Jump to content
TD-40

Why Patterson And Gimlim Were Successful That Day.

Recommended Posts

Backdoc

The ambient noise in combination with a blind approach may have made the difference. One thing though....I have a feral dog that always avoids blind corners. I walk her with my other dogs but she alone will always approach blindspots at the end of the leash in a fashion to see around the corner. She always walks so as to maximize her ability to avoid surprise. She doesn't drop her head to eat when she can't see in all directions. We feed her in open spaces where she eats alone.  I will spare you the details but life has been pretty unusual with her.

 

And now with age she cannot hear. Life with her is becoming more difficult as she doesn't see all that well and now doesn't trust her hearing. Walking her has always been unpredictable but now even eating is hit and miss. She is a wild animal and that hasn't changed in the 6 years she has been with us.

 

The point here is the PGF creature apparently put herself where she couldn't see the approach of P-G, couldn't hear their approach and then becomes preoccupied with something at water's edge in broad daylight. Just an observation.

 

Well, Patty was not with her back to the approach of Roger and Bob.  In that sense, she was facing where someone might come and had the woods (her element) to her back.  I like your point though.  I am assuming Patty was hungry or thirsty.  Who knows.  Would have been cool is Roger and Bob had found some half-eaten fish or something like it.  Maybe Patty just took the risk and went to the creek and was being foolish.  It is also, possible she cut down on the risk by being behind the tree pile and having a creek separate her from the approach and also had her back to the woods as her element.  She also had an escape route where she ultimately walked and did use.   You bring up a good point to consider HoldMB and I thank you for offering it in the spirit of the discussion.  Makes me think of the Q.   What is  the best place for a bigfoot around there to access the creek for water or food?  Seems to me she was being pretty smart.  Good thoughts.

 

Backdoc

 

 

 

Let's say someone is a skeptic.   Could a skeptic discuss the concept of an 'animal' being surprised? 

 

 

Let me share a flawed skeptic view. 

 

It was a skeptic that said that Patterson and Gimlin gave conflicting statements as to the creatures position upon seeing it. The complaint was that Roger said it was squatted by the creek and Gimlin said it was standing. The result in the skeptics mind was a smoking gun had been discovered. Did the skeptic consider any other rational alternatives ... it doesn't seem so.

 

Alternative:   Roger was on horseback walking just ahead of Gimlin who was also on horseback and leading the pack-horse. Roger rounds the root system and he and his horse see the creature squatted at the stream. Gimlin has yet to round the the root system and doesn't know yet what the commotion is all about. As Gimlin starts to round the overturned root system, the creature has stood up, which would make sense to me. To assume Roger and Bob saw the creature at the exact same moment is to assume they were riding on the same horse or were riding side by side as they rounded the overturned root system is being presumptuous at best.. However, the official story had Roger just ahead of Bob which allowed the creature time to react to the spooked horse by standing up from a squatting position.

 

Did the skeptic consider a rational alternative before jumping to there being a smoking gun ... you tell me.

 

 

 

They jump on the little details even if further exploration leads to a reasonable conclusion.  In the example you just outlined here, it further strengthens the story when we look at, 'the rest of the story' 

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...