Jump to content
BillMcD

21 Degrees Between Bigfoot And You

Recommended Posts

BillMcD

MM posted this in a tweet yesterday. Quite a telling video I think.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeG

Look, this is how much of a nice guy I am.

This video has been posted dozens of times before on here, and we have a rule forbidding the repeat posting of images. However, as this is a thread starter, and a topic of conversation we haven't had before, I'm going to allow it. See, I told you I was nice!! :)

But that's it! Don't post this video again, anywhere, not even in quoting a post. Link to it instead.

Thanks

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BillMcD

Sorry for the post then. Had never seen it before.

My bad..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeG

That wasn't aimed at you, Bill, it was a general comment to all that might read the thread. Don't worry, your post is fine.

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I've seen this multiple times, and it's a case in both the positive and negative realm of the Patterson-Gimlin film authenticity. On one side of the circle, Sasquatch have smaller leg proportions compared to humans and would have more of a bent kneed gait, which is what we see here in the degree flexibility.

However, someone on YouTube (I won't post the video as it's already been posted several times, in favor of MikeG ;) ) already showed that if you do happen to be wearing clown feet or larger, slip on feet, that your knees will bend at a degree like Patty does, which is a case against the film.

Again, no way to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
salubrious
Moderator

Hmmm... not sure that is the case. If someone is hoaxing, they have to know that BF has this particular detail of their anatomy (I know because I have seen them close up). Sooo if they know that, aren't they admitting that there is something real out there??

In addition, a clown foot is going to pose some profound difficulties in producing a natural gait for a human! I think you will find that most clown shoes don't support the weight of a human, that instead they are really just a cover for a pretty normal shoe beneath. But if one did hold your weight, could you walk in it?? I think you will find that the answer is no, especially if you have to also not look down where you are stepping, make it look natural and all while on uneven terrain.

Edited by MikeG
.......please don't wuote the preceding post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Twilight Fan

LOL! When this video first started I thought it was going to show Bigfoot wearing high heels. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Shouldn't this be in the PGF section?

Anyway...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Tom Pate's elbow vs Patty's doesn't work for me. And look at their legs for cripes sake. Bob H never said anything about leg padding. I mean, come on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist

Could it be people with high heels have the 21 degree difference only? What a terrible example to use if there is any substance to this observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flatlander

I would say that the main reason for the shin rise is the length of the foot. BF has an 18' foot. It has to raise its shin that high to walk. As someone posted above, its like walking in clown shoes or swim flippers. You have to walk different if you have extremely long feet.

Now, the real problem is faking really long feet and footprints. You'd have a hard time putting a human foot in an 18" BF foot and getting a deep evenly impressed footprint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

21 Degrees Between a Cheeseburger and me!...........yummy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Patty's feet were 14.5", which IMO, has been confirmed several ways. That's only a couple of inches more than any human her height. Even less than Shaq. This would mean that the toes were either rigid or flopping around then, correct? Can't be both, unless the feet were very sophisticated. So how do the skeptics explain the dynamics of the feet then?

311_336.gif

307_309.gif

Do they look like they were flopping around? Because they certainly don't look rigid. Which is it?

IMO, the feet were not the reason for the 90 deg leg lift. It was the actor's intent to do that as well as take long compliant steps, for whatever reason. But not because of flipper feet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

****, that link again ... :)

I was going to ask if it is physically impossible for a human to walk with the supposed shin angle of BF, but I guess Kit's link indicates it is not.

Could we all chip in for a sponsored hoax to put some of these things to bed once and for all? Maybe we could work through the full FB/FB "confirms on" list ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Where is the link to the video showing Tom Pate walking that way without looking silly?

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...