Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Crowlogic

Bob H, Chico And The "peanuts Gang"

Recommended Posts

Guest

Not when key figures know where the proof is.

Hey Kit, are you hinting that Bob H knows where the suit is???? I recall Korff blurting out at the end of a podcast that the suit was buried in Bob H's back yard. But surely if that was the case the suit would have surfaced by now. What's the hold-up?

Also, help me understand why Heironimus' alleged inconsistent comments damage his credibility, while the inconsistent comments of Patterson and Gimlin do nothing to cast doubt on their credibility.

Who says P&G have immunity? There's plenty of special pleading to go around, but the OP of this thread deals with Chico. The skeptics seem to think that Chico being at the PGF site is a game breaker. How so? We all know that Bob H was a close associate of Roger P at the time, which could be why he felt some sort of entitlement to claim he was the guy in the suit. As far as Chico being loaned out goes, that doesn't imply Bob H was there. He loaned Chico out to Roger at least one other time when he wasn't there so what's the big deal?

How do we know this? Gimlin admitted that he rode Chico at Bluff Creek and I assume that was him riding Chico with the packhorse as seen on the pre-PGF scenery footage. Bob H claimed Chico was there when the PGF was filmed (which he claimed was shot from horseback!) But Bob H says there was no packhorse when he went to Bluff Creek to film the PGF. Therefore, Bob H must have loaned out Chico on at least 2 occasions. Bob H never mentioned that loaning out Chico was a regular occurrence. Apparently Bob H was NOT present during the filming of the alleged pre-PGF footage. So if it can be established that the PGF was on the same reel and filmed after the scenery footage on the same day (which is the implication), then Bob H was not there.

Otherwise, Bob H needs some special pleading to explain how he forgot that the packhorse was actually there. Or that the scenery footage was not on the same reel as the PGF, or it was shot on an earlier date. Either way we don't have the original film or a complete copy of it (yet) to confirm this, but this smoking gun is going to cool off until these issues get resolved, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Kit:

(reference the PGF on Trial)

"Have you submitted your opening statement?"

They were posted to open each debate topic, so they have been up since the concept started.

Next step is for you to post your opening statement, and then I do rebuttal to yours.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Hey Kit, are you hinting that Bob H knows where the suit is???? I recall Korff blurting out at the end of a podcast that the suit was buried in Bob H's back yard. But surely if that was the case the suit would have surfaced by now. What's the hold-up?

The suit is not in Bob's yard. His only possession of it was when he brought it back to Yakima from California in Opal's Buick. He never buried anything and Gimlin and Patterson dropped off Chico and picked up the suit from the trunk at night just as Opal stated. Nor did he ever make any such claim to Korff.

Kal Korff is all of the following things - a liar, a thief, and a fraud (he is not a member so I am assuming it is OK to say that). Getting involved with him was one of Greg Long's three biggest mistakes. The other two were not keeping his cool and assuming that producing anything other than the suit and/or a confession would nail the coffin shut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Really?

Wishing you luck and good fortune and good hunting and all that, but for all your trumpeting and horn tooting, what have you provided? Don't get me wrong, here in mid-December, warm wind blowing out of Canada is a welcome by-product.

I appreciate a well constructed razz and that was a good one. Thus far in public nothing more than Greg Long. Words and words and words. Written words and recorded words. Words of mine and words of others. Soon clips of my interviews will be on my Youtube channel, but those will be more words that will be raindrops on a duck for hardcore believers. It is in a documentary film that any proof will be provided.

Surely, you don't think me stupid enough to blurt it all out for you guys on an Internet forum?

Trying to get a film made by someone who is not a film maker by trade is no easy task. It is one that takes time, and time most of all is the greatest challenge in all of this.

And here we are in December and still no Bigfoot DNA from Melba Ketchum and David Paulides. Here's an official prediction: It will never come because it was never there to begin with. My apologies for the non sequitur.

I will do many things, but one of them will never be allowing myself to be baited into shooting my own foot. My pride is not so haughty as that.

Happy Holidays, I1. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thepattywagon

Kitakaze,the following statements by you basically say that you have proof of a hoax, and that it is in the form of either a suit or a confession. The only confession that will have any weight would be one from Bob Gimlin.

But you know that.

"The other two were not keeping his cool and assuming that producing anything other than the suit and/or a confession would nail the coffin shut."

"It is in a documentary film that any proof will be provided.

Surely, you don't think me stupid enough to blurt it all out for you guys on an Internet forum?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Drew

Bob G confessing is the only way? What about film outtakes? or an inter view with RP saying it was a hoax?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Drew, for myself there are a few possibilities that would I think be acceptable to dismiss the PGF as a hoax:

  • Verifiable film outtakes (same film lot, and dateable - must be traceable to the actual event or immediately before/after)

  • Bob G making a definitive statement

  • Anyone producing THE suit used

  • Anyone producing a similar suit from the same period that could reasonably have been used as-is or modified within logical limitations given the participants resources and capabilities

  • Anyone producing a recreation of the suit using period correct materials

Any of those would be nail in the coffin IMO.

That said, if the PGF were dismissed tomorrow, it only means the PGF and trace evidence associated with it is invalidated, says nothing about the 6-7,000 other reports, the tens of thousands of other tracks observed, the thousands of casts, etc.

Edited by infoman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

The suit is not in Bob's yard. His only possession of it was when he brought it back to Yakima from California in Opal's Buick. He never buried anything and Gimlin and Patterson dropped off Chico and picked up the suit from the trunk at night just as Opal stated. Nor did he ever make any such claim to Korff.

Heironimus claims that the film was shot in the morning..."between 11 and 12"....but the shadows in the film show that it was shot in the afternoon, just as Roger and Bob claimed it was.

Is this Heironims' current "memory" of the time, kitakaze....and, if so, how sure of it, is he?

Also, if you decide to use the "faded memory" excuse, like parnassus recently did....(agreeing that it was shot in the afternoon)....then, how would explain the fact that Bob has/had no knowledge whatsoever of the massive inner-core of the alleged "suit"....despite all those hours he was there with Roger, Bob and the suit??? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

infoman wrote:

•Bob G making a definitive statement...

I've recently had an idea, concerning just that....Bob Gimlin making a statement. But, with one very significant condition associated with it. I think it could be a statement which would carry a tremendous amount of weight....whether the film is a hoax, or not.

I plan on talking to one of his close friends about it, sometime in the near future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Spazmo

He never buried anything and Gimlin and Patterson dropped off Chico and picked up the suit from the trunk at night just as Opal stated.

Opal stated that Gimlin and Patterson picked up the suit from the trunk? Is this correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

She stated she saw Gimlin's green horse truck pulling in with Chico and another horse she didn't know the night of the day she discovered the suit. She freaked a bit at first and thought it was a live animal in the trunk. She said that the next day Chico was back in pasture behind the house and that the suit that she, her sister-in-law Willa Smith, Bob's sister Mary's son John Miller all saw and handled the previous day was gone. She said that when she was with her sister Myrtle in the orchard beside the house she discovered the scratch on the car that BH said had been put on the car in the bush in NorCal at Bluff Creek.

This was covered in the Two Strong Reasons thread and before that on the old BFF. I am quite satisfied Opal is not a nefarious colluder for the deception of Bigfootery and the world and the boonswoggling and fraud for financial gain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Spazmo

I am quite satisfied Opal is not a nefarious colluder for the deception of Bigfootery and the world and the boonswoggling and fraud for financial gain.

That's not at all what I was suggesting with my question.

I simply wanted to be sure you weren't stating things as fact that may not have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor

As a skeptic, I prefer to focus on the PG film subject itself as evidence of a hoax.

There is no need to blunder into subplots, sorry Crowlogic... I just don't find this particular argument relevant.

The "Patty" film shows enough for one to realize it's a suit.

Edited by gigantor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

That's not at all what I was suggesting with my question.

I simply wanted to be sure you weren't stating things as fact that may not have been.

Got it. I don't think you think that. It was more for the people who do. I will point that out next time because as the sun will rise tomorrow, it will come up again. These are uncomfortable things for some people determined to believe Patty was a real Bigfoot - there are a whole lote of people that support Bob's story. He was there at the Waylon Jennings show, so was DeAtley, and he did try and get Al to do something about Roger screwing him. It really happened and the witnesses I have interviewed and the ones Long did confirm it. DeAtley himself confirmed it. Are there missing links in what Bob says? Sure. It is to be expected. The things that PGF believers routinely point to are not BH contradicting himself, but what Phil Morris or someone else said. I promise you now that there are loops and missing links that nobody has ever thought of.

But here the big fat deal - he's not the only one. There are numerous people supporting his story. Opal isn't saying she saw a Bigfoot - that creature we are told is everywhere yet nowhere. She said she saw Gimlin's green horse truck pull in with Chico and another horse at night and that the suit she, Willa, and John were playing with that day was gone the next and Chico returned. It's a pretty mundane claim, and multiple people back it up because multiple people were there. Bigfooters talk about a multiple witness Bigfoot sighting. How about a multiple witness Bigfoot suit sighting?

Ah, but unlike the PGF proponents, the BH proponents do not have a film of a suit, where the PGF buffs have a film of a Bigfoot. Oops. No they don't. They have what they recorded with their VCR's, DVR's, TIVO, LMS DVD, Youtube, etc, etc. Not Bill, nor John, nor Erik and Martin, nor the late Beckjord had the PGF. They have what Patterson made for them. They never had the things one would need to get to the center of the PGF Tootsiepop. No original, no info on where it was developed, no info on how they managed an impossible feat of developing it the way they said they did. oops, we forgot. oops, we lost it. And the credulous nod in forgiveness and help make excuses for them. It stinks, stinks, stinks and still people eat it up and ask for more. That is fine. It is to be expected when something is hidden from you and made mysterious. That is why the PGF is a cherry on a fortean sundae.

But hoaxers screw up. They always screw up. Patterson screwed up and Gimlin screwed up. Patricia screwed up. Al DeAtley screwed up. Ray Wallace screwed up. Bob Heironimus screwed up. They and more had a role to play. Some of them did better than others, but they all screwed up at some point. The key is two uncover their biggest screw-ups and use the ones that will lead to proof. I think Patricia and Bob G feel relatively safe now, but the end is coming, and I think they both know it. I do not for one minute think it will be a question of will the hoax be revealed, but rather how and what kind of fallout is there. There are no shortage of hoaxes that took decades and decades to be uncovered. If a hoax was done with any skill, the hoaxers did their jobs and covered their tracks. I am saying that it was done pretty well, but chance and determination have killed it. It's all a matter who reveals the hoax first.

I think I can tell you the death of the PGF as a real Bigfoot. Patterson royally screwed up when he told Gimlin to recruit his good friend Heironimus. Decades later a barely literate teenager somehow managed to get his phonenumber through a friend on Youtube and then came to a skeptics website to tell skeptics interested in the PGF about the crazy things he has been hearing about. The skeptics were naturally skeptical and every single one blew him off because no one could believe this person who could barely for a coherent sentence. I was away and when I came back and saw this development I pounced like some kind of cougar at the YMCA. I managed to use finesse and detective work to get the phone number from him without him actually straightup giving it to me. Then I got to BH myself and the end had begun. How the end really ignited came in such a manner as neither Heironimus, myself, or anyone connected to him and knew of his involvement could predict.

This is how I think the end came. Yakima is a small town and in small towns people know each other and they talk. Coincidences happen much more in a small town then they do in some gargantuan metropolis. The film staying secretly a hoax is no secret in Yakima and it was the principals that nailed their hoaxes coffin by screwing up the roles they had to play. Gimlin could do his believers a giant favour by picking one story and sticking to it, but he's inevitably twisted up in the mess of contradictions he and Roger made in the various tellings of their story.

It doesn't matter a bit now, though. The damage is done and the proof is not in the contradictions.

Edited by kitakaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

kitakaze wrote:

there are a whole lote of people that support Bob's story

And not ONE key body measurement, that supports his story. Isn't that true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...