Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

A New Look At The Story Of Bob H

Recommended Posts

kitakaze

Kit:

"There is not a single pro-PGF argument that I can't knock out of the park "

As a general rule of creature costume making, we can only add to the physical features of the human wearing the costume, so if we want to make something look smaller than the human's anatomy, we have to build up around the area to look smaller, and create the illusion with that addition. The problem is, by adding to reshape a feature, the overall anatomy gets bigger.

Patty has a remarkably small head, for the reshaped way it has a very low cranium and a sloping back crest going back after what appears to be a brow ridge. And then the face or muzzle is quite flattened as well. Usually, to reshape a normal human head into a configuration like that, the result is a quite big head for the body, and the PGF doesn't show this.

Could you explain what design of prosthetic illusion Roger used to make Bob H. look that way and keep the relatively small head? Based on the recreation Morris helped with and Bob H wore for the TV program, they didn't succeed the second time around, because the forhead is too big by far. What did Roger do that Morris couldn't duplicate?

Bill

Easy. You show me a profile of Patty, perfect perpendicular profile, no angle, and I will give you the same for Bob with no hat on. You haven't established scale for Patty so you don't know how big or small her head really is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Long identified the Bluff Creek Company Store as the place he thought most like to have been the 5:00 pm meeting place. Long was was not there. BH did not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

weather prevented any flights! under what rules kit? FAA VFR or IFR?

There was torrential rain. All flights in the area were grounded for October 20, 1967. It's not even half the problem. They could not even possibly have made it to Eureka and back in the time they said they did by car. Then there's the insanity that we are supposed to believe that they broke off pursuit of the Bigfoot because Roger feared attack by multiple Bigfoots, but oh, we're going to tether our horses for many hours there at the campsite and hope for the best that those Bigfoots don't like horse meat sashimi.

It's gonzo and the timing is impossible. Byrne knew it and Al threw him off the track by telling him it was a hoax and to promise not to quote him publicly on it. Dahinden knew it was impossible and threw his hands up in the air saying they just must have filmed it earlier. They reported to the Times-Standard that they filmed Patty at approximately 1:30 and Friday afternoon of Oct. 20 and were in Yakima watching it developed in DeAtley's living room on Sunday afternoon Oct. 22. Totally impossible.

Keep 'em coming, though.

Edited by kitakaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Heironimus' description of the suit being different than Morris' is not Heironimus contradicting Heironimus. BH could have remembered wrong or remembered right. Morris' suit could have either been significantly altered with funds from DeAtely after him seeing the Morris suit, or an entirely new one created. really Heironimus did he know what a Morris suit looked like? you seem to think he did!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Long identified the Bluff Creek Company Store as the place he thought most like to have been the 5:00 pm meeting place. Long was was not there. BH did not.

Actually, Long literally was there. Not in '67, though, if that is what you meant. BH did not what? I'm going to request counter-arguments make complete sentences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

There was torrential rain! I did not ask you that! I asked under the rules laid down by the FAA you state no flying? was it under VFR or IFR? a vast difference. please clarify your no flying rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Heironimus' description of the suit being different than Morris' is not Heironimus contradicting Heironimus. BH could have remembered wrong or remembered right. Morris' suit could have either been significantly altered with funds from DeAtely after him seeing the Morris suit, or an entirely new one created. really Heironimus did he know what a Morris suit looked like? you seem to think he did!

Justwonder, in the lower right of a post you will see the button "Reply" between "Edit" and "Multiquote". That is for quoting. If you could please use it, it will make for a much more coherent conversation. People are going to read me in your post and think it's you typing. Get's hard to follow.

What makes you think I think Heironimus was aware of Morris Costumes in 1967?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

There was torrential rain! I did not ask you that! I asked under the rules laid down by the FAA you state no flying? was it under VFR or IFR? a vast difference. please clarify your no flying rule.

What would it matter under what authority flights were grounded? Gimlin said he was waiting in the truck while Roger was mailing the film. They could not be mailing it from a post office because it would have been closed. If they are going to charter a plane, how can Roger pay for that when he is broke and has no funding from DeAtley? It doesn't matter how he could pay for it because he could not physically film the creature at 1:30, track the creature for three miles as they originally said, do all the casting, film the plaster our scene, film the stomp test, drive all the way from there to Eureka and back and then to be at Al Hodgson's store around 6:30, and then later speaking to the Times-Standard reporter around 9 then returning to the film site around 10 pm.

It's really impossible, so what authority the flights were grounded under is moot. Byrne was the one who found that information and it was to him that DeAtley admitted the film a fake and asked him not to quote him because of family relations. Byrne interviewed DeAtley a mere three weeks before Long did. he told Byrne he knew the film was a fake because Roger said he was going to film a Bigfoot at Bluff creek just before he left Yakima. I believe he was trying to throw Byrne off the trail that would implicate DeAtley's direct involvement in the hoax. DeAtley himself just said he had no contact with Roger between the book and the film being taken, yet now they were discussing what Roger would do at Bluff Creek? I think DeAtley boonswoggled Greg Long as well. I think he played Long and told him how much a schmuck he thought Patterson was because he read Long`s hunger for dirt. That's why he made such a point about Patterson's adultery. he seemed to know exactly what would satiate Long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
BFF Donor

There was torrential rain. All flights in the area were grounded for October 20, 1967.

Reference, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

This has been absolutely classic, a nice Sunday treat.

You can usually tell who feels like they are 'losing' an argument on the web by the pace of the posting and the faux confidence.

Simple comparisons of the appearance of the head on the PGF subject, to the skeptic approved skeletal reconstruction, compared to the CC recreation are, as Bill points out, inconsistent and not supportive of Bob H or Phil Morris.

There does not appear to be enough volume in the head of the PGF subject for Bob H's head if the skeptic approved skeletal reconstruction scale is used, let alone for a football helmet, and then some mask of indeterminate description. As the CC recreation clearly shows, the proportions of the costume head do not compare favorably with the head of the PGF subject. See photos of period correct football gear (shoulder pads and helmets) to see that it is not even close for either theory, including Parnassus' shouldermapads.

60sNFLimages-2.jpg

60sNFLimages-4.jpg

Of course, Kit recently stated he is no longer sure that it was a Phil Morris suit, so he has an out there as that storyline continues to breakdown. But he is tied hip-to-hip to Bob H and Greg Long.

That is the same Bob H whose story is full of holes it aspires one day to have the integrity of cheesecloth, thanks Knight via Mellissa. And it is the same Greg Long who was hoaxed and scammed by Kal Korff and now also Al DeAtely according to someone who posts here regularly, what was that name.....

I wonder how cooperative Phil and Amy will be though when they learn Kit is tossing their claims under the bus?

The $64,000 question then becomes, are Phil and Amy Morris lying?

Or is it just another in the ever-expanding list of skeptic-approved 'misrememberings'?

Edited by infoman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
BFF Donor
justwonder, on 30 January 2011 - 02:50 PM, said:

There was torrential rain! I did not ask you that! I asked under the rules laid down by the FAA you state no flying? was it under VFR or IFR? a vast difference. please clarify your no flying rule.

What would it matter under what authority flights were grounded?

Because it would require an authority to "ground" all flights. All you need to do is correctly cite the one that did so.

Reference, please.

They could not be mailing it from a post office because it would have been closed.

I mail things all the time when the post office is closed.

It doesn't matter how he could pay for it because he could not physically film the creature at 1:30, track the creature for three miles as they originally said, do all the casting, film the plaster our scene, film the stomp test, drive all the way from there to Eureka and back and then to be at Al Hodgson's store around 6:30, and then later speaking to the Times-Standard reporter around 9 then returning to the film site around 10 pm.

Why not? I once killed a moose at 10 am, got lost trying to find him until sometime after noon (oh, wait! I don't have the precise time? Perry Mason is going to tear you up, Huntster!), found him wedged belly-down between two trees, skinned him, cut him into pieces, bagged him, packed him about 150 yards to the canoe (the only things left were the hide and most of the guts), paddled a mile to camp across a lake, realized it was only about 4 pm, decided to haul him home rather than spend the night with him, tightened up my camp for my absence, paddled/pulled/emptied/repacked/etc that canoe down the 3 miles of creek against the current and over multiple beaver dams to the lake where I parked my Bronco, packed the meat from the canoe to the Bronco, paddled the canoe to a lonely spot about a quarter mile away to stash until my return, then drove about 50 miles down a trail, then dirt road, then paved country lane, then Parks Highway. Got home in time to take my picture with the moose's head in the driveway before dark.

All by myself.

Prove it? I can't. I was by myself.

So why don't you do a Perry Mason and prove that I'm lying................

Byrne was the one who found that information and it was to him that DeAtley admitted the film a fake and asked him not to quote him because of family relations.

1) Reference, please

2) So do you believe Byrne in this instance, then disbelieve him when he stated so many times about finding tracks that were clearly not hoaxed? Selective in your beliefs, aren't you?

Edited by Huntster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
BFF Donor

There was torrential rain. All flights in the area were grounded for October 20, 1967.

Reference, please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

What would it matter under what authority flights were grounded? absobloodylutely!the FAA they say you do.

not moot kit!but let me give you a brake,yes VFR grounded. IFR rain NO.so thats the no fly out the wndow.

Byrne, the great white hunter.your having a laughfff.but don't quote me!

Eureka, it's not the only airport and there was one far closer,who handled IFR traffic and postal cargo. a growing trend in those days,a major name these days. did have regular flights from that airport. but thats up to you to find and eliminate has a possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The DeAtley charter question can be answered pretty simply, I am sure that there are skeptics who can name which specific airport was flown from, what the specific conditions were, and what specific kind of plane was used.

That is pretty simple and straightforward investigative reporting, and very meaningful in terms of establishing the veracity of the claim it 'could not have' flown. Lack of this type of foundational information would indicate a pretty sloppy approach to the investigative reporting, and would instead suggest advocate-journalist, totally different things.

In regards to qualifications for this particular question, I hold a Commercial Pilot's license with Instrument Priveleges (since 2003, started flying in '87, and have logged time in 20 different fixed and rotary wing aircraft types over the last 25 years), I can and have flown in rain, even heavy rain, in small planes (300hp, 6 seats).

What specific airport, what specific conditions, and what specific kind of plane - this will go a long way towards ending the discussion re: whether or not the charter flight 'could have' occurred.

Edited by infoman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

info,I think us both take Kits no flying as for what it is. but kit let me give you another little clue! you don't need bad weather to ground VFR flights.what time was the flight old chap? (LOL)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...