS BACK. IT'S LEANING A LITTLE BIT FORWARD, BUT IT'S NOT LEANING IN THE WAY THAT YOU WOULD EXPECT-- THAT YOU SEE WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT NONHUMAN PRIMATES WALKING BIPEDALLY. IT'S TOO HUMANLIKE TO BE ANYTHING OTHER THAN A HUMAN, IN MY OPINION. >> narrator: BILL MUNNS DOESN'T AGREE WITH BEGUN'S ASSESSMENT THAT THE CREATURE IN THE FILM IS HUMAN. HE HAS STUDIED IT FRAME BY FRAME, AND THE WAY THE FUR MOVES ON THE FIGURE CONVINCES HIM THAT THIS IS NO COSTUME. >> BACK IN 1967, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY TYPE OF STRETCH FUR TECHNOLOGY, WHICH BECAME AVAILABLE IN THE EARLY '80s. THE STRETCH FUR TECHNOLOGY WOULD HAVE ENABLED A LOT OF WHAT WE SEE IN THE FILM TO BE POSSIBLE. THE OLD, STANDARD, NON-STRETCH FURS OF THE TIME, HOWEVER, BEHAVED VERY, VERY MUCH LIKE ORDINARY CLOTH IN THE WAY THEY FOLD, THE WAY THEY BEND, THE WAY YOU STRUCTURE SEAMS. AND IF WE LOOK AT THE PATTERSON FILM, THERE'S A LOT OF SUBTLE CURVATURES IN THE BODY THAT ARE APPARENT BY THE HIGHLIGHTS AND SHADOWS THAT SUGGEST THAT EITHER IT WAS MASTERFULLY TAILORED, OR IT'S SIMPLY NOT FUR CLOTH AT ALL. THAT'S WHAT BASICALLY PROMPTED ME TO CONTINUE TO HAVE DOUBTS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE SEEING SIMPLY A CHARACTER SUIT IN THAT PARTICULAR FILM. >> narrator: MUNNS USES AN OVERLAY TECHNIQUE THAT ALLOWS HIM TO ASSESS THE POSSIBILITY THAT IT'S A COSTUME. >> NOW, WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT IT IS THAT THIS HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PAST BY OTHER PEOPLE, BUT IF THEY DO NOT HAVE CERTAIN CRITERIA CORRECT IN THE BEGINNING, THEN THE COMPARISON IS FALSE. >> narrator: HE POSES A HUMAN FIGURE OVER EACH FRAME OF THE FILM USING PRECISE MEASUREMENTS FROM THE PHOTOGRAMMETRY MODEL OF BLUFF CREEK. >> REHEARSAL SHOT RIGHT NOW? >> YEAH, SOON AS I GET INTO POSITION, I'LL JUST TELL YOU TO GO FOR IT. OKAY, GOING. >> narrator: MUNNS AND THE TEAM USE THE SAME CAMERA MODEL AND LENS AS THAT USED BY PATTERSON TO FILM THE CREATURE. >> ARE WE READY? >> OKAY, MATT, GO. >> narrator: THEY ALSO USE A HIGH-DEFINITION VIDEO CAMERA TO FILM THE SEQUENCE. THEY ARE TESTING TO SEE IF MOTION BLUR IN THE OLDER CAMERA COULD ACCOUNT FOR THE SHAPE OF THE BEAST'S HEAD. THEY THEN COMPARE THE FILM FROM EACH CAMERA. >> THEN WE'RE GETTING INTO THE POINT WHERE IT MAY BE A VERY SIMPLE REALITY THAT THERE MAY NOT BE A HUMAN ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH WHO HAS THE PROPORTIONS AND HEIGHTH NECESSARY TO BE THIS CREATURE. >> narrator:<i> MONSTER QUEST</i> IS PUTTING CRITICAL EVIDENCE OF THE EXISTENCE OF SASQUATCH UNDER THE MICROSCOPE. THE COMPLIED DATA IS IMPRESSIVE: THE MOST FAMOUS AND LONGEST FILM OF THE BEAST, THE MOST CONTROVERSIAL FOOTAGE EVER RECORDED; A MAP OF ALL THE EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS IN THE LAST 40 YEARS; THE MOST EXTENSIVE COLLECTION OF TRACKS EVER COLLECTED. THE SCIENCE TEAM IS EXAMINING WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS THE CRIPPLEFOOT TRACK. DR. JEFF MELDRUM AND DR. DAVID HOWE ARE EXAMINING A CAST OF THE TRACKS. >> MY FEELING IS, IN THIS MOLD OF THE CRIPPLEFOOT, THAT THERE VERY WELL COULD HAVE BEEN A LISFRANC INJURY ACROSS HERE, AND OBVIOUSLY IF THIS IS SOMEBODY OUT IN THE WILD THAT DOESN'T HAVE TREATMENT, WHICH WE WOULDN'T EXPECT, THE RESIDUAL DEFORMITY COULD HEAL OVER IN THIS DIRECTION. >> narrator: THE LISFRANC INJURY IS A DISLOCATION OR FRACTURE BETWEEN THE FOREFOOT AND THE MIDFOOT JOINTS, COMMONLY CAUSED BY TRAUMA. >> I THINK IT'D BE VERY DIFFICULT TO COME UP WITH THE KNOWLEDGE AND THE ABILITY TO HOAX THIS TYPE OF A FOOTPRINT. THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF EVIDENCE OUT THERE THAT POINTS FAVORABLY TOWARDS THE REAL THING. >> THE PROBABILITY OF THIS BEING A HOAX IS ALMOST NONEXISTENT. >> narrator: JEFF SEDLIK, A FORENSIC PHOTOGRAPHY EXPERT, IS WRAPPING UP HIS ANALYSIS OF THE PATTERSON FILM FOOTAGE. USING IMAGE ENHANCEMENT TECHNOLOGY, HE HAS BROUGHT THE FILM TO ITS BEST POSSIBLE RESOLUTION AFTER WEEKS OF FRAME-BY-FRAME WORK. >> AT A CERTAIN POINT, THE SUBJECT TURNS TOWARD US, AND WE GET A GREAT FRONTAL VIEW OF THE FACE, THE BODY, AND THE ARMS AT FULL SWING. AND IF WE ZOOM IN ON THIS FRAME, WHICH IS VERY OUT OF FOCUS BECAUSE OF THE CAMERA SHAKE AND THE MOVEMENT OF THE SUBJECT AND THE LEVEL OF ENLARGEMENT, WE GET TO SEE SOME DETAILS. AND AS WE SHARPEN IT, WE SEE THE SUBJECT HAS BREASTS THAT ARE CLEARLY VISIBLE. WE SEE THE SUBJECT HAS WHAT APPEARS TO BE A BEARD OR HAIR ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE FACE AND SOME SORT OF WIG OR WHAT APPEARS TO BE A HELMET COVERED WITH HAIR AT--OUT AT THE TOP. AND WE CAN SEE THE EYES AND THE NOSE OF THE SUBJECT RIGHT THERE. AND THAT COULD BE EITHER A MASK WITH HOLES IN IT, OR IT COULD BE A FACE. WHETHER OR NOT THAT SUBJECT IS A HUMAN IN A SUIT OR IS SOME KIND OF CREATURE THAT IS NOT HUMAN REMAINS A MYSTERY. >> narrator: BILL MUNNS BELIEVES THE ANIMAL IS REAL. HE HAS EXAMINED THE FILM FROM THE UNIQUE POINT OF VIEW OF A HOLLYWOOD CREATURE CREATOR. USING THE TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE IN 1967, MUNNS HAS BUILT AND FILMED FIVE POSSIBLE HEAD SHAPES TO SEE IF MOTION BLUR ACCOUNTS FOR THE HEAD SHAPE OF THE CREATURE. HE THEN FILMED THE HEADS IN A SIMILAR MOTION TO THE CREATURE IN THE PATTERSON FILM. FINALLY, HE SUPERIMPOSED THE HEADS OVER THE FOOTAGE. HE DETERMINES THE MOST LIKELY MASK SHAPE. MUNNS HAS CONCLUDED THAT IT CANNOT BE A HUMAN IN A MASK UNLESS THE WEARER'S HEAD IS BURIED DEEP INSIDE THE SUIT, MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE WEARER TO SEE. HE IS ALSO UNABLE TO GET A HUMAN FIGURE TO FIT WITHIN THE PROPORTIONS OF THE IMAGE CAPTURED IN THE FILM. >> NOTHING IN THE PATTERSON FILM GIVES AN INDICATION AT ALL THAT ANY OF THE JOINTS OF THE BODY, THE SHOULDER, HIP, PELVIS, KNEES, ELBOWS, AND SUCH--THAT NONE OF THESE HAVE BEEN SHIFTED IN ANY WAY. WE SEE THAT THE KNEE DISCREPANCY HERE IS TREMENDOUS. THE KNEES ARE SO MUCH HIGHER THAN THE KNEES HERE, THE BACK OF THE KNEE TO THE BACK OF THIS PARTICULAR KNEE. WE COULD SAY WITH CONFIDENCE A PERSON OF THIS HUMAN PROPORTION ABSOLUTELY COULD NOT BE WEARING A SUIT AND LOOK LIKE WHAT WE SEE IN THE FILM. THE ONLY THING I CAN SAY WITH GENUINE CONFIDENCE IS, THAT IS NOT A HUMAN BEING IN A FUR COSTUME. WHAT IT TRUTHFULLY IS, I AM MYSTIFIED BY, BUT IT IS NOT A HUMAN BEING IN A COSTUME. >> narrator: THE<i> MONSTER QUEST</i> TEAM HAS MADE SOME CRUCIAL DETERMINATIONS REGARDING THE SASQUATCH EVIDENCE. THE SCIENCE TEAM HAS DETERMINED THAT THE CRIPPLEFOOT TRACKS ARE NOT HUMAN IN NATURE AND HAVE NOT BEEN FAKED. ANALYSIS OF CASTS OF OTHER SASQUATCH TRACKS REVEALS THE PRESENCE OF A MID-TARSAL BREAK, MEANING THEY WERE LIKELY MADE BY A LARGE PRIMATE. THE TEAM UNCOVERED A LIKELY MISTAKE IN EARLIER ANALYSIS OF THE FAMED PATTERSON FILM SHOT IN 1967. A NEW ANALYSIS, TAKING THE CORRECT LENS PERIMETERS INTO ACCOUNT, PROVED THE CREATURE TO BE OF LARGER SIZE THAN THAT OF A HUMAN. THIS MAKES IT UNLIKELY THAT IT COULD HAVE BEEN HOAXED WITH SOMEONE WEARING A SUIT. >> A LOT OF PEOPLE, LIKE ME, HOPE THAT THERE IS A BIGFOOT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE EXTREMELY EXCITING IF THERE WERE A PRIMATE, A<i> LARGE</i> PRIMATE, LIKE THIS THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT LIVING IN OUR MIDST. SO WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST THE IDEA OF BIGFOOT, AND WE EVEN HAVE FOSSILS THAT TELL US THAT THERE WAS SOMETHING THIS SIZE THAT EXISTED ONLY A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND YEARS AGO. >> THE MORE WE'RE ABLE TO ANALYZE THESE VIDEOS AND IMAGES OF SASQUATCH, THE MORE ANSWERS WE CAN GIVE PEOPLE. AND THERE CERTAINLY ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS OUT THERE, MORE THAN HAVE EVER BEEN ANSWERED. >> I THINK THIS REALIZATION IS A VERY EXCITING BREAKTHROUGH IN THIS FIELD, NOT ONLY FOR LENDING GREATER CREDIBILITY TO THE EVIDENCE OF THE FOOTPRINTS FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THE SASQUATCH BUT FOR ME PERSONALLY. >> I WOULD HAVE TO SAY THAT I'M VERY, VERY EXCITED, ACTUALLY, BY WHAT HAS COME FROM ALL OF THIS RESEARCH. IT HAS LED ME ALONG A PATH THAT I NEVER EXPECTED. Captioning by<font color="#00FF00"> CaptionMax</font> www.captionmax.com
this was a favorite of mine. I dont remember them having anything great, but I think they had one of the first depictions of the first giant squid video - first widespread depiction anyway. Regardless, loved this show.
Remember when they got the DNA from the bed of nails on the porch of the cabin?!
They are all on Discovery+
This show was fairly unbiased as well which made it very good
THEY ARE?! Bro I gotta find the octopus gogantius one, only the natives around the islands understand what I’m talking about when I reference that particular episode, thank you for informing us
I literally just realized this the other day and was going to make a post.. I used to love monster quest years ago I wish they would do a reboot. Technology is more advanced now it would be interesting to see
Holy fuck the nostalgia