Jump to content

Substantiating Philip Morris' Statements


Recommended Posts

Guest Cervelo

Cervelo ignores the facts....as expected. :)

I have no need to discuss 'body proportions' with you, Cervelo. I'll just continue along this line of analysis, and eventually move it beyond this Forum.

Meanwhile....your words, and kit's....as with tontar's....will fade away, into oblivion.

I can only hope and wish you achieve your goal ASAP...let me know if I can help ;)
Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

kitakaze wrote:

 

 

It's all about context...

 

 

In the Frames after F362, in the animation kit posted...Patty's arm is swung out to the side, and appears foreshortened in length. 

 

The measurements in my comparison graphics are valid, nonetheless. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

On post #7, you were doing pretty good there until you posted the side by side pics pulling me right back to patty-is-real camp. Should have quit while you were ahead. we both know I would be even more unreasonable asking to see both images in motion, but by now that goes without saying. The fail always comes from the same thing: The failure to be able to make that suit especially when viewed in motion.

Props to Kit for great background stuff for all of us to read, learn from, investigate, and consider though.

 

And yet it is very carefully selected stills that represent milliseconds that are used to tell us that Patty has an inhumanly proportioned arm. What does the moving footage tell you vs the still?

 

F362-UpperArm-UpperLeg-Ratio1B_zps90a0d9

 

forearmBW.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

I can only hope and wish you achieve your goal ASAP...let me know if I can help ;)

 

 

Thanks, Cervelo... :) I don't see any reason why this analysis can't be developed, and move forward beyond a Discussion Forum. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

I should make it clear I do not read anything outrageous about the backstory esp when money is involved. If I ever pulled a hoax of a man ape, I would run to the press and never to scientist knowledgable about apes, anthropology, and so on like Patterson did. Just a further thought to consider on human nature. It is the equivalent of Patterson Knowing he is lying and then rushing off to the top people in lie detection.

 

Patterson had no intention of showing anything to any scientists. He had to be pushed into this by Dahinden and Green, and it was Green who made it possible. Patterson was only interested in making money, and regardless of his film being dismissed as proof of Bigfoot, he never again went back to the one plave he supposedly found it.

kitakaze wrote:

 

 

In the Frames after F362, in the animation kit posted...Patty's arm is swung out to the side, and appears foreshortened in length. 

 

The measurements in my comparison graphics are valid, nonetheless. :)

 

 

In post 18, from your still to the animated gif under it, how much time roughly has elapsed?

Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

Props to Kit for great background stuff for all of us to read, learn from, investigate, and consider though.

 

Aside from the obvious cherry picking of "facts" in his history and the slant to make it appear nefarious, notice that there is nothing predating the day it was filmed.

 

No "facts" of premeditation or any other indicator of it being a hoax. Nothing outside of the ordinary of Roger just filming his documentary and trying to make ends meet. There is also nothing about the "cash grab" that they wouldn't have done whether it was a hoax or a real Bigfoot captured on film. Were they hoaxers or just opportunists?

 

 

As far as substantiating Phillip Morris' statements, you have to start with the man's honesty and the integrity of his word. Maybe we should start with "see the original costume that fooled millions the world over" that he used (and still uses) to pull in ticket sales?

 

29nv2b6.jpg

 

 

This is the same guy trying to paint Roger as a cash grabber with no business ethics..

Edited by roguefooter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Morris claimed that he and his wife identified Patty as being one of their gorilla suits while watching a news item re the PGF on their old trusty 24" Magnavox TV, circa 1967 (B/W?). Slam dunk! Except that the tiny little picture of Patty was only a blob on the screen and the heavy modifications that Roger did to the suit, and the wrong color, etc. Or did Phil Morris just recognize Roger's name and assumed it was his suit? This one's a no brainer, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Crowlogic

So where are the records of the lawsuits Mprris claims were made against Patterson?  The camera is a long known story but 7 lawsuits?  Phil Morris is good at promoting Phil Morris.  His handiwork both in the past and in more modern times looks nothing like we see in the PGF.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Morris has married himself to hieronimus. That alone shows Morris is wrong as there have been multiple stories by Bob H. Who knows if Morris ever sold roger a suit for some other reason but phone records and business records would prove they had such a phone call placed as Morris contended. From skinned horses to shoulder pads, it is enough to make a mans one glass eye tumble out of the ape mask from the shock of it all.

Edited by Backdoc
Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Morris has married himself to hieronimus. 

 

 

I bet they name their firstborn 'Bozo'... ;)

 

 

 

 

 

That alone shows Morris is wrong as there have been multiple stories by Bob H.

 

 

A Morris suit shows us that Morris is wrong...(about his suit being used for the film subject.) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
roguefooter

 it is enough to make a mans one glass eye tumble out of the ape mask from the shock of it all.

 

Except it wouldn't tumble because Bob said his glass eye was glued to the mask.

 

You really can't make this stuff up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rockape

"Except it wouldn't tumble because Bob said his glass eye was glued to the mask."

 

Glue wasn't so great in those days.

 

So, I guess this stuff by Morris about the seven lawsuits was just a lie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im telling you guys, that morris suit is the original. Thats the one that fooled millions in the 1967 bigfoot hoax!

I just called that number in the pic and it is Morris costumes. I said ..

Me: hi i saw an ad online that says you guys sell the exact same suit used in the 1967 bigfoot hoax?

Guy: yeah we do . They run about 1200-1600.

Me: and they look exactly like the one in the film?

Guy: yes

Me: thankyou

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...