Most Gorillas knuckle-walk, using both their legs and their long arms, putting pressure on their knuckles, with the fingers rolled into the hand. Many have seen this type of gait. On the other hand, gorillas rarely walk using only their legs, though it is not unknown.
However, the fact that Ambam, a silverback western lowland gorilla at The Aspinall Foundation's Port Lympne Wild Animal Park in Kent, southeast England, walks upright, like a person, has been captured on video and spread to YouTube has made both the park and Ambam a gorilla. Still, as the zoo notes, it's not all that unusual.
In a press release, gorilla keep Phil Ridges said, "All gorillas can do it to some extent. But we haven't got any who do it like Ambam, and he is quite a celebrity at the park."
Ambam is 21. Ridges adds that Ambam's father also exhibited the same behavior. "Ambam's father Bitam used to display the same behaviour if he had handfuls of food to carry. Ambam also has a full sister, Tamba, and a half sister at Howletts, who also sometimes stand and walk in the same way. "
Ambam hasn't decided to emulate any more lyrics from the Frankie Valli & The Four Seasons song. One of the other lines is "Talk like a man."
Silverback western lowland gorillas are endangered, as you might expect, and the park is asking those who might appreciate Ambam's newly publicized gait to help them, and adopt one. Such adoptions can be made at this link.
Many viewers note that "Patty's" top part looks overall like a gorilla and often skeptics use this to say that Patty's anatomy is impossible since Gorillas are not capable of walking upright, their center off gravty is too low (Napier says this famously in his book, Bigfoot) Skeptics say that Patty must be a man wearing a gorilla suit. I don't think so because Patty's top part has more anatomical resemblances to an actual gorilla than to any gorilla suit ever made.
Below are more comparisons from the Amazing Randi Educational Boards to show that Patti is built MUCH more broadly than a conventional human being, something like half again broader. The argument goes that you can make a suit that is that much broader than a human being but then you cannot have the human skeleton's shoulder and hip joints appear to move natually in the indicated places. What you need then is a basic skeleton that is half again broader than a normal human skeleton. And included is John Green's drawing from his book Sasquatch estimating the girths (circumferences) of Patty at different points.
Below is a Pre-Film drawing of a female Sasquatch after Ostman's account compared to the film Patty. Patty is like the traditional Sasquatch of the older reports, only now we have a more precise view of what those reports were describing.
Anthropologist Grover Krantz offered an in-depth examination of the Patterson film. He concluded that the film depicts a genuine unknown creature. Primarily, Krantz' argument is based on a detailed analysis of the figure's stride, center of gravity, and biomechanics. Krantz argues that the creature's leg and foot motions are quite different from a human's and could not have been duplicated by a person wearing a gorilla suit.
Krantz pointed out the tremendous width of the creature's shoulders, which (after deducting 1" for hair) he estimated at 28.2 inches, or 35.1% of its full standing height of 78", or a higher percentage of its 72" "walking height," which was a bit stooped, crouched, and sunk into the sand. The creature's shoulders are almost 50% wider than the human mean. (For comparison, André the Giant had a typical human ratio of 24%. Wide-shouldered Bob Heironimus (see below) has 27.4%. Only very rarely do humans have a shoulder breadth of 30%.) Krantz argued that a suited person could not mimic this breadth and still have the naturalistic hand and arm motions present on the film.
Krantz wrote, "the knee is regularly bent more than 90°, while the human leg bends less than 70°." No human has yet replicated this level lower leg lift while maintaining the smoothness, posture, and stride length (41") of the creature.
Krantz and others have noted natural-looking musculature visible as the creature moved, arguing this would be highly difficult or impossible to fake. Hunter and Dahinden also note that "the bottom of the figure's head seems to become part of the heavy back and shoulder muscles... [and] the muscles of the buttocks were distinct"
Krantz also interviewed Patterson extensively and, as noted below, thought Patterson lacked the technical skill and knowledge needed to create such a realistic-looking costume.
Krantz reports that in 1969 John Green (who at one point owned a first-generation copy of the original Patterson film) interviewed Disney executive Ken Peterson, who, after viewing the Patterson film, asserted "that their technicians would not be able to duplicate the film." Krantz argues that if Disney personnel were unable to duplicate the film, there is little likelihood that Patterson could have done so.
More recently, Krantz showed the film to Gordon Valient, a researcher for Nike shoes, who he says "made some rather useful observations about some rather unhuman movements he could see."
Grover Krantz (1992). Big Footprints: A Scientific Inquiry Into the Reality of Sasquatch. Johnson Books. ISBN 1-555660-99-1.
My statement has always been that I defer to Krantz and nobody has ever shown any reason to say otherwise on the subject. And that means especially ANY non-experts in human and primate anatomy. [At this point I am unable to examine the statements made by David J. Daegling and Daniel O. Schmitt, but it would seem they were quite in error if they said the anatomical features I spoke of were NOT evident in the film. They were so evident, and Patty is NOT a man in a suit.
I am also putting this blog entry under the category of "Frauds and Hoaxes" as well, because IMHO, the skeptics who are trying to say that Patty could be a man in a suit and who produce such illustrations as the ones supposedly showing how a human skeleton would fit in there, which include such features as too large of a cranium going outside the outlines of the head or feet protruding below the level of the feet of the creature in the film, are knowingly being fraudulent in their misrepresentation and are collectively guilty of promulgating an actual HOAX.]