Jump to content

Patty's Feet.....and The Footprints (Part 2)


Guest Admin
 Share

Recommended Posts

You hate it when I'm right well  Sweaty if you or any other bigfoot proponent can furnish anything that runs counter to what I've stated then please by all means do so.  It would be a truly appreciated contribution to the entire bigfoot question.  However it's going to require stepping out of Patty land since I did say that nothing in the post PGF world has delivered solid validation.   

 

 

It isn't the fact that you are correct when you say "there is no body", Crow, that I strongly dislike....it's your habit of repeating it in almost every one of your posts, that I don't like.

 

The fact of the matter is, the lack of a physical specimen is not in question. Proponents and skeptics are in agreement, on that point. So, I don't understand why you continue to rant about the lack of a body.

 

What is it, exactly, that you are looking for??? Do you want us all to resign our memberships, and stop discussing/analyzing the evidence?  Would that make you happy?

 

 

 

 

We step out of Patty anytime we entertain how certain observations we have made could have been hoaxed. It is not being able to explain them away as a mere man in a suit that forces us to step back into Patty being something other than a man in a suit wearing cowboy boots as you had claimed.

 

 

 

That's correct, BH. :)

 

We give the 'man-in-a-suit' scenario a shot every time we ask kitakaze for details regarding his "Patty suit" claim. But, kit just doesn't seem to want to cooperate.

 

So, what's a lowly Bigfooter to do???

 

I just keep getting sucked back in...by those contracting calves...and bending fingers. :)

 

 

 

 

As far as you being right in saying another PGF has not been made since Patterson - stating the obvious isn't much of an accomplishment when it comes to being right anymore than someone saying water is wet and fire is hot.

 

 

Very true...  :thumbsup:

Edited by SweatyYeti
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Bigfoothunter

^^

 

Let us not forget those moving lips. I had to shake my head in disbelief when Drew acted like I had created Patty with PhotoShop Vs the poor degraded images of her face that he seemed to prefer. It must have been a shock to his system to find that the original film image was better than the multi-generation older blurry copies. I might add that while Crowlogic says we do not consider Patty being real - Crowlogic doesn't take on the facial change that can't be blamed on motion blur seen in a poor copy print. It's just like DWA said, "Such is the Bigfoot skeptic. He'll tell you everything you don't know about a subject that you know much better than he (or she)  does."    

cibachrome_PGF_PGF%20-%20Copy_zpsztmn92z

Edited by Bigfoothunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Let us not forget those moving lips. 

 

 

 

I certainly won't, BH. ;)

 

 

 

 

I had to shake my head in disbelief when Drew acted like I had created Patty with PhotoShop Vs the poor degraded images of her face that he seemed to prefer. It must have been a shock to his system to find that the original film image was better than the multi-generation older blurry copies. I might add that while Crowlogic says we do not consider Patty being real - Crowlogic doesn't take on the facial change that can't be blamed on motion blur seen in a poor copy print.

 

 

The Cibachromes are the most true-to-original images we have of the PGF.

 

And if the original reel is ever found...and not too degraded...high-resolution digital scans of those frames will show the mouth movement with greater clarity than the images we have now. 

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Passionate Member
BFF Donor

If you have any common sense you at least must admit the footprint observations must be discarded and Gimlin was lying or a total fool.

 

Why should the footprint observations be discarded by anyone: skeptic/skoftic/proponent/genius/fool, or otherwise?  That doesn't make any sense at all, although I can see why that would be convenient for some arguments.  Sorry, that just ain't happenin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Crowlogic

 

 

Let us not forget those moving lips. 

 

 

 

I certainly won't, BH. ;)

 

 

 

 

I had to shake my head in disbelief when Drew acted like I had created Patty with PhotoShop Vs the poor degraded images of her face that he seemed to prefer. It must have been a shock to his system to find that the original film image was better than the multi-generation older blurry copies. I might add that while Crowlogic says we do not consider Patty being real - Crowlogic doesn't take on the facial change that can't be blamed on motion blur seen in a poor copy print.

 

 

The Cibachromes are the most true-to-original images we have of the PGF.

 

And if the original reel is ever found...and not too degraded...high-resolution digital scans of those frames will show the mouth movement with greater clarity than the images we have now. 

 

Sweaty how many times have you posted the same old tired gifs?  When dealing with a dead issue such as the PGF expect the conversations to run in a repeating loop.  Of course this will all change when bigfoot is proven the way the real world demands proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Sweaty how many times have you posted the same old tired gifs?  When dealing with a dead issue such as the PGF expect the conversations to run in a repeating loop.  Of course this will all change when bigfoot is proven the way the real world demands proof.

 

 

 

There is a good reason for re-posting animations, and images, Crow. As the pages add-up in the threads, the images become buried...and more and more difficult to find. 

 

Since this is a significant,  and still controversial film....the images and animations are worth being seen. And, re-posting them is a way of keeping them easily viewable. 

 

 

What you've been doing lately, is something which simply serves no purpose.  As I said, the 'lack of a body' is something which is not even in dispute. So....what's the point of continuing to state that fact?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's controversial, for sure. Significant? Hardly. It's only cared about by a tiny percentage of the population.  If you feel this is a significant film (outside of the bigfoot community) , then I would suggest you need some clarity and perspective. 

 

Sweaty, why is the existence of bigfoot so important to you? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's controversial, for sure. Significant? Hardly. It's only cared about by a tiny percentage of the population.  If you feel this is a significant film (outside of the bigfoot community) , then I would suggest you need some clarity and perspective. 

 

 

 

It is a very significant film, dmaker.  

 

It is a ONE-of-a-kind film.

 

It is spoken highly of by both proponents and skeptics, alike.  I could quote many skeptics who have made positive comments, on it's exceptional realism.

 

And the analysis of it is not finished, yet. :)

 

 

Oh...also...when Heironimus finally does admit that he wasn't Patty....the question of what the Film is will become a more open question, in the eyes of the general public. 

 

 

 

 

 

Sweaty, why is the existence of bigfoot so important to you? 

 

 

Why do you care? :)

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just curious, Sweaty. I don't get it.  You've never even claimed to have seen one, yet you obsess over this film.   I am just curious what would motivate one to do that. 

Edited by dmaker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Crowlogic

Sweaty oh I see now.  So if 20 pages back I say there's no body does that mean I can't say there is no body again ?  The things anyone say's or posts get buried in the posts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just curious, Sweaty. I don't get it.  You've never even claimed to have seen one, yet you obsess over this film.   I am just curious what would motivate one to do that. 

 

 

Why don't you ask kitakaze what motivates him to obsess over this "trivial" film? 

 

He has, by far, the greatest obsession over it....(in a rather sick way, to boot).  

 

He started a thread on JREF, asking skeptics to "Help kitakaze end the PGF controversy"....he went and interviewed Phil Morris...even though Phil had nothing to do with the Film.....he produces wacko graphics, trying to show how Bob H. "fits" Patty....he promotes flawed Poser 7 graphics, which falsely show Bob "fitting" Patty's dimensions....he went and "discovered the Patty suit", yet cannot substantiate even one detail of his story....he "obtained three confessions"...which "exist", yet do not exist....he "found the complete 2nd Reel", yet has never given a complete description of exactly what footage is on it....and, last but not least....has spewed a fountain of vile towards those who "believe" the Film shows a real, live creature.

 

So, you are curious as to why I "obsess" over the PGF"? It's because I think this film is worthy of the very best...and most thorough...analysis it can be given. :)

 

Not....games...BS...smoke...and mirrors. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just curious, Sweaty. I don't get it.  You've never even claimed to have seen one, yet you obsess over this film.   I am just curious what would motivate one to do that. 

 

 

Dmaker

 

 

I have never understood how the skeptic 100% convinced could spend one more second on the PGF or the Bigfoot issue. 

 

I confess I am part of a group of thinkers who happen to be 100% convinced the Earth is round and Not flat. Therefore, I do not go over to the Flat Earth Society Forums.

 

The larger issue of Bigfoot existing is an unknown. It is NOT a known or proven fact Bigfoot does not exist.  We all recognize if the PGF happens to be real then it is 100% proof at least in 1967 Bigfoot existed.  This is why I think the Convinced attack the PGF so much.  Well, not the film as much as Roger Patterson.

 

Why would a skeptic who is 100% convinced even give on second more to the issue of Bigfoot?  I have to believe for some, it is because they are not as confident as they might pretend in their skeptic view.  Otherwise the only reason I can think of would be to show how smart they think they are.  Put another way, all that is left is some weird self-satisfaction of telling others how dumb they are. 

 

I don't see anything so far from the skeptics which is so impressive as to make me believe the 100% Convinced Skeptics have this issue right. I am open minded. 

 

 

I am not impressed with the case the skeptics have offered so far.

 

There are two strong considerations which may point to Bigfoot being real:

 

1)  The PGF is impressive.  Attempts to debunk it have been weak at best.  Every smoking gun ends up being a dude.  Closer scrutiny of what is one the film tends to yield many Q for the skeptic and continues to be impressive for the believer.  This does not make it true. It just makes it unlikely to be obviously convincingly false.

 

2)  The many eye witness accounts of seeing something.  There is some bit of heat one would take ( a social price to pay) for coming forward with a Bigfoot claim.  In spite of this, people from many walks of life are reporting various encounters.  They seem to at least think what they saw seemed real to them.  Some % of these must be misidentifications.  Some other % can be the person was hoaxed or a hoaxer/ liar themselves.  Does this really account for all the remaining % whatever that number would be.

 

You have skeptics on TV like Dr. Daegling (sp?) who studied the film.  Then, he admits in his book: to date the PGF has not been proven to the false.  So even he is not as much of a skeptic as many of the Convinced Skeptics on the BFF who contend the film has obviously and easily proven to be false. The rest of us who don't get that, including apparently Dr. Degling, must just be dumb.

 

 

"You've never even claimed to have seen one"

 

Dmaker, why do you think SKEPTICS obsess over the film?  Obviously PGF believers are impressed with what they see on the film.  I was not in Dallas Texas in 1963 but am convinced by just what I saw on film JFK was shot by someone in the head.

 

BD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't speak for anyone else. I have stated my interests in bigfoot in general many times in this forum and others. But the question I put to Sweaty illustrates where most of my interest lies. The behaviour of proponents. I don't understand why bigfoot as a myth attracts such ardent believers when it really has no more evidence going for it than other myths.  Why does this particular myth ( mostly I believe in its American manifestation) gain such feverish loyalty from its enthusiasts? To the point they will spend their lives chasing or obsessing over something (imo) doesn't even exist, and seems obvious to me that it doesn't exit. 

 

Bigfoot must fill some sort of fundamental piece of their world view puzzle. Or it is irresistibly empowering or some other factor. I don't know.  I am losing interest in the psychology of the bigfoot community. I don't think further participation is about to offer any more insights. And, frankly, butting heads with some individuals in the community is just not worth the mental energy any more. I think I will use 2016 as my exit from bigfoot forums. 

Edited by dmaker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps because evidence that has been collected and vetted provide enough to push for more evidence and continue the search. 

When I say vetted, this excludes fakes, hoaxes and forgeries.  The remainders, while not having the holy grail of evidence - a body, cannot be explained away by recreations or other demonstrations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, they can. The very lack of a any physical remains of a bigfoot pretty much demands that they be explained away as recreations or mistakes. At least until someone manages to provide some better evidence.  The null has not been over come, so it stands.

 

Vetted?  Vetted by whom and where?

Edited by dmaker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • masterbarber pinned this topic
  • masterbarber unpinned this topic
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
  • gigantor featured this topic
  • gigantor unfeatured this topic
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...