Jump to content
Guest

Ray Wallace Hoaxing And The Pgf

Recommended Posts

SweatyYeti

^

 

A very well-written post, Pat... :) .....especially so, after a beer...or three... ;)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

An yes, I do think it relevant/important, as it helps establishes what came first.

 

 
Pat,
 
But what if you didn't really want to know which came first.     :)  
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

SweatyYeti,

 

Thanks !  Or 9ish...ha ! ha !  :)

 

Bigfoothunter

 

;)

 

Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

These pics are similar in that the all have a person/thing with 2 arms and 2 legs.

 

One looks like an Egyptian Statue right off the movie The Ten Commandments.

 

The Patty head is pointed.  The Patterson drawing is nothing like it.

 

The breast issue is similar in that both the drawing and the Patty figure appear to have breasts.  a 50/50% chance real or faked. Rogers drawing of the breast area has a significant sag vs the Patty creature.  Why not make a Patty suit with the same kind of sag in the breast area if one is making a costume?  Why the more uplifted breast area in the actual Patty result?  

 

This pics do not match Roger's attempt. It is a stretch to think it does.   The idea of what Roger drew and believe is worth considering. Just seems we have a generic look that would be similar if most people drew one. If Roger thought bigfoot was more of a ancient man than ape his drawing reflects a 95% human where Patty looks 95% ape-like to me.

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

kitakaze,

 

April 20th, post 1539, you said,

"..the stompers at the time of use in August 1967 would have been about ten years old, and have seen plenty of use in the dirt roads of NorCal. The heel crack is characteristic of the stompers' age and texture as alder wood."

 

I asked how you know this, that they were made around 1957. A very simple question, asked multiple times, we had a discussion on those stompers compared to casts from a known date, 1958. An yes, I do think it relevant/important, as it helps establishes what came first. We have casts from a known date, 1958. You said yourself the one '58 cast did not match the stomper, then you supplied another cast suggestin' it was made by the stompers in question. Your image for some reason was lightened so much as to loose detail, so I darkened it. I then asked if it matched your stomper, you failed to answer. I don't think it was made by your suggested stomper either, thus we have two casts from a known date of 1958 that resemble the Wallace stompers an may indeed be what Wallace used as a template for his stompers. Really is quite simple.

 

As for your..."I find it grating to read your posts and the way you choose to present them in a technical discussion.", that I don't put the "g" on words now an again is of no matter to the relevance of the context of my posts.

 

How technical is this, your post 1604, "There is not single question that you have ever asked me that is hmmm or hard or uh-oh. They are time and again the base questions of a Bigfoot enthusiast with comical notions of interpersonal communication and an invested belief in the absurd. You want to keep ridiculous BC/BCM/OM tracks on the table. You should do this and pass them around with your Bigfoot enthusiast friends and tell each other that this is really, really, real Bigfoot stuff." 

 

Or how's this for technical, your post 1505, "You think a hump in the middle demonstrates a flexible foot. I do not. I see rigid feet making humps and I really could care less if it's right in the middle, a little forward, a little back. It;s gobbledy-goop." 

 

As for your "There is no way I'm going to look through even one Rosco filled post looking for any question of yours.", no need to be curt kitakaze, I think there's rules bout that. Your diction an use of the English language may impress yourself, however your discourse does nothin' to the context of your posts.  

 

So...once again..I'd rather not ask somethin' else, but stick to my original question, how do you know those stompers were made around 1957 ?

 

Pat...

 

 

smileyvault-cute-big-smiley-animated-013

So Kitakaze finds out that he blew it on the BCM tracks when he was forced to deal with the absense of transfer evidence in the prints along the road - and he doesn't know when the so-called stompers were made. Oh this is gold!!!

Edited by Bigfoothunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Roger Patterson needed the money shot to pay for everything so he made it happen... I find nothing strange about that story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wheellug

Kerry I agree that Roger needed the money.  It was a great thing that he was able to capture, on film, such a great creature as Patty.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eq9Gg0izUDE

 

Heard it here,  just before Meldrum get's that stupid look on his face like wow, this guy is not going to fall for it.


Check out the video's cover photo, the old tree stump hoax.

Edited by WV FOOTER
edit objectionable text

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...