Jump to content
Guest Bipedal Ape

Pattys Height

Recommended Posts

Guest

Not perfectly, no. That's because when Al and Roger paid a visit to the Ray Wallace School of Bigfoot Hoaxing and got some tips and materials to make the tracks at Bluff Creek like he did only a month before, Roger decided to get creative and use his hands to customize the soles...

Bigpgfkillshota.gif

But if Wallace could fool Don Abbott, Patterson can have fooled believers even better. Meldrum even thinks they are the same and he was duped by Wallace too!

What's he talking about, G?

Kit, regardless of where you intend to go with this, "Wallace" did not make the Patty tracks. Sorry, but that's a no go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

A "nuh-uh"? Drats. Patterson made the tracks. The toe signature is an exact match. Try doing that with two different sources. That'll be a lot more effective than a "nuh-uh."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The toe signature (whatever that is) is not an exact match, sorry.

Edited by Gigantofootecus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest parnassus

Here's a total waste of my time..

post-337-0-53313900-1331939632_thumb.png

This is using V6's footlength (which was maximal) and a foot ruler approx. 1" smaller. This would account for some bloom from overexposure and motion blur. This is an error analysis with the given info. The resultant error renders this estimate useless. We must refine the estimates to narrow the range of error. Use several frames showing the foot to refine the foot/height ratio. Also, determine the walking versus standing height with better precision (this one is easy, actually). The object here is to reduce the relative error. After that, who knows?

nah, you did it wrong and by so doing increased the likely height and nearly doubled the error. In the first place there is no evidence of vertical motion blur. Secondly, you have to make a best measurement, then append an error estimate either side of it. Perhaps that is 74 +/- 3. You do the measurement. Then do the same with the height. eg 336 +/- 10 pixels (there could be slight motion blur but no bloom). But you can't just postulate systematic errors. You have to have evidence. The fractional ("relative") uncertainties are .04 and .01%, and the total is then .05. That gives a walking height of 5-7 +/- 5% aka 5-4 to 5-10. Your mileage may vary but not by a whole lot.

The standing height can be dealt with by posing models in a repeatable way. Assigning a huge error is not appropriate at this time. But that is a whole nother thing.

p.

Edited by parnassus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Where is your error analysis?

Narrow down the variables (and rationize the estimates).

Why do you assume that the footlength was 14.5"???"

Waiting.. :popcorn:

Edited by Art1972
:to remove 1A violation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

The toe signature (whatever that is) is not an exact match, sorry.

"Nuh-uh" x 2! Double drat!

Bigwallacepatterson4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

"Nuh-uh" x 2! Double drat!

Bigwallacepatterson4.jpg

Nuh-uh x 3! Triple drat!

Kitlock.gif

Must have been Roger's own foot!

Edited by Gigantofootecus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

So when did the mid tarsal break talk start? Did the PGF Hoax crew invent this type of footprint?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Ok... Here's the deal:

#1 I put a polite warning in this thread, back on page 3 somewhere, asking all members to stay on topic, and to concentrate your posts/comments on the argument- and not the person making it.

This has been ignored by some of you, and I have as of right now found 4 posts that either need to be edited, or deleted.

#2 Some of you will be hearing from me shortly, via PM regarding this situation.

#3 As of right now, because once again the topic cannot be discussed in a polite, intelligent, and mature manner- the thread is being locked/closed.

I have not decided whether it will remain closed indefinitely, or if I will open it back up at a later point after a cooling off period.

It will remain closed at least until sometime tomorrow, until after I've had a chance to discuss it with other members of staff (Chief Admin), and reach a consensus.

Check back tomorrow- as it will either be re-opened, or I will post a further update if it is needed.

A.

Edited by Art1972
: to add update/reason for thread being locked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See-Te-Cah NC

I am reopening this topic, but if it gets out of hand, it will be shut down again... possibly for good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

Thanks, STC.  Great timing, too... ;) ....I just happen to have something to post regarding Patty's height. It's a new method of determining her height.

 

I'll post it either tonight, or tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...