Bigfoot Research – Still No Evidence, But Plenty Of Excuses To Explain Why There’S No Evidence

[Guest Kerchak]

I don't care if she appears fat or muscled, the important part is that it would be extremely difficult for Bob Hermonious to put on a suit and even walk with it to add that much bulk.

Exactly. Nobody in such a bulky padded suit with large fake feet on walking across an uneven sandbar with dips and rises could move as fluidly and at ease as that.........especially in 'one take' with no practice run throughs, as Bob H claimed.

[WSA]

Psyshroom:

"There isn't A story out there, no matter how sincerely told, no matter how saintly the person telling it is, that counts as evidence proof."

That's better. :-)

[Guest]

Its weird to me that a 46 year film is still considered the best video evidence for sasquatch. With all the advances in film technology and digital recording, we apparently haven't gotten a modern day PGF film with a clearer and crisper shot. At least not one that bigfooters dedicate so much time to.

[norseman]

Its weird to me that a 46 year film is still considered the best video evidence for sasquatch. With all the advances in film technology and digital recording, we apparently haven't gotten a modern day PGF film with a clearer and crisper shot. At least not one that bigfooters dedicate so much time to.

Such an "animal" does exist.

Is it a hoax or is it real?

http://www.sylvanic.com/

[Drew]

Anyone interested in early and new Hollywood gorilla suits, should really check out this awesome blog. http://www.hollywoodgorillamen.com/

[Guest]

Such an "animal" does exist.

Is it a hoax or is it real?

http://www.sylvanic.com/

From the way it is shot, it looks suspicious. But regardless of how I feel, why aren't the bigfooters clamoring over this stuff as much as they do the PGF? What does Meldrum say about it?

Anyone interested in early and new Hollywood gorilla suits, should really check out this awesome blog. http://www.hollywoodgorillamen.com/

The lost world apeman is particularly interesting.

[Guest Theagenes]

If no one has cared enough to attempt a legitimate replication then the challenge rings a bit hollow. To my knowledge, the only folks who've attempted to make some kind of Patty suit (other than Roger, of course) are Leroy Blevins and Dfoot. Belvins' suit is kind of silly when viewed up close, but he knocked the "apparent great mass" of the PGF out of the park. Dfoot was well on his way to making a good suit when he ran afoul of folks here and got banned. I think some folks think he sabotaged himself here because he reached a point at which he realized he was in over his head and he could never replicate the PGF because there was a real bigfoot in it!

I'm a little late responding to this, but I have been reading much over the long weekend.

Blevins suit may look silly up close, but when you change the contrast, saturation, and color so that it matches the PGF more closely it looks a lot more like Patty. If the PGF were recorded with modern video tape under those lighting conditions she might look pretty silly too.

BEFORE:

AFTER:

[WSA]

And those comparisons do highlight a crucial difference between how a human ambulates and how the subject in the P/G film does. Note the angle of the lower leg on flexion. Nobody I know walks like that. Seems a pretty extreme affectation for somebody to insert into a gait, don't you think, and for what purpose?

[norseman]

From the way it is shot, it looks suspicious.

Very suspicious...... But it certainly is more "clear" than the PGF.

But regardless of how I feel, why aren't the bigfooters clamoring over this stuff as much as they do the PGF?

I think the consensus is, is that Todd Standing is a fraud. I'm not exactly sure how the community has came to that consensus.

What does Meldrum say about it?

Don't know, but this is what Richard Studstad had to say about him:

http://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2011/04/in-defense-of-todd-standing.html

Best of luck to all of you, whether you are a bigfoot believer or not. It is certainly true that much of the existing evidence HAS been hoaxed. I personally doubt that ALL of it has. The best quality film or video evidence—the P-G Film and the Todd Standing footage—well, I don't really know for sure and I probably never will, since no DNA exists that can be associated with either.

Richard Stubstad

Ojai, California

[Guest Kerchak]

I'm a little late responding to this, but I have been reading much over the long weekend.

Blevins suit may look silly up close, but when you change the contrast, saturation, and color so that it matches the PGF more closely it looks a lot more like Patty. If the PGF were recorded with modern video tape under those lighting conditions she might look pretty silly too.

You keep highlighting the still where Patty is at one of her greatest distances from the camera ad comparing that to the Blevins still.

Why don't you try comparing the section of the film where she is only circa 100ft from the camera and turns to face it? Compare that section with the Blevins footage. She is actually pretty clear and not all that far away. Patty is light years more convincing than the Blevins suit. Its got zero to do with film quality/obscurity. If it was just a question of film quality/obscurity we'd all be arguing over this piece of nonsense.

And those comparisons do highlight a crucial difference between how a human ambulates and how the subject in the P/G film does. Note the angle of the lower leg on flexion. Nobody I know walks like that. Seems a pretty extreme affectation for somebody to insert into a gait, don't you think, and for what purpose?

Yes, Blevins couldn't even get the leg movements right, despite all his practice.

Edited January 24, 2013 by Kerchak

[Guest]

Seems a pretty extreme affectation for somebody to insert into a gait, don't you think, and for what purpose?

Ever walk in swim fins?

[WSA]

A classic rejoinder Saskeptic. As it turns out, I have. Lots. And seen it done too. Lots. Although you can MAKE your lower leg lift up that high consciously, it results in a herky-jerky walk. (I've seen John Cleese do it too!) If you compare the fluidity of Patty's stride to someone just walking with oversized prosthetics, well, I guess we're seeing two different things.

[Guest]

Even Meldrum admits the gait can be replicated by a human, isn't it time to stop asserting otherwise?

http://youtu.be/BTL7sR2E8p4?t=29m2s

[Guest Kerchak]

^

Incorrect. He said "some aspects".

well, I guess we're seeing two different things.

Yes and you have your eyes and your mind open. That is the difference.

[Guest]

^ What did the other two scientists say about the gait?

Further, what Meldrum said was:

"Frankly I was surprised that our subject was so easily capable of replicating some aspects of the walk..."

The 'some aspects' is not a modifier of the walk replication, rather it modifies how easily the actor replicated it.

Meldrum also states:

"We know that his gait as best as we can see approximated that of the sasquatch."