Jump to content
Guest

Suit Possibly Key To Final Hoax Proof

Recommended Posts

Bill

The problem with speculation is that you try to make sense of partial knowledge, and "connect the dots" when you don't have all to dots. Whatever you connect, whatever picture thus develops, isn't correct.

The opening post is one such example. It may have been offered in good faith as an attempt to think through the matter, but it's still flawed by the lack of enough "dots' to connect correctly.

The true situation of this "suit" has never been correctly guessed by anyone in this forum for the entire time it's been talked about. I wish people would let it go for now, because you all are collectively batting zero. But of course, you may do as you wish in a discussion forum, and I'm sure some will continue to try and connect the dots, incomplete as they are.

If you do, it's a waste of your time, but then, it's your time to waste as you choose.

Bill

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest WldHrtRnch

^^Surplussed Bill!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Primate

It could just as easily be a case of being delicate, simply because its Kit. Considering his long history and method of investigation, combined with many of the statements he has made here, I would not be surprised if many of the people involved with the PGF would not be interested in dealing with Kit at all, for any reason. If its all about fame and fortune of hoaxing, as so many skeptics seem to think it is, then now, with all the players advancing in age, they would profit far more by exposing the hoax now, attain new fame, and bring attention to the film yet again.

Adam, I plussed you for calling it the way it is.

Kit likes to present as if he feared because he speaks the truth . Actually people are annoyed because he is annoying . There are people in Bigfootery , as he likes to call it , who would rather have nothing to do with him . It is a testament to Bill's committment to resolving the PGF mystery that he is taking responsibility for Kit's claims of a suit .

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Primate:

There is some truth to Kit's fear. regret I can't elaborate, but what prompted his fear is real and part of the complication.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JiggyPotamus

I would have to agree that a suit will prove nothing, especially considering that it could have been manufactured after the PGF was shot. The fact that it can never be proven means that there should not be any legal issues involving the PGF, at least in my opinion, but I'm not a lawyer. I do not think a suit that even approaches Patty's looks exists anywhere in the world, and that anyone claiming to have one is either mistaken about what they have, or are trying to pull something on someone.

And think about this...Would Patterson or Gimlin really have kept the suit around after they realized they were not going to use it anymore? The only thing the suit was good for at that point was to expose them, so there would be no reason to keep it. And no one has ever proven that someone made the suit. It would have to have been someone on the cutting edge of the technology, as these two guys did not do it themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest teria

The National Geographic documentary that analyzes the film and concludes that it depicts a real creature clinches it for me.

Give me a more credible source of information and I'll consider it, but not until then.

BTW, if it was a suit, it was put together by someone who'd seen a squatch up close.

Where might I find this NatGeo documentary? I would like to watch it. Many thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

For suit comparison, please see this thread: http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/36293-six-million-dollar-man-bigfoot/

That is a suit made ten years after on a relatively popular TV show with all sorts of resources available to them in comparison. If I were to connect dots I would start with comparisons of what others had done with the bigfoot concept.

Also, there's a certain irresponsibility to the title of this thread. It screams out like an Exposé News Headline. It misrepresents the content which is filled with speculation and innuendo. I can't say that I care for this type of baiting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Produce the damn´ suit and we can have a discussion on THAT! After that discussion we can have our arguments if the suit was used in PGF or not.

Until then let´s kill the thread. There´s nothing new here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I'll leave others to comment on the substantive elements of the original post. I'll just say that my intention with the title was to imply only that once hoax evidence begins to come forward, I expect it'll come in a wave with full corroboration by various participants -- and that it may be closer than we think.

And if we follow the dictum to reserve all discussion until after the suit is produced, the Kit Bombshell thread would only be a page or two, not over 100. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

The assumption being that if hoax evidence comes forward, it is valid evidence and truthful. Unfortunately, a lot of "hoax evidence" which comes forward fails on examination and just becomes litter on the side of the road.

There is also the issue that various participants, alive today, can't personally corroborate a lot of what is regarded as hoax evidence, even if they were inclined to join in exposing a hoax.

You're really dealing with just two people, Bob Gimlin, who was there, and Bob Heironimous, who claims he was there. Doesn't seem like enough people to form a wave.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Bill, yes, the evidence must be verifiable. I expect Al and perhaps Patricia to have some knowledge of the truth -- *IF* it were a hoax. They could/would join. There may other researchers told by those in the know, sworn to secrecy, who may be honoring that commitment.

Oh, and possibly the as-yet-uncredited master suit maker. ;-) I could see a maker being given his remuneration on condition he didn't confess his role, and a person who abides by a strict honor code may hold himself to that to this day. You know, like those who always ensure their work product is ceded to the rightful copyright holder. LOL

Or relatives of said persons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ike

What I find telling is that there is more evidence that Patty was real than there is that Kit's story (from "I have a suit," to "I have become a diplomat and no longer am interested in bigfoot") is real.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

HDL:

I realize you are simply exploring options, and i use that same approach in my analysis work. List or consider all the options you can think of, and then examine each and see if some can be eliminated for cause, and if you can reduce the list to one option, that is most probably the truth.

The problem with confessions is, if a person's been lying for years, how do we distinguish the truthful confession from another manipulative lie intended for some secret purpose. Granted there are some people who perpetuate a lie for some purpose, and finally "come clean" with the actual truth, there are other people who cover one old and decaying lie with a new lie. Get's a bit tricky sorting out the one from the other.

Same for makeup artists. For each person who simply wants to rightfully claim his/her rightful credit for actual work done, there's usually two or three who wrongfully claim a credit they don't deserve to make themselves look important. One of John Chambers' bitterest experiences was after his rightful glory for Planet Of The Apes, dozens of other makeup artists started taking credit for it. They usually worked on his crew (which was massive) and rightfully should have told people "I was on the Planet of the Apes makeup crew", but instead, they'd say something like "I did "The Planet of the Apes" (implying they were the designer and key artist). John was genuinely hurt by seeing his supposed fellow makeup artists take his credit by misleading people.

Also, there's a curious misconception that makeup people are under some professional ethics obligation to keep secrets. They aren't. Maybe if they did disguise work for the CIA, but for a plain job, and not for a big studio which has the lawyers to sue if there's some kind of NDA, there really isn't any logical motivation for a master suit-builder to keep it a secret if he really did do Patty. That just isn't the way the industry works.

So if such confessions were to emerge, they'd need to be examined with these types of skeptical consideration.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Yes, we're up and running again!

Mods requested the title be changed and I concurred. Wasn't trying to mislead; rather, trying to spark discussion of the possibility of the Kit/Bill suit may begin a flood of admissions that conclusively solves the PGF mystery.

Bill, your point is well taken, that if a creature artist comes forward, his or her claim would need to be scrutinized and may not be provable. But I believe we are reaching a point where proof will be revealed. We also know that both you and Kit have information not yet shared, and may not be shared for some time yet, and I am going to draw inferences from that fact in conjunction with the information that has come out. :-) I'll connect the dots I have access to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...