Jump to content
Guest

Ray Wallace Hoaxing And The Pgf

Recommended Posts

Guest

No.

This guy was bee-boppin' and skattin', duping Bigfooter hunters like there was no tomorrow in NorCal. Why are they coming to see him?

His tracks undeniably were the tracks that Patterson said was why he came to Bluff Creek in October.

There is not one shred of evidence to support Ray Wallace being involved in any sort of field hoaxing of tracks in N Cal or elsewhere. Making casts to sell via his business venture is NOT the same as field hoaxing.

See chapter 2 of Legend Meets Science for the comprehensive debunking of the Wallace claims, in particular pp60-63 (addressing the numerous obvious flaws in his hoaxed "stompers") and pp69-70 (specifically debunking the Wallace/Bluff Creek connection).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
masterbarber

Why does Wallace write to Ray Crowe about Patterson and DeAtley visiting his home before the PGF was out.

Before the PGF was out or before they filmed it?

If the latter, and you can prove it, that may well be a huge problem........

On the flip side of the coin, Wallace apparently had alot of opinions (or observations) about bigfoot behavior:

http://www.nabigfoot...Raywallace.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

What drives me nuts is how photos get manipulated to "prove" a point. I don't doubt that a pair of Wallace stompers created the Blue Creek trackway...but the proof for this is how the general shape of the Wallace stomper matches the track in the photo comparison above. Funny how the Wallace stomper doesn't even match another picture of the same stomper. Either 1 picture has the stomper tilted away from the camera or the photo has been manipulated to better fit the track. The view of the track may have foreshortened its width, but that was never determined.

wallacestomper.gifwallacestompertrack.gif

The only way to prove that the stomper matches the track is to MEASURE their dimensions, not with photo comparisons. Photos distort the dimensions of objects unless they are aligned parallel to the camera plane, which they obviously were not. Otherwise, it's just sloppy debunking and doesn't prove your case. Even with the alleged "crack" in the heel showing up in a track, we need the dimensions to put this one to bed. Close but no cigar.

Also, what was the avg step length of the trackway? Wallace couldn't have taken very long steps in his wooden stompers, I wouldn't think. Why that didn't tip anyone off is beyond me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wheellug

What drives me nuts is how photos get manipulated to "prove" a point. I don't doubt that a pair of Wallace stompers created the Blue Creek trackway...but the proof for this is how the general shape of the Wallace stomper matches the track in the photo comparison above. Funny how the Wallace stomper doesn't even match another picture of the same stomper. Either 1 picture has the stomper tilted away from the camera or the photo has been manipulated to better fit the track. The view of the track may have foreshortened its width, but that was never determined.

wallacestomper.gifwallacestompertrack.gif

The only way to prove that the stomper matches the track is to MEASURE their dimensions, not with photo comparisons. Photos distort the dimensions of objects unless they are aligned parallel to the camera plane, which they obviously were not. Otherwise, it's just sloppy debunking and doesn't prove your case. Even with the alleged "crack" in the heel showing up in a track, we need the dimensions to put this one to bed. Close but no cigar.

Also, what was the avg step length of the trackway? Wallace couldn't have taken very long steps in his wooden stompers, I wouldn't think. Why that didn't tip anyone off is beyond me.

Very similar.. but.. looking at the little toe, the impression and the cast appear to be different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Meldrum already deals with this issue, kita, which I've pointed out to you multiple times.

I'm going to (as a favor to all the other board members who may be tempted to fall for this rebutted non-arguement), directly quote the entire passage pertinent to your alleged proof of hoax:

The spotlighted carved feet do bear some resemblances to the numerous Wallace 'casts', such as the bulbous forefoot and pronounced split ball, but also displayed some differing traits. For exeample, the toe row is arranged along an arc rather than a straight edge. The proportions of the foot are more reasonable. What was the inspiration for the subtle departures from the Wallace signature stereotype?

It seems that the carved feet do bear a resemblance to some of the 15-inch footprints that had been found and cast by Bob Titmus on a number of occasions, and also to the well-documented tracks on the Blue Creek Mountain Road, investigated by Green and Dahinden. Titmus had duplicated a pair of deep and distinct 15-inch tracks left in firm sand, and also the larger Jerry Crew cast. In the process he had smoothed them over with clay to facilitate the molding process. This gave the duplicates a slightly blocker and less natural appearance in contrast to the originals I had examined closely. Titmus had distributed a number of copies of these duplicate casts to interested individuals, and they were available. Ray's brother Wilbur "Shorty" Wallace, presented Green with a Titmus duplicate of the Crew Cast. He or Ray could very well have had a copy of the Titmus 15-inch cast as well. Could this have been the source of inspiration for the novel carved feet, clearly distinct from the classic Wallace stereotype, only unveiled years after the fact by the later Wallaces?

The resemblance of the carvings to the 15-inch casts is clear but actually fairly superficial. Closer examination reveals the wooded carvings are rather crude copies of the 15-inch casts. John Green has examined and photographed as many of the original 15-inch footprints as anyone. The stretch of tracks along the road on Blue Creek Mountain was laid in fine dust, and those numerous prints were exceptionally clear. He noted a number of details that distinguish them from the Wallace's carved wooden feet. First, "being rigid it [the fake foot] cannot change its width when weight comes on it, so it cannot make a clear print wider than itself, but compared to almost all of the 15-inch prints I have casts or pictures of, it is too narrow in relation to it's length. That in spite of the fact that [the toes of] the wooden feet is the shortest of any. Second, it is not sufficiently curvaceous. The living foot can make a print narrower and straighter than itself, but the wooden foot cannot do the opposite. Third, it could not conceivable make a wide straight groove between the toes and the ball [as occurs when the toes are flexed]. Check the picture, wich is on the cover of mu first printing [On the Track of Sasquatch]. Fourth, the rounding of the heel itself is not symmetrical. All the others are, including the narrow print that shows only four toes, which is otherwise the closest match to the carving."

In fact, the wooden feet don't accurately match any of the casts they have been compared to. Coleman points out that Steve Matthes, a member of Tom Slick's Pacific Northwest Expedition, declared the 15-inch tracks he found deeply impressed in a sandbar along Bluff Creek in 1960 to be fakes. Coleman asserts these casts to be a match to the Wallace's carved wooden feet and therefore concludes that, "Yes, Wallace appears to have placed prank footprints near some of his California work sites from 1958 through the 1960s." The problem is--the Matthes cast does not match the publicized Wallace carved feet, but the Mattes cast is a reasonable match to the Titmus 15-inch casts.

Meldrum, Sasquatch:Legend Meets Sciencepp61-64

This should mark the last time you need to be corrected on this issue, Kita. Wallace's biggest hoax involving bf was that he hoaxed bf. His claims are absolutely worthless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I just made a quick gif for that.

wallace_bluecreek_comp-gif.gif

Try doing that with this one (which has not been fudged like the one you used).

wallacestompertrack.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest HucksterFoot

Try doing that with this one (which has not been fudged like the one you used).

wallacestompertrack.gif

I did a resize and tilt. What is the actual measurement of That Wallace stomper anyways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest HucksterFoot

Try doing that with this one (which has not been fudged like the one you used).

wallacestompertrack.gif

To add: All this print stuff should all be over in an appropriate PGF thread anyways. Maybe it can be moved there? :]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I did a resize and tilt. What is the actual measurement of That Wallace stomper anyways?

The actual measurements have not been disclosed (or have they?) That's the problem. You can't "estimate" the tilt, you have to know it. Otherwise, you could stretch & compress almost anything to fit. But that won't prove anything. I personally think they look like a match, but it can't be verified by stretching/compressing overlaid photos. So even if the photos can be made to match, it can't be stated as fact that they do. Which many have done. The LMS excerpts alluded to the tracks being too narrow to match the wooden Wallace feet. If the photo of the track is not appreciably foreshortened, then this claim has merit. It will take the physical dimensions of the wooden feet and the tracks to settle this.

ETA: Sorry about this OT stuff

Edited by Gigantofootecus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Try doing that with this one (which has not been fudged like the one you used).

G, are you seriously implying that one of Wallace's relatives reshaped one of Wallce's many, many stompers to be a match for the BCM trackway?

Both feet...

1107477084.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest HucksterFoot

The actual measurements have not been disclosed (or have they?) That's the problem. You can't "estimate" the tilt, you have to know it. Otherwise, you could stretch & compress almost anything to fit. But that won't prove anything. I personally think they look like a match, but it can't be verified by stretching/compressing overlaid photos. So even if the photos can be made to match, it can't be stated as fact that they do. Which many have done. The LMS excerpts alluded to the tracks being too narrow to match the wooden Wallace feet. If the photo of the track is not appreciably foreshortened, then this claim has merit. It will take the physical dimensions of the wooden feet and the tracks to settle this.

ETA: Sorry about this OT stuff

I hear ya, and I don't want my gif comp to be misleading. Should be recognized as such and Definitely not a precise way to establish these issues. A nice laser scan of the Wallace wooden feet would be cool. :]

Edited by HucksterFoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

G, are you seriously implying that one of Wallace's relatives reshaped one of Wallce's many, many stompers to be a match for the BCM trackway?

Both feet...

1107477084.gif

:D NO. I mean that the photo of the wooden foot that Dale Wallace is holding in his left hand is the same foot that is used to compare to the Blue Creek Mountain track. They are definitely the same wooden foot from different photos. Yet the foot in the photo above is wider than the foot in the photo used to match up to the BCM track. This means that either someone fudged the photo and compressed the width, or Dale was holding it at an angle from the camera (for that other photo, which is different from the photo above). Do you see what I'm getting at here?

Meldrum/Green contend that the BCM tracks were too narrow to be Wallace stompers, because apparently no stompers have been brought forward that fit the width of the tracks. The dimensions of the wooden stompers are cast in stone and the substrate was dry powdery soil on hardpan, which retained the shape of the foot in the track. A wooden foot can not make a track narrower than its actual width. This is why we need to know the physical dimensions of any Wallace foot that is claimed to match the BCM track. It seems only the narrow ones need apply. However, the one Dale is holding is not as narrow as has been led to believe. The width of the photo has been fudged, by whoever posted that photo. All I'm saying is use the foot that Dale is holding above for any comparisons since it's less distorted. Now the question is how narrow were the BCM tracks in comparison?

Edited by Gigantofootecus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

This thread is for the continuation of the discussion regarding Ray Wallace and his Blue Creek Mountain Road hoax 3 miles from the PGF site done at the end of August during the Bigfoot Days festival in Willow Creek. This hoax duped Royal BC Museum anthropologist Don Abbott and the Bigfoot hunters Rene Dahinden and John Green, the latter who to this day still will not admit being hoaxed. The BCM tracks were what was said to be the reason that Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin came and spent three week according to Gimlin and one week according to Roger Patterson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...