Jump to content
SweatyYeti

Was Bob Heironimus Patty? Pt 1

Recommended Posts

Guest

Thanks Bill, I will see if I can make a contribution here with that sometime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

kitakaze wrote:

What is the purpose of the pink line extending from Bob's foot into the Patty frames?

To show where the feet don't line up as BH image is to large compared to P/G subject.

Pat...

That's right, Pat. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Bob H has always come up lacking in arm length and leg to torso length proportions. Also consider all the "contraptions" tauted within Patty to give Bob arm length and shoulder mass and yet seeing them side by side Patty should be quite a bit bigger than Bob if indeed Bob was Patty. It takes me way too many mental acrobatics to have Bob as Patty.

I think Sweaty unintentionally made the point better than I did...

PattyBob352CompAG2Fade1.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze
(snip)

All of those points are...(in Patty's case)...unaffected by a suit, and any potential padding inside the suit.

(Even though a suit may add an inch, or two, to the bottom of the feet...that's an insignificant amount, considering the overall picture. And, it can be adjusted for.)

And....so far, it seems that no matter how you scale 'em...you can't make all of those points match-up.

1) In your Patty graphic, if I was to to place the blue dot where you are guessing Patty's shoulder joint to be an inch to the right, why would I be wrong and you be right in the choice of placement?

2) Arms and shoulders are capable of a wide range of movement in three dimensions.

I can change the distance from my elbow to my eyes easy as pie. Can't you?

shoulder_shrug.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Interesting comparisons, Sweaty.

Are we 100% certain that the aspect of both images is correct (and not anamorphic)? If so, it's hard to argue those side-by-side pics.

In this particular comparison, Spazmo, the aspect ratio doesn't actually matter...because the lengths being compared are along the 'Vertical' axis, solely. (The yellow lines are drawn horizontally, but the lengths being compared are the 'vertical lengths' between the lines).

So the Horizontal width of the image...(and Patty)...is irrelevant, in this case...

BobPattyProfileElbowComp2Lined.jpg

The reason I bring it up is because digital images are often thrown out of proper aspect during resizing. Not saying that's the case here, but it's something that should be addressed in fairness.

To my eye, neither image looks to be "stretched" in any way, so it may be a total non-issue anyway.

That's a good point, Spazmo....and Bill. I found out, a few months ago, that the images I'd been capturing off of the LMS dvd are, in fact, stretched horizontally. Their 'aspect ratio' is off...and the images need to be reduced, in width, by about 9%.

I found that out by comparing one of my images of Patty to the same image in Bill's Report. In his report, he has a 'Full frame' image of Frame 350...(I believe it is)...with the correct aspect ratio.

So, in my recent graphics, I've been making that correction.

I'm curious to hear what the rebuttal of this comparison is going to be.

S.

It will be interesting....because there aren't too many ways to refute what these comparisons show..if any... ;) Bob just doesn't match Patty...in those key points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

I'll give it a whirl...

What is the purpose of the pink line extending from Bob's foot into the Patty frames?

To show where the feet don't line up as BH image is to large compared to P/G subject.

Pat...

That's right, Pat. :)

This frame does not show a knee, let alone show a foot on Patty...

BobPattyProfileElbowCompAG1.gif

I'm sorry, but this simply isn't any manner of science, IMO.

I suggest, Sweaty, if you think it is science, you choose your favourite graphics, hit CNTRL+P, pop them in an envelope, and mail them to you nearest university for analysis. Save the stamp if you like and just email them.

If your evidence is so good, surely people outside of a Bigfoot or skeptic forum should be seeing it.

Edited by kitakaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

I think Sweaty unintentionally made the point better than I did...

This image of Bob contains no usable information, regarding the location of Bob's elbow-joint...

X-ManHerionimus.jpg

It's completely meaningless, with respect to the comparison I've presented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest FuriousGeorge

post-122-089579600 1294024915_thumb.jpg

IIIIII knew it.

If I only knew how to do the superimposing GIF, you would see it more clearly. For me right now it's a toss up between Abe Lincoln, Papa Smurf or Adrian Zmed.

Edited by FuriousGeorge
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

1) In your Patty graphic, if I was to to place the blue dot where you are guessing Patty's shoulder joint to be an inch to the right, why would I be wrong and you be right in the choice of placement?

Notice how kitakaze chooses to object to one point which is not in this graphic, of key 'measurement points'...the 'shoulder joint'...

BobHMeasurementPoints.jpg

The shoulder, and the 'end of the hand'...are not key measurement points, because they can be affected/altered/disguised by a suit, and padding.

In the graphic with the blue dot on the shoulder, I did not use that point as a measurement point...I used it only as a pivot point, for Patty's arm...to adjust the location of the elbow-joint.

If you really want to place that blue dot an inch to the right, kitakaze.....please, go right ahead and DO SO. :D Patty's elbow will still end-up at the same location, vertically.

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

kitakaze wrote:

If your evidence is so good, surely people outside of a Bigfoot or skeptic forum should be seeing it

If your theory is SO TRUE....that Bobby was Patty...then surely you'll be able to find, and show us all, exactly where the significant error is in the comparisons I've posted... :D:D:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Spazmo

If your evidence is so good, surely people outside of a Bigfoot or skeptic forum should be seeing it.

Are you addressing Sweaty, or yourself? And would there be a difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Bob H has always come up lacking in arm length and leg to torso length proportions.

Ain't that the truth! :) And I reckon' he'll continue to come up short.

Also consider all the "contraptions" tauted within Patty to give Bob arm length and shoulder mass and yet seeing them side by side Patty should be quite a bit bigger than Bob if indeed Bob was Patty. It takes me way too many mental acrobatics to have Bob as Patty.

That's a good way of putting it, Crow! Between the physical comparisons, and Bob's lame "confessions"...it takes a mighty strong 'will to believe', to buy his story.

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Crowlogic

Notice how kitakaze chooses to object to one point which is not in this graphic, of key 'measurement points'...the 'shoulder joint'...

BobHMeasurementPoints.jpg

The shoulder, and the 'end of the hand'...are not key measurement points, because they can be affected/altered/disguised by a suit, and padding.

In the graphic with the blue dot on the shoulder, I did not use that point as a measurement point...I used it only as a pivot point, for Patty's arm...to adjust the location of the elbow-joint.

If you really want to place that blue dot an inch to the right, kitakaze.....please, go right ahead and DO SO. :D Patty's elbow will still end-up at the same location, vertically.

The 1966 Bob H photo demonstrates just how round shouldered Bob H is. He would have needed a whole lot more than football shoulder pads to bulk up to Patty. He's too narrow to have Patty's fantastic girth without heaps of padding all over the place. We can assume Phil Morris padded up his rug for Bob at Cow Camp but that suit is laughably bad. Perhaps they should have borrowed Youtube's Butchiethekid's monkey suit for Cow Camp. It couldn't have looked any worse than Phil's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Spazmo

The 1966 Bob H photo demonstrates just how round shouldered Bob H is. He would have needed a whole lot more than football shoulder pads to bulk up to Patty. He's too narrow to have Patty's fantastic girth without heaps of padding all over the place. We can assume Phil Morris padded up his rug for Bob at Cow Camp but that suit is laughably bad. Perhaps they should have borrowed Youtube's Butchiethekid's monkey suit for Cow Camp. It couldn't have looked any worse than Phil's.

Wait a sec...

Are you saying that Butchiekid's videos are fakes??? :o

NO! Say it ain't so!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze
If your evidence is so good, surely people outside of a Bigfoot or skeptic forum should be seeing it.

Are you addressing Sweaty, or yourself? And would there be a difference?

To the first question, I use the possessive pronoun "my" rather than "your" when addressing myself and sometimes in the third person just for fun.

To the second question, unless Sweaty is working on a documentary film project in which he presents his various drawings, graphics, and other things he feels are evidence for a position regarding the PGF or Bigfoot in general, yes, there would be a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...