Overview
A recent discussion on Reddit’s r/bigfoot forum has challenged the authenticity of newly circulated Bigfoot footage, arguing that the video itself may be a hoax rather than credible evidence of an unidentified primate. The post, titled “The New Capturing Bigfoot Footage Is The Real Hoax,” was published by user u/CrazyOlHoboJoe and questioned why some viewers believe the recording definitively undermines the famous Patterson-Gimlin film.
The author described the new footage as “really bad” and suggested that its quality and apparent presentation do not provide a strong basis for resolving long-standing disputes over the 1967 film. The post did not provide a formal forensic analysis, chain-of-custody documentation or independent evidence establishing that the newer recording was fabricated. Instead, it presented a skeptical opinion within a community devoted to discussing whether Bigfoot, also known as Sasquatch, may exist.
Debate Over the Patterson-Gimlin Film
The Patterson-Gimlin film, recorded in Northern California in 1967, remains one of the most debated pieces of alleged Bigfoot evidence. Supporters point to the figure’s movement, proportions and apparent musculature as signs that it may depict an unknown animal. Critics have argued for decades that the subject was a person wearing a costume.
The Reddit exchange emphasized that questions about the film and questions about Bigfoot’s existence are not necessarily the same. One commenter, identified as u/zer0c00l81, wrote: “PG film can be a hoax and bigfoot can still be real. Its not mutually exclusive.” The original poster agreed. That distinction is central to the discussion: disproving one recording would not, by itself, disprove every sighting, report or cultural tradition associated with Sasquatch.
Indigenous Traditions and Cultural Context
Another commenter, u/Nevhix, argued that First Nations and Native American communities in the Cascadia bioregion had stories and reported encounters involving Sasquatch before Patterson and Gimlin’s time. Such comments reflect a broader point frequently raised in Bigfoot debates: traditions involving wild or human-like beings predate modern films, television coverage and internet speculation.
However, Indigenous traditions should not be treated simply as evidence for or against a biological species. Different communities have distinct histories, languages and spiritual frameworks, and outside observers can oversimplify those traditions by grouping them under the modern “Bigfoot” label. Folklore can preserve cultural memory, express beliefs or serve symbolic and social functions; it does not, on its own, establish that a creature exists. Conversely, the existence of folklore does not demonstrate that every account was deliberately fabricated.
Evidence Remains Unresolved
The Reddit post illustrates how quickly ambiguous footage can become a proxy for larger arguments over the Patterson-Gimlin film and the broader Bigfoot mystery. In the discussion provided, no participant supplied independently verifiable material confirming the identity of the figure, the location of the recording or the circumstances in which it was made.
As a result, the claim that the new footage is a hoax remains an allegation rather than an established finding. Resolving its authenticity would require the original, unedited file; reliable information about the camera and location; testimony from witnesses; and technical examination for editing, staging or costume-related evidence. Until such information is made available, the recording is best regarded as unverified, while the debate over Bigfoot continues to rest on a mixture of disputed footage, eyewitness reports and longstanding cultural narratives.
