Jump to content
Admin

The Munns Report (2)

Recommended Posts

DWA

Yeah, come on.  When you are trying to show me someone is a faker and a liar, you need to come up with evidence better than a 6-y-o can muster to get me to even listen to you.  Stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

^^

 

As ridiculous as your response was - its still one of the best worthless ones you have ever posted.     :)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

So much special pleading :)

 

Patty's noggin compared  to two proven blokes in a suit vs Patty scaled to 45 years of imagination and no established height/distance/lens size.

 

/www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCzRBzBmUjE

 

So first it's show me that a head can fit in that suit.

 

Now it's how does that suit compare in motion.

 

What do you want next? A physical specimen of a bloke in a suit?

 

I can do that faster than you can Get Monkey...

 

Now I know who you are, mr wristband. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
salubrious
Moderator

What do you want next? A physical specimen of a bloke in a suit?

 

I can do that faster than you can Get Monkey...

 

Really? its on! I'll race you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

What do we want next squatchy? How bout that suit you've been working on. Any progress pics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

.

 

 

I asked you an easy enough question. You posted pictures of two suit heads. I merely asked you to post pictures of the full suits so I could see the size of the suit heads in comparison to the overall body and then compare them to Patty. 

 

You declined to do so. For what reason would you decline to do so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

^^^Special pleading, I figure.  No money where mouth is, I figure.  Got nut-TIN', I figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
salubrious
Moderator

Frankly, its a fool's errand to try to build a suit- the problem is the same as if someone presents proof short of the actual body. Essentially, it will get shouted down. Why bother?

 

The only real, solid evidence so far is the simple fact that Patty has proportions that don't fall into the human intermembral index. I have a friend that is really skeptical of BF (and one of his hobbies is to complete a paper on human influences in evolution), but when I pointed that out, and that Bill Munns had done a study showing just that, he shut up because he immediately saw that Patty cannot be explained by a human wearing a suit. He was educated enough to understand why.

 

So you don't have to read between the lines, if the PGF is dismissed by anyone using the argument 'it looks like a dude in a suit', all that means is that the person making such an argument has not taken the time to consider the implications of the human intermembral index and Patty's dimensions. In short, they are not looking at the evidence and simply offering an opinion. The thing is, Patty does look like a dude in a suit- all BF do until you see one in person. But Patty is on film so its not that hard to sort out her dimensions- and the fact that she cannot possibly be a person in a suit.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc
BFF Donor

Sal,

 

We do not have to ask someone to build the perfect suit.   If we know the suit has a specific characteristic we have the right to ask about a suit replicating that thing. I agree the best suit made will be shot down by someone who blindly believes Patty is real no matter what.  But we can identify 1 or 2 things that suit does in how it preforms (out of many to choose from).  We can then say, "show us that has been accomplished" in a suit.

 

For example, if we had a video of a Bigfoot running at 45 mph we don't have to build a suit running 45 mph. If we could calculate the figure is running at 45 mph in this hypothetical case, all we have to know is a man --suited or not-- cannot run at 45mph. 

 

In Patty, we can identify her toes extending actively on the film.  Therefore, a suit would have to achieve this.  Has a suit achieved this?  Now is it too much to ask the skeptic to offer a suit example that shows how this was done? 

If Bill Munns is correct and a person head cannot fit into a Patty make in a functional way, this results in proof.   Is it too much to say, "look I am not asking you to build an entire suit but at least build a mask that is Patty-like where a mans head can fit in it." 

 

For a suit to work it must achieve ALL the things Patty achieves in theory.  Yet, if it cannot do just 1 or 2 of them, we don't have to ask for it to do all of them.

 

Yes,  the perfect suit would not satisfy a % of the believers.  Still, unless Patty was a man barefoot in a suit having 14.5'' long 6'' wide feet I don't see how the toe extension was achieved. 

 

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

To me:  it's absolutely beyond silly to continue talking about Patty with people who don't understand how the world works.  If this were anything other that bigfoot, everyone would accept what has been pretty much proven:  Patty is an animal unrecognized by science.

 

Bigfoot skeptics seem to think that if a vanishing hope of something still exists, then it must be the thing we must believe.  No.  We're done with it, because that's how science works.  There's a vanishing possibility that the universe is an artificial light show put on by an extraterrestrial multinational firm.  I mean, that's about as likely as Patty being human.

Edited by DWA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

^^

 

I don't even think you know what the sentences means that you posted - let alone how it fits in with whst DWA previously stated.   :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

^^

 

I was going to post this to another thread, but it had been locked - but it needs to be said and heard in my view.

 

All this talk about building a working replica of a PGF suit is like listening to kids talking about building a time machine. Not only would the suit need to look real in every way, but how it moved and functioned on film and the kinds of things that Donskoy observed about it would need to be present and there is no one that even talks about accomlishing both - let alone has the first clue how to achieve it.

 

A taxidermist can do only so much in posing a dead specimen to look somewhat as it did in life, but to go beyond that to the point of giving it life so that the Mechanics and Natural Motor Functions demonstrated in the PGF become so realististic that its out of the reach any human being.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×