For decades, the 1967 Patterson-Gimlin Film has remained one of the most debated pieces of evidence in the study of Bigfoot. Many have sought to debunk it, but some of the loudest voices claiming it was a hoax, Bob Heironimus, Phillip Morris, Greg Long, and Kal Korff, have presented narratives riddled with inconsistencies, contradictions, and outright fabrications.
In my recent Critical Analysis of the Heironimus Claims, I dissect the claims made by these individuals and expose their glaring weaknesses. Here is a brief overview of the major points.
In my recent Critical Analysis of the Heironimus Claims, I dissect the claims made by these individuals and expose their glaring weaknesses. Here is a brief overview of the major points.
Bob Heironimus Bob Heironimus: A Story That Keeps Changing
Heironimus claims he wore a Bigfoot costume in the film, yet his descriptions of the suit's material have changed drastically over time. At first, he described it as being made of a twenty-five-pound horsehide suit, then later changed his story to say it was a lightweight synthetic fur. He also gave conflicting details about its construction, the boots he wore, and even the filming location. Additionally, weather records contradict his claim that he was sweating profusely inside the suit on a hot day when the recorded temperature was just fifty-five degrees Fahrenheit.
Perhaps most telling is Heironimus’ financial motive. He admitted publicly that his reason for coming forward was money, saying, "It’s my turn now." His claims only surfaced decades later, conveniently timed to align with a book deal.
Heironimus claims he wore a Bigfoot costume in the film, yet his descriptions of the suit's material have changed drastically over time. At first, he described it as being made of a twenty-five-pound horsehide suit, then later changed his story to say it was a lightweight synthetic fur. He also gave conflicting details about its construction, the boots he wore, and even the filming location. Additionally, weather records contradict his claim that he was sweating profusely inside the suit on a hot day when the recorded temperature was just fifty-five degrees Fahrenheit.
Perhaps most telling is Heironimus’ financial motive. He admitted publicly that his reason for coming forward was money, saying, "It’s my turn now." His claims only surfaced decades later, conveniently timed to align with a book deal.
Phillip Morris Phillip Morris: Where is the Proof?
Morris, a costume salesman, asserts he sold Roger Patterson the suit used in the film. Yet, he has provided no evidence, no receipts, no order records, and no surviving suit that matches the Patterson-Gimlin Film subject. His story also conveniently surfaced over thirty years after the film, once it was a recognized cultural phenomenon.
Morris has a history of dubious business practices, including a lawsuit for selling unlicensed Barney the Dinosaur costumes and making opportunistic claims, such as falsely stating he inspired the character Dr. Evil from Austin Powers. His involvement suggests a profit-driven publicity stunt rather than a credible revelation.
Morris, a costume salesman, asserts he sold Roger Patterson the suit used in the film. Yet, he has provided no evidence, no receipts, no order records, and no surviving suit that matches the Patterson-Gimlin Film subject. His story also conveniently surfaced over thirty years after the film, once it was a recognized cultural phenomenon.
Morris has a history of dubious business practices, including a lawsuit for selling unlicensed Barney the Dinosaur costumes and making opportunistic claims, such as falsely stating he inspired the character Dr. Evil from Austin Powers. His involvement suggests a profit-driven publicity stunt rather than a credible revelation.
 Easy to tell which one is a costume! |  The character assassination of a dead man. |
Greg Long Greg Long’s The Making of Bigfoot: A Biased Attack Piece
Long’s book, The Making of Bigfoot, set out to "prove" the Patterson-Gimlin Film was a hoax, but his research was deeply biased. He actively sought out negative testimonials against Patterson while ignoring key witnesses like Bob Gimlin. His portrayal of Patterson as a "liar and thief" is based on cherry-picked anecdotes, and his reliance on unverified hearsay further discredits his work.
Most importantly, no physical proof of a Bigfoot costume was ever presented in Long’s book. Instead, his case rests on assumptions, contradictions, and biased storytelling.
Long’s book, The Making of Bigfoot, set out to "prove" the Patterson-Gimlin Film was a hoax, but his research was deeply biased. He actively sought out negative testimonials against Patterson while ignoring key witnesses like Bob Gimlin. His portrayal of Patterson as a "liar and thief" is based on cherry-picked anecdotes, and his reliance on unverified hearsay further discredits his work.
Most importantly, no physical proof of a Bigfoot costume was ever presented in Long’s book. Instead, his case rests on assumptions, contradictions, and biased storytelling.
The "Colonel" himself, Kal Korf (sitting between an American & Israeli Flag). Kal Korff: The Self-Proclaimed Intelligence Officer
Korff, who played a key role in promoting the hoax claims and assisting Long lining up witnesses, has a well-documented history of fabricating credentials, including falsely claiming to be a Colonel in Israeli Intelligence.
His past is littered with publicity stunts and fraudulent statements, making him one of the least credible figures to support the hoax theory. Yet he writes the forward in Long's attack piece.
Korff, who played a key role in promoting the hoax claims and assisting Long lining up witnesses, has a well-documented history of fabricating credentials, including falsely claiming to be a Colonel in Israeli Intelligence.
His past is littered with publicity stunts and fraudulent statements, making him one of the least credible figures to support the hoax theory. Yet he writes the forward in Long's attack piece.
Conclusion: The Case Against the Patterson-Gimlin Film Falls Apart
Despite their combined efforts, Heironimus, Morris, Long, and Korff have failed to present a consistent or convincing case that the Patterson-Gimlin Film was a hoax. Their testimonies contradict each other, rely on no physical evidence, and are financially and personally motivated. Meanwhile, the Patterson-Gimlin Film endures. Its subject displays biomechanics, proportions, and muscle movement that remain unmatched by any costume reproduction to this day.
The hoax claims collapse under scrutiny. The film stands as a piece of evidence that has yet to be debunked and remains one of the most compelling pieces of footage in cryptozoology.
Below find the Critical Analysis in PDF form!
Despite their combined efforts, Heironimus, Morris, Long, and Korff have failed to present a consistent or convincing case that the Patterson-Gimlin Film was a hoax. Their testimonies contradict each other, rely on no physical evidence, and are financially and personally motivated. Meanwhile, the Patterson-Gimlin Film endures. Its subject displays biomechanics, proportions, and muscle movement that remain unmatched by any costume reproduction to this day.
The hoax claims collapse under scrutiny. The film stands as a piece of evidence that has yet to be debunked and remains one of the most compelling pieces of footage in cryptozoology.
Below find the Critical Analysis in PDF form!
RSS Feed
