Jump to content
SweatyYeti

Was Bob Heironimus Patty? Pt 1

Recommended Posts

Guest

See the story of Joseph Smith's telling of the origin of the Golden Plates of Nephi and his 'translation' efforts for a textbook example (with apologies to any LDS, as I have good friends and family who are LDS).

:blink:

I suppose I'm kind of wondering how you justify this portion as being compliant with the Rules & Guidelines in place here regarding religious discussion.

Specifically....

8. Do not discuss religion or politics. No exceptions.

So.... :blink:.

Pay particular attention to the No exceptions. portion.

This post was *reported* multiple times for the manner in which it ran afoul of the stated and agreed upon rules regarding religious inferences/discussion.

Please comport your future posts in compliance with the Rules & Guidelines.

I came awfully close to either deleting the entire post, or editing out the offending portion. But, it never hurts to use some infractions of the Rules & Guidelines by addressing them and leaving them in place as *reminders* for everyone to see as an example of what not to say.

This is one of those *examples*.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

It would be easy to prove that Bob H was Patty, all that has to happen is for measurements to be taken that show any of the critical physiological ratios of Bob H are even close to that seen in the PGF.

Very true, infoman. kitakaze is in a position where he has the relationship with Heironmimus, the "knowledge" that Bob was Patty, a camera...(if he doesn't, I'll loan him one... :) ), the proximity to Bob, and the MISSION....to "prove" what he "knows" to be true.

He has everything he needs.....except for ONE little thing...the NUMBERS.

The measurements of Bob and Patty, relating to those key points.... will never agree. :D

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I am on the road but I will take my medicine HR. It was probably too obscure a reference anyway, my apologies to any/all offended, I will use more imagination for comparisons going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
parnassus

Careful what you wish for. Here are BH & Patty scaled so that the distance from their eyes to their butts are the same. I used the markers on their butts that you provided. This should hold if you think BH was in the suit. Your shoulder/humerus placement looks off to me. It should be just south of the chin, if it was BH. Shoulder pads don't enter into it.

bobpatbutt.png

shoulder pads don't enter in to it????? Shoulder pads raise the shoulders by up to 4 inches!!

mlnrj6.jpg

Not to mention that Bob has his shoulder hunched up, and PattyBob has his shoulder down and back. The position of the shoulder joint can vary by several inches by the action of the trapezius and the shoulder retractors, not to mention rotation about the spine.

You are way too high on Patty Bob.

acss35.jpg

Take a look at a couple of Stanford's wide receivers, Chris Owusu and Doug Baldwin. Where would you put the head of the humerus?

by the way, the short orange lines show that shoulder pads can mimic the little "pectoral" line that some have placed their hopes on as a sign of an authentic creature... it isn't.

Costumes are designed to disguise the wearer.

Edited by parnassus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest FuriousGeorge

Not that this will add or detract from the shoulder pad theory but just to keep the facts in order, shoulder pads from the 60's and earlier were bigger. Those pads pictured above are smaller for two reasons. The materials alone were bigger in the 60's and they didn't fit shoulder pads according to position back then, meaning wide receiver pads and other skill position pads of today are smaller than the pads of other positions. Back then there was one type. Big.

Flexibility from the pads of the 60's and earlier should also be considered when thinking in these terms, as the pads of today are much more fluid.

Edited by FuriousGeorge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Not to mention that Bob has his shoulder hunched up,

Are you sure that Bob has his shoulders "hunched up", in that comparison, Parn?...or are you just making things up, to suit your needs?? ;) ...

PattyBobBobElbowMatch1A.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Are you sure that Bob has his shoulders "hunched up", in that comparison, Parn?...or are you just making things up, to suit your needs?? ;) ...

PattyBobBobElbowMatch1A.jpg

When I imagine putting Bob in a suit, I see a comically large head. Anyone else agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

When I imagine putting Bob in a suit, I see a comically large head. Anyone else agree?

I agree, wholeheartedly! :)

No need to imagine, though, K-O...here's Bob now, with a comically-large head, inside a comically bad suit... :lol: ...

RuggedBob5.jpg

PBHeadCompAG3.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Infoman said:

Kit, do you think that if there were a hole, large enough for the PGF subject, with a trackway or evidence of passage leading up to it, and not beyond it, ANYWHERE in the site of what was at that time an extremely exciting event, that Byrne, Dahinden or Green would have simply ignored it?

Very good observation. Also, I would have a hard time believing if that hole was there, they wouldnt have looked into the bottom of the hole for "tracks". I just don't think John Green has ever been interested in continuing a story he felt was a hoax, and I believe if John Green had seen that hole, and found tracks in it (and there should have been)- we would have all known about it. Judging from past stories about Dahinden, I am betting he would have went on a real info slam of the whole affair.

Byrne, Dahinden and Green, all men interested in making the discovery themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wheellug

If there were a hole, next to the creek, in the creek bed.. would not said hole be filled with water?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

shoulder pads don't enter in to it????? Shoulder pads raise the shoulders by up to 4 inches!!

They don't raise the rotator cuff and they don't raise the head. Note where the football player's chin is relative to the shoulder pads. THAT'S why shoulder pads don't enter in to it.

Not to mention that Bob has his shoulder hunched up, and PattyBob has his shoulder down and back. The position of the shoulder joint can vary by several inches by the action of the trapezius and the shoulder retractors, not to mention rotation about the spine.

You are way too high on Patty Bob.

Bob doesn't have his shoulder hunched up. Excuse? Patty is leaning forward more than Bob and turned slightly more toward the camera. But that wouldn't affect the height of the shoulder joint relative to the chin. You insist that's Bob in there, after all.

bobpatbutt2.png

Huge difference in humerus length if the scaling is correct. I scaled both images to match the distances between the eye to the X you placed on their butts. Personally, I think your X placement exaggerates Patty's size somewhat, but not enough to match the humerus. You'll have to come up with some other excuse why Bob comes up short, besides "shoulder pads".

Take a look at a couple of Stanford's wide receivers, Chris Owusu and Doug Baldwin. Where would you put the head of the humerus?

by the way, the short orange lines show that shoulder pads can mimic the little "pectoral" line that some have placed their hopes on as a sign of an authentic creature... it isn't.

Costumes are designed to disguise the wearer.

The point in this exercise is to focus on body markers that can not be disguised by a costume. For example the eyes & elbows. We should also be able to estimate where Bob's humerus was, if that was him in the suit, otherwise, why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

If there were a hole, next to the creek, in the creek bed.. would not said hole be filled with water?

That's a good question, and one I don't have an answer to..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thepattywagon

I wonder if Bob Heironimus will jump into the hole he's digging himself now, to show how he did it back in '67?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest demon

They don't raise the rotator cuff and they don't raise the head. Note where the football player's chin is relative to the shoulder pads. THAT'S why shoulder pads don't enter in to it.

Bob doesn't have his shoulder hunched up. Excuse? Patty is leaning forward more than Bob and turned slightly more toward the camera. But that wouldn't affect the height of the shoulder joint relative to the chin. You insist that's Bob in there, after all.

bobpatbutt2.png

Huge difference in humerus length if the scaling is correct. I scaled both images to match the distances between the eye to the X you placed on their butts. Personally, I think your X placement exaggerates Patty's size somewhat, but not enough to match the humerus. You'll have to come up with some other excuse why Bob comes up short, besides "shoulder pads".

The point in this exercise is to focus on body markers that can not be disguised by a costume. For example the eyes & elbows. We should also be able to estimate where Bob's humerus was, if that was him in the suit, otherwise, why not?

you cannot tell where bob would actually be relative to the costume.who's to say the butt pad is going to line up exactly with his rear.same with the shoulders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crowlogic

Excellent. You continue to ask this. You must be ready then to finally select one of the three names from the following...

Byrne. Dahinden. Green. Three men documented the site back then. Which one was instructed to or thought of looking for a hole or depression in the vicinity that would be spoken of until three and a half decades later?

If you can not select one of those three names, I invite you to explain exactly how your question makes sense logically, because I do not see it.

I considered the problem of the hole as far back as September

The fact that there is zero observations of a hole and or tracks leading into one by anyone/everyone that visited the site after the filming is IMO outstanding evidence that there was not a hole present that anyone entered for any reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...