Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Theagenes

Dfoot's Theories On The Pgf As A Hoax

Recommended Posts

Guest John

Blah Blah Blah. Ill say it again as I have on other PGF threads. You show me using 1967 materials how it was supposedly faked. YOU CANT !!

I rest my case Gigantofootecus. ;)

A direct challenge is given above and the answer to the results (before they are in) with it. Seen it over and over. 'Patty' must be produced to the proponents' satisfaction, which is of course at best subjective.

Patty is a bigfoot - forgone conclusion. An attempt must be made to prove 'she' isn't. Never mind providing a type specimen that matches the footage (1000's of reliable reports, etc. etc.).

Edit to remove double post.

Edited by John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

You said that your $500 costume would be "better than Patty", tontar. Of course never admit that you can't do it! Here are some canned excuses you can borrow:

'I have better things to do.' (Like arguing about Bigfoot online for several hours a day.)

'I do not have time for Bigfoot because I suddenly became the Ambassador to several countries.'

'I was close but, they sent me the wrong color dynel!'

8 )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tontar

Thanks, John, your ability to be concise and clear is awesome!

G, you say that a suit recreation should not be made for the proponents' benefit, but for the skeptics' peers. Sounds good, but the skeptics rarely challenge anyone to make a suit to prove Patty was a suit, they don't need convincing it was a suit, they often tend to agree on the aspects that point to a suit. So they make a conclusion without having to see a reproduction, they're satisfied with the existing evidence.

The whole reason to make a reproduction suit would be to demonstrate, or prove to those who do not accept the explanations or comparisons that are at hand, and must go that extra step to paint a picture more clearly, a picture that proponents generally don't want to see no matter how clearly it might be painted. When a somewhat obvious aspect is pointed to, described in great detail, and is rejected with a challenge of "show me, prove it, duplicate it", you really don't have to be a psychic to know how that extra step will be received. When those obvious aspects are dismissed with all manner of creative excuses, "we don't know what sort of unique biology or anatomy hey might have...", rather than an admission that the anomalies are actually seen and that they are curious anomalies, then the conclusion to a more thorough demonstration is foregone.

You said that your $500 costume would be "better than Patty", tontar. Of course never admit that you can't do it! Here are some canned excuses you can borrow:

Thanks, xspider, I appreciate your generosity.

'I have better things to do.' (Like arguing about Bigfoot online for several hours a day.)

Having better things to do is hard to argue with. However, be careful how much you criticize people arguing about bigfoot for hours each day, every day, weekends included. I think you yourself, and fan base, fit that model far better than some you seek to poke fun at. And like I said, I have cut back significantly, because, really, I have better things to do than bang my head against a wall. A bit of head banging in the morning, and the occasional visit here and there is enough for me these days.

'I do not have time for Bigfoot because I suddenly became the Ambassador to several countries.'

If true, that's a hard one to argue about. I don't plan on becoming an ambassador any time soon, but that doesn't mean my non-ambassador time automatically goes to bigfoot pursuits.

'I was close but, they sent me the wrong color dynel!'

Speaking of the wrong color dynel, I have a few photos to show which might explain the median furrow a bit better. I'll get to those sometime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Tontar, "So they make a conclusion without having to see a recreation,.." Well, sounds pretty handy. Still lookin' forward to you tryin' ta explain the median furrow, one of those perfectly natural anatomical features, just a friendly reminder. :) Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tontar

Median furrow. Two ways, a second method is one I just found the other day. I'll get back to you on that one in a bit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Tontar, Don't forget to include/explain the natural depression between the scalpulas, that area includes the upper area of median furrow, which...is also a perfectly natural anatomical characteristic. Pat...

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...