It was brought to my attention today by my old friend Henry May that a Facebook Page by the name of "NFL Insider" had posted an article about a Bob Gimlin confession.
This isn't our first rodeo dealing with Bob Gimlin "Confessions".
First I find it very interesting and a bit suspicious that a page for NFL fans would post this at all.
Remember not everything you read on the internet is the truth. And this one should have been punted, because it was a real fumble.
This isn't our first rodeo dealing with Bob Gimlin "Confessions".
First I find it very interesting and a bit suspicious that a page for NFL fans would post this at all.
Remember not everything you read on the internet is the truth. And this one should have been punted, because it was a real fumble.
Fact Check: The “Bob Gimlin Final Confession” Article Is Fiction
A narrative article circulating online claims that Bob Gimlin revealed a hidden truth about Bigfoot shortly before death, including claims that the 1967 filmed subject was “trained” and not entirely wild.
The article presents this as a historic confession that would fundamentally alter Bigfoot research.
This claim is false.
Below are direct excerpts from the article, followed by verified facts.
A narrative article circulating online claims that Bob Gimlin revealed a hidden truth about Bigfoot shortly before death, including claims that the 1967 filmed subject was “trained” and not entirely wild.
The article presents this as a historic confession that would fundamentally alter Bigfoot research.
This claim is false.
Below are direct excerpts from the article, followed by verified facts.
Claim: “The figure in the footage wasn’t entirely wild… It was trained.”
This is the central allegation of the article and the one driving its spread.
Fact:
Bob Gimlin has never stated that the filmed subject was trained, conditioned, controlled, or associated with any human program. This language does not appear in any documented interview he has ever given.
The claim directly contradicts Gimlin’s long standing and consistent position regarding the event.
This is the central allegation of the article and the one driving its spread.
Fact:
Bob Gimlin has never stated that the filmed subject was trained, conditioned, controlled, or associated with any human program. This language does not appear in any documented interview he has ever given.
The claim directly contradicts Gimlin’s long standing and consistent position regarding the event.
Claim: “There are… rules. Things I promised I’d never reveal.”
The article repeatedly implies secrecy, restrictions, and external control over what Gimlin is allowed to say.
Fact:
There is no evidence that Bob Gimlin has ever been subject to nondisclosure agreements, government restrictions, or external “rules” regarding the 1967 film. NDA's usually forbid people from speaking at all from a topic.
This trope is a common narrative device used in fictional conspiracy writing to excuse a lack of evidence. Beware folks who decry "Government Cover Up" when there evidence fails!"
The article repeatedly implies secrecy, restrictions, and external control over what Gimlin is allowed to say.
Fact:
There is no evidence that Bob Gimlin has ever been subject to nondisclosure agreements, government restrictions, or external “rules” regarding the 1967 film. NDA's usually forbid people from speaking at all from a topic.
This trope is a common narrative device used in fictional conspiracy writing to excuse a lack of evidence. Beware folks who decry "Government Cover Up" when there evidence fails!"
Claim: “Dr. Lexi Halloway, a cryptozoological sociologist, weighed in immediately.”
Fact:
This individual does not exist.
There is no academic, scientific, or professional record of a cryptozoologist or sociologist by this name. The title itself has no recognized standing within scientific disciplines. The title "Cryptozoological Sociologist" simply does not exist either.
Fabricated experts are a HALLMARK of fictional or satirical articles presented in a news style format.
Fact:
This individual does not exist.
There is no academic, scientific, or professional record of a cryptozoologist or sociologist by this name. The title itself has no recognized standing within scientific disciplines. The title "Cryptozoological Sociologist" simply does not exist either.
Fabricated experts are a HALLMARK of fictional or satirical articles presented in a news style format.
Writing Style and Structural Red Flags
Beyond the false claims, the article displays clear indicators of fictional writing:
Dramatic cinematic dialogue
Invented experts with vague credentials
Undefined locations, dates, and sources
Humorous merchandising anecdotes used as filler
Broad claims of internet chaos without evidence
Legitimate reporting does not rely on narrative suspense or anonymous authority.
Beyond the false claims, the article displays clear indicators of fictional writing:
Dramatic cinematic dialogue
Invented experts with vague credentials
Undefined locations, dates, and sources
Humorous merchandising anecdotes used as filler
Broad claims of internet chaos without evidence
Legitimate reporting does not rely on narrative suspense or anonymous authority.
What Bob Gimlin Has Actually Said
For decades, Bob Gimlin has consistently stated that he and Roger Patterson filmed a real, unknown creature and that he stands by his experience. He has repeatedly declined to embellish or sensationalize the event.
At no point has he suggested the subject was trained, captive, engineered, or part of any hidden program.
For decades, Bob Gimlin has consistently stated that he and Roger Patterson filmed a real, unknown creature and that he stands by his experience. He has repeatedly declined to embellish or sensationalize the event.
At no point has he suggested the subject was trained, captive, engineered, or part of any hidden program.
Digging a Little Deeper
This actually is a repost simlar to a Facebook Group called "What's for today". They post the same article from yet another dubious source.
But we did find where the title and thumbnail came from!
A Youtube Channel, called "Wild Discovery." It's just a click bait title. The content of the video did nothing but speak a some brief facts about the film with none of the tropes of the web articles.
Bob's truth was simply not wavering from his story according to the video.
This actually is a repost simlar to a Facebook Group called "What's for today". They post the same article from yet another dubious source.
But we did find where the title and thumbnail came from!
A Youtube Channel, called "Wild Discovery." It's just a click bait title. The content of the video did nothing but speak a some brief facts about the film with none of the tropes of the web articles.
Bob's truth was simply not wavering from his story according to the video.
Whoever is responsible, they took the idea from a click bait title and simply conjured up a story to fit a narrative, of "woo," and government coverups.
Now if something were the truth, why would they lie within the article?
Simply because they have zero evidence to support any of this nonsense.
Now if something were the truth, why would they lie within the article?
Simply because they have zero evidence to support any of this nonsense.
Conclusion
The circulating article is not journalism. It is not a leak. It is not a confession.
It is a fictional narrative written in a misleading format that blends invented dialogue, fabricated experts, and conspiracy tropes to create the illusion of a revelation.
Readers are encouraged to verify extraordinary claims using primary sources and documented evidence before sharing sensational stories, this way something doesn't become out of nothing.
Extraordinary claims require evidence. In this case, there is none.
Till Next Time,
Squatch-D
The circulating article is not journalism. It is not a leak. It is not a confession.
It is a fictional narrative written in a misleading format that blends invented dialogue, fabricated experts, and conspiracy tropes to create the illusion of a revelation.
Readers are encouraged to verify extraordinary claims using primary sources and documented evidence before sharing sensational stories, this way something doesn't become out of nothing.
Extraordinary claims require evidence. In this case, there is none.
Till Next Time,
Squatch-D
RSS Feed
