32: Great Balls of Fire

Does some element of us exist after we die?  Is it possible that a message in a dire time of need could reach a loved one across vast distances without the aid of electronic or mechanical means, with a form of psychic energy either just before or after death?  Could our emotional spirit be so intense in a moment of crisis that it leaves an imprint or echo that can reverberate in the ether and be heard, seen or sensed again and again?  There have been many reported cases where this seems to have happened, and you may have seen such stories in the news or even have one from your own family.  Don't you wish scientists would study these examples in a search for answers to some of the most significant questions of all?  Well, some scientists are because this type of occurrence falls under the field of parapsychology and we're fortunate enough this evening to speak with Brandon Massullo.  Brandon is a clinical therapist and parapsychologist with graduate degrees in clinical counseling from the University of Toledo and psychological research methods from the University of Edinburgh in Scotland, UK.  His research at the University of Edinburgh centered on neurobiological correlates of ghostly encounters, and he studied within the Koestler Parapsychology Unit at the University of Edinburgh under the supervision of author and international lecturer, Dr. Caroline Watt.  Brandon has been fascinated by paranormal phenomena for 20 years and has been a participant and featured speaker in numerous paranormal forums and events.  Join us for a fascinating discussion of his research into the possibility that our cries, or at least some form of our being, may linger beyond our earthly existence. For more information on this episode visit our website!

8 Juni 20191h 28min

Whether you believe in Bigfoot or not, the story of the Patterson-Gimlin film remains a superb example of the scientific investigation of an anomalous event that falls within the realm of the paranormal.  Other documentation of things like UFOs, ghosts, and other cryptids have come under close examination throughout the years, but little has been of such relative quality and few examples if any have been able to provide such relatable data to examine.  This relatability is due to the corporeality of the subject in the film.  Whether an unknown primate or a man in a suit, it seems it is something from the world of which we know.  Perhaps it’s not any data which is so troubling and debatable amongst the authorities, but the implications that data leads to if the film is authentic.  In any case, it is a film and an event which deserves full reconsideration.  Although of little value to scientists, another component worth considering is the personal experience, because it is that which gives the rest of us context.  As we wrap up this series with our conclusions, we were fortunate to talk with one of the two men who were there, Bob Gimlin.  Maybe character shouldn’t be considered when trying to determine the validity of this incident, but we can attest that Mr. Gimlin is as real and genuine a man as you’ll meet.  After decades of remaining silent about his role, we’re grateful he’s finally agreed to tell his story because he deserves to be heard. For more information on this episode visit our website!

26 Maj 20192h 14min

There are a few researchers for whom the Patterson-Gimlin Film has sparked a life-long quest to analyze its mystery and the possibility of Sasquatch. Concerning the preservation of the actual film itself, no one has done more to secure its integrity than William “Bill” Munns. While the original 16mm Kodachrome Color-Reversal film shot by Roger Patterson has since gone missing, Munns built a mobile High Definition digital film scanner and with exclusive permission from Patterson’s widow Patricia, has painstakingly scanned every frame of her first generation copy at 5K resolution, even discovering an additional two frames at the beginning, making the total count 954 frames in total. Bill Munns has spent most of his long career in filmmaking and creating special makeup effects, starting as a makeup artist with Universal Studios in 1969. He created full body suits for fictional creatures such as “Swamp Thing” and “The Beastmaster,” and so he brings to the PGF controversy well-established expertise in the fabrication of various creature costumes. Munns also has spent the last 22 years doing computer graphics, which positioned him well to do the image analysis of the PGF film frames. So he is uniquely well-qualified to analyze evidence consisting of 16mm film, and showing what many suspect is just a human in a fur creature costume. Tonight we sit down with Bill Munns for an interview in which he discusses his process, analysis and his conclusions which lead him to believe the film to be authentic. For more information on this episode visit our website!

20 Maj 20191h 58min

It's easy for the uninformed, casual observer to make a declaration on a website's Comments Section, but what do the experts think about the Patterson-Gimlin Film? If we look to science to provide answers about the subject in the PGF, then we should consider the evaluations of physical anthropologists who specialize in primate morphology and authorities in biomechanics and bipedal locomotion. Fortunately, the academics and costume professionals who did weigh in ignored the gossip about character and focused only on the film. Unfortunately, most of the scientific community wouldn't bother giving the film any consideration and those that were asked to, dismissed it outright after limited viewing with no careful examination. What's interesting is that the few scientists who did analyze the film thoroughly and gave a favorable conclusion did so with a detailed report, while those that were doubtful about its authenticity had more superficial observations or disagreements about the other scientists' findings. This is to say there doesn't appear to be a point-by-point scientific argument disproving the creature's existence. Perhaps the most widely acceptable objective scientific review is akin to anthropologist David J. Daegling's assessment, generalized as, although the film's subject is compelling, the possibility of a hoax cannot be ruled out. But if it is a hoax, then the film must show a human in a suit, which then leads to the question, how could such a convincing costume be fabricated, especially by a layman? For that answer, who better to ask than the professionals in that field, the Film and TV Special Effects creature creators? Please join us for the fourth installment of our series on the PGF as we hear from the experts. For more information on this episode visit our website!

12 Maj 20193h 39min

Tonight, we have a special bonus episode for you, a commercial-free interview with a very talented writer, director, and performer who has actually worn a sophisticated ape-like costume for a Hollywood feature film and lived to tell about it. You may know Jorma Taccone from the wildly popular comedy trio, “The Lonely Island.” Along with Andy Samberg and Akiva Shaffer, the three have gone on to produce some of the most memorable and hilarious “Digital Shorts” for Saturday Night Live and their feature films, comedy albums and live performances have garnered them millions of fans. But what you may not know about Jorma is that he portrayed the loveably goofy primate-like character “Chaka” for the 2009 film “Land of the Lost,” inspired by the original 1974 children’s television series. While you might think hopping around in a monkey suit for a movie would be fun (certainly Jorma thought so at first) it turns out the hours-long, daily application of the Special Effects makeup was mind-numbingly tedious, and the performance while wearing it was physically grueling and exhausting. We’ll hear from Jorma about his experience with a professional, expensive, skin-tight costume, some funny anecdotes about shooting the movie, and his thoughts on the appearance of the creature from the Patterson-Gimlin Film. As many experts have stated, if the subject in the PGF was actually just a man in a costume, that costume was one of the best that’s ever been made. For more information on this episode visit our website!

5 Maj 201944min

When indirect evidence of an extraordinary event defies conclusive debunking, then the easier route for some critics is to attack the presenter of the evidence. Naturally and unfortunately, Roger Patterson's integrity and thus his credibility came under scrutiny and assault as a means of discrediting the film itself. Another common tendency in dealing with an incredible incident is to accept outright the allegations of a purported hoaxer or associate as a way of comfortably coping with a disturbing possibility which can then be safely set aside. In the case of the Patterson-Gimlin Film, there are two central claims that suit this purpose for those who doubt the film's authenticity. Bob Heironimus claimed he was the one who wore an ape suit for the film, given to him and made by Patterson. Philip Morris of Morris Costumes claimed he sold his standard gorilla costume to Patterson, who may have modified it for the filming. These assertions were enough for many to put the matter to rest, except one must consider that there are significant discrepancies between the details of the Heironimus and Morris stories, leading to an improbability that they were describing the same outfit. So, the question remains, between these three gentlemen, who do you believe, or rather, whose story is more comfortable for you to believe? For more information on this episode visit our website!

29 Apr 20191h 50min

What if you had spent years searching for something elusive, something you believe existed that most didn't, and then one day you finally happened to capture it on film? What would be your immediate next steps if you wanted to present it to the world? In the days before instant media uploads to the internet, where would you take the film and who would you show it to first if you wanted to be taken seriously? Roger Patterson had thought he and Bob Gimlin had captured irrefutable proof of Bigfoot, next to bringing the beast itself out of the woods. Little could he realize that every action and claim going forward from that moment of filming would be analyzed and criticized for the rest of his life, in addition to his integrity. Whether out to prove authenticity or a perpetrate a hoax, in either case, the reaction to the film was predictable. From the few scientists who bothered to look, to the curious public, some believed, some scoffed, some didn't know what to think. What we know now from Patterson and Gimlin's story, is that indirect evidence is not enough for most, you need to produce a body, but even then there are those who will refuse to believe. What we also know is that for Patterson, and in turn Gimlin, providing this film as evidence turned out to be much more trouble than a benefit and much more than they bargained for. Realizing what these men went through, if you were to one-day capture extraordinary evidence, would you think twice about sharing it? For more information on this episode visit our website!

21 Apr 20191h 53min

Skeptics and believers alike will always demand proof of paranormal claims. But what happens when extraordinary and therefore controversial evidence is offered? When it comes to one of the most popular and enduring legends of a cryptid, that of North America's Bigfoot or Sasquatch, we have an answer. On October 20, 1967, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin were about ten days into a horseback trip near Bluff Creek, northwest of Orleans, CA. Patterson had heard of Bigfoot activity in the area and hoped to film some evidence with a 16mm motion picture camera. Around 1:30 p.m. that day, Patterson got his wish, and much more than he bargained for in the long run. As the pair rode around an upturned tree stump, they suddenly spotted what appeared to be a massive, ape-like beast quickly walking away from them. As Patterson struggled to free himself from his startled and fallen horse, he managed to start filming while running towards it, capturing almost one minute of an unexplainable creature who has since been affectionately nicknamed "Patty." What resulted was a film clip that has been scrutinized nearly as much as the Zapruder film and became the iconic image of what the public envisions when they think of Bigfoot. Attempts have been made to call into question Patterson's character and in turn, the likelihood that he would perpetrate a hoax of this encounter. But this tactic doesn't address the heart of the matter and answer the question, just what is that creature on the film? The Patterson-Gimlin film has never been satisfactorily debunked, which is why it is still hotly debated to this day. There are only two logical conclusions about the film itself: either it remains one of the greatest hoaxes of all time, or the film actually captured a Bigfoot. For more information on this episode visit our website!

14 Apr 20192h