Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest

If A Suit And Not Bh Then Who?

Recommended Posts

BFSleuth

Must have been quite a drain on finances to buy all those suits...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gershake

Yes, I was in Yakima working on the project and swung by Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital. I caroused over to information and asked how I might go about checking for records of a patient admitted for a dog bite to the groin. When the lovely lady finished staring and asked when, I said 1967. I didn't bother mentioning Bigfoot to the men escorting me from the building.

Hahahaha. Love your sense of humour. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

So you're trying tell us that Florence wasn't capable of identifying a cheesy gorilla costume?

That's hilarious.

Appeared to have mange, white skin underneath, flat, flared nostrils, seven feet tall, 300 lbs, smelled like rotten meat... $200 monkey suit...

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/canadianhoax.htm

Welcome to Bigfootery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton
I can't say for sure what it was that you were looking at, but as I showed you, Elna Wallace was filmed wearing Bigfoot suits for Ray's hoaxing. You may be thinking of a 2003 article by Franz Lidz. The relevant portion is this... The most famous "evidence," a blurry 1967 home movie of a startled specimen striding into a thicket, also may have been Wallace's work: possibly his wife, Elna, in an ape suit. "Ray L. Wallace was Bigfoot," his son Michael confessed last month. "The reality is, Bigfoot just died." As you can see with careful reading, that is not a family member claiming Elna as Patty, but speculation on the part of the journalist. Or was it something else? I have never heard of Michael or Dale making any claims about Elna and Patty.

kitakaze,

I looked again for where I found it, but haven't found it. But from the photo I took of the screen, this is what it says.

That was no man in a gorilla suit in the infamous Patterson-Gimlin grainy black and white film footage from 1967- that was Wallace's wife Elna.

He did it for the joke and then he was afraid to tell anyone because they'd be mad at him, admitted Dale Lee Wallace, the hoaxster's nephew.

The image I photoed was not a transcript of a article, but a image of the actual article, image of frame 352 on right, bout all I can recall of the top of my head.

Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I have floated this out there before...I'm not 100% convinced that this is the answer, but I think it answers alot of questions/issues. I know most people will write this off because of the size, but if you look at the math - it seems to work -

Roger Patterson in the suit.

Here are the conditions that would make this work.

1. John Green being reasonably accurate when measuring from where he stood to tree TC-2 = 115 ft (I think this is likely)

2. Bill Munns calculations putting Roger's filming location approx 3-4 ft in front of Green's position. (Likely)

3. A 25mm lens on Patterson's camera. (possible)

So IF Green was 3-4 feet behind Roger, then Roger is 111-112 ft from TC-2. Patty walks directly behind TC-2 so add roughly 2 ft back to the distance. At that point, Roger is approximately 114 ft from Patty. If you estimate Patty's image size on the film and use the lens formula with a 25mm lens, Patty (in walking stance) is somewhere around 4' 8" to 4' 10". If you stand that walking stance up you will end up with a height 5' 3" to 5' 5" approx. Roger was 5' 3".

Here are some of the issues I think this solution answers.

- Why BH's stories are inconsistent and why he doesn't appear to match the dimensions according to some analysis.

- Why there doesn't appear to be the substantial padding that would be required to get the "bulk" ( If you compare photos of Roger and Patty scaled to the same height, their width is close to the same - i.e. proportional)

- Why Roger's face looks so similar to Patty's when overlayed.

- Why Patty and McLarin both take 17 steps across the same distance - A Patty with 41" strides would have taken fewer steps than McLarin

- Why Gimlin denied using the camera at first and answers the question "Was it a man in a suit" by saying "Roger and I were the only men there" -(rather than saying "NO - it was not a man in a suit")

What this solution also means is that the trackway was not made by Patty during the filming - it was somehow faked. The feet on Patty didn't make the tracks, so the "foot-ruler" is invalid.

If you look at the image that Sweati posted in the Munn's thread showing Patty on the left and 2 pics of McLarin, and it happens that McLarin in the middle picture is standing in the same place as Patty, then McLarin is substantially taller than Patty - Hmmmm.

There is a thread named "Roger as Patty" here and another on the old BFF if you are interested in more info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

Appeared to have mange, white skin underneath, flat, flared nostrils, seven feet tall, 300 lbs, smelled like rotten meat... $200 monkey suit...

http://www.bigfooten...anadianhoax.htm

Welcome to Bigfootery.

Comparing a Bigfoot clearly visible at your house to one witnessed through thick bush in the dark is hardly a good comparison. Florence Showman even witnessed it more than once- standing in her driveway.

You do realize that the woods will break up the appearance of a suit don't you? That's why the majority of videos happen in wooded cover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Again you distort and introduce details not present in the source material. The hoax occurred early in the morning on May 15, 1977. The bus driver Pat Lindquist who was 6'2" described a 5'11" 165 pound man (24 year old Ken Ticehurst) in a $200 gorilla suit as being seven feet tall and 300 pounds, wide white eyes, flared nostrils, dark brown or black fur, light brown hair on the face, and white skin underneath with the appearance of mange. He also said the creature stank horribly like rotten meat. He said he pursued it into the bush, was pushing branches apart and then saw it 20-25 feet away. He felt it could reach him in to steps. It made him panic and shake. It was a kid in a suit. Other passengers on the bus concurred with the size estimation of the "beast".

Comparitively, Florence Showman had both her sightings at night. We certainly do not know for sure the lighting levels of her sighting. The one in her basement was said by her to happen while looking out the basement door windows. She specified no specific distance. The second sighting she made no comment on in terms of details of the creature. Jerry, however, said that while coming into the driveway with his wife and sons in the car, they saw something down by the creek jump a big stump "like a Bigfoot."

You're arguing from incredulity as if Florence would be able to identify a fake suit and not confuse it for a real creature when you don't know the exact circumstances. At the same time you are dismissing similar known hoaxes from the history of Bigfootery and introducing elements not from the source material. Apparently you're Delorean is in better working order than you suggest for you to imply what Florence could or could not identify. Like as if it really was Bigfoot that was outside Florence's basement window.

Patterson greatly depended on Jerry Merritt for his Bigfoot ventures. He relied upon Merritt's Hollywood connections, used his home as a staging area for various efforts with his Bigfoot pursuits, and competed with Merritt's ghost town creation to make a Bigfoot themed attraction, which he urged Merritt to support. Merritt was repeatedly the target of a Bigfoot hoaxer in Yakima. One of his closest friends was an admitted Bigfoot hoaxer by the testimony of a Yakima film developer. When Merritt himself experienced this hoaxing, his dig attacked the hoaxer, who then fled down the driveway and then down the street. This was not a Bigfoot coming into the town of Yakima and targeting one of Patterson's closest friends.

People can look at these facts and put two and two together that with Merritt being hoaxed, easily the prime suspect is Roger Patterson. Merritt himself suspected that Roger was doing this to get his support. People throughout the history of Bigfootery have been fooled by hoaxers when one would think they should have known better. Hoaxers are a proven reality. Bigfoot is not, and most certainly not coming into American communities and casing people's homes.

The argument that Florence Showman should have known better is extremely flimsy and ignores the reality of Bigfoot hoaxing history.

Edited by kitakaze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

Again you distort and introduce details not present in the source material.

What details would those be? The darkness from being in the early morning hours? Or his statement of the bush being thick?

You're arguing from incredulity as if Florence would be able to identify a fake suit and not confuse it for a real creature when you don't know the exact circumstances.

Like arguing from credulity that an off-the-shelf monkey suit could easily fool her.

Or that the bus encounter was comparable at all to the Showman's encounters without knowing the exact cirumstances to be able to make that determination.

Edited by roguefooter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

People can look at these facts and put two and two together that with Merritt being hoaxed, easily the prime suspect is Roger Patterson.

It still does not equal fact. There is no set formula or pattern for a hoax- it can be done by anyone, at any time, for any reason, or no reason at all. You could have all the tell signs of being for obvious reasons and be completely wrong.

Patterson is no more a hoaxer than anyone else, he's only a suspect. We know he wasn't the guy who wore the suit in any incident so that in itself discounts him considerably.

Edited by roguefooter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kerchak

Repeat serial hoaxers do NOT turn into repeat serial hoaxees a short while later. LOL, it just doesn't happen. Roger Patterson was a repeat serial hoaxee. We know that as FACT. It wouldn't surprise me if Roger's friends played a few pranks at the expense of the gullible and sincere bigfoot believer Roger Patterson around Yakima.

Hoaxers carry on hoaxing. They don't end up being the hoaxee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Cliff Barackman stated in an interview with FOX that 7 or 8 people have claimed to be in the "suit". So far, the only people I've heard of that were allegedly the man/woman in the "suit" are:

1.) Bob Heironimous

2.) Ray Wallace's wife

3.) Jerry Romney

4.) On YouTube I found a video in which the uploader claimed his father was the man in the suit.

One YouTuber claimed in a comment that as many as 50 people have claimed to be in the "suit"! I'd really like for these people to give names :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...