Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

PBeaton

TWIST,

 

Clearly there is all kinds of distortion goin on in your frame 306. Here are the frames you use side by each an another look at a few of those frames, notice the overall distortion in the subject in frame 306 compared to the clearer frames 304 or 307, it's as if her left side almost disappears. The distortion also appears visible in the trees in the background. 

 

Pat...

(click to enlarge)

post-279-0-35950200-1451449779_thumb.jpg

post-279-0-16912900-1451449816_thumb.jpg

Edited by PBeaton
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

PB, thanks for agreeing with me, as you displayed above, there is the possibility for as you say, "distortion", or as previously stated, "artifacts"  from one frame to another.  Could a possible suit piece be distortion, sure thing, could a calf contraction come off as a distortion, sure thing, or as an artifact, who is here to argue semantics :)  The only other reason one could exist (artifact) without the other (distortion) is special pleading, which would never occur here :)  

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

TWIST wrote:

 

 

 ...could a calf contraction come off as a distortion, sure thing, or as an artifact, who is here to argue semantics 

 

 

The fact of the matter is, TWIST...the film frames around the apparent 'calf muscle contraction' do not contain distortion/streaking due to camera motion. The camera was steady during those frames.

 

So, I do not understand where you are getting your "distortion" explanation from. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

It takes a special level of denialism not to see contracting calf muscles in Sweaty's gif.  Yet we are supposed to think that we are just seeing 'shadows and pareidolia'?  lol!  no way : )  

 

 



What other muscles should i be looking for?

 

:you:  Yowza!  Good clip, Norse.  

 

Science makes provisional conclusions all the time based on the evidence at hand.

...

No, collecting a platypus would have been a much larger task than wandering out into any wooded area in any state in the US and finding a bigfoot.  

 

That's ripe, dmaker!  just google 'provisional conclusions' and the very first reference says:  
provisional: existing or accepted for the present time but likely to be changed
 
awesome work   :rolleyes:   
 

I don't see anything that looks like a calf muscle on the left leg.

 

It's there as plain as day.  Maybe look again because simple denialism will not make it go away.

Edited by xspider1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

PB, thanks for agreeing with me, as you displayed above, there is the possibility for as you say, "distortion", or as previously stated, "artifacts"  from one frame to another.  Could a possible suit piece be distortion, sure thing, could a calf contraction come off as a distortion, sure thing, or as an artifact, who is here to argue semantics :)  The only other reason one could exist (artifact) without the other (distortion) is special pleading, which would never occur here :)

TWIST,

 

I'm guessin you missed the part where I said "the overall distortion in the subject in frame 306 compared to the clearer frames 304 or 307.", but hey...if you think the motioned blurred distorted images are as clear as the other frames, that is completely your choice. Do the calf contraction frames show the same distortions as frame 306 ?

 

How is it you consider it "special pleading" TWIST, do you believe motion blur doesn't distort an image ?

"Special pleading is a form of fallacious argument that involves an attempt to cite something as an exception to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exception.

camera_motionblur.jpg

 

Or...since that was your fifth post in a row using the ol' "special pleading"... were you just on a run with it ?  ;)

 

Pat...

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It takes a special level of denialism not to see contracting calf muscles in Sweaty's gif.  Yet we are supposed to think that we are just seeing 'shadows and pareidolia'?  lol!  no way : )  

 

 

What other muscles should i be looking for?

 

:you:  Yowza!  Good clip, Norse.  

 

Science makes provisional conclusions all the time based on the evidence at hand.

...

No, collecting a platypus would have been a much larger task than wandering out into any wooded area in any state in the US and finding a bigfoot.  

 

That's ripe, dmaker!  just google 'provisional conclusions' and the very first reference says:  
provisional: existing or accepted for the present time but likely to be changed
 
awesome work   :rolleyes:   
 

I don't see anything that looks like a calf muscle on the left leg.

 

It's there as plain as day.  Maybe look again because simple denialism will not make it go away.

 

Think whatever you want, xspider1. It makes no difference to me. I was just politely describing what I see.  Feel free, however, to get your snot all in a knot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Crowlogic

 

 

 

This could easily be a combination of pareidolia, shadows and film artefacts. 

 

 

It cannot easily be 'film artifacts', due to it's relatively high level of resolution. Neither can it easily be pareidolia...since it is a very simple change of shape. 

 

The only thing left is an illusion caused by a shadow disappearing from the lower-leg. And if you think that is the case...then feel free to re-create the illusion. 

 

Good luck with that. :)

 

 

 

 

 

Why would I bother to try to create a suit with a realistic moving calf muscle, when I don't believe that I am looking at a suit with a realistic moving calf muscle?  That is ridiculous.

 

 

Why would you bother asking Bill to post his photo of an alleged Bigfoot, taken a long distance away from the subject...when you cannot accept that you are seeing a contracting calf muscle, in a film taken at only about 100 feet away???

 

Talk about ridiculous. :wacko:

 

 

Wait, so the calf contraction cannot be a "film artifact" but other things can be when it suits the needs of the PGF proponents?

 

http://bigfootforums.com/uploads/post-18602-0-41422300-1448862373.gif

 

Here is a "film" artifact from the beloved PGF film, so its only a film artifact when it plays in your favor? or is this a case of "special pleading" ?? 

 

Bigfoot exists is the cornerstone of special pleading.

 

 

 

 

 

Wait, so the calf contraction cannot be a "film artifact" but other things can be when it suits the needs of the PGF proponents?

 

http://bigfootforums.com/uploads/post-18602-0-41422300-1448862373.gif

 

Here is a "film" artifact from the beloved PGF film, so its only a film artifact when it plays in your favor? or is this a case of "special pleading" ?? 

 

 

 

The 'calf contraction' is not a film artifact...because the level of resolution is well above the level of film grain/noise....and also, there is no distortion due to camera movement.

 

In the film frame which you claim shows the "suit leg coming apart".....there is significant distortion, due to camera movement...

 

mk_davis_pgf_frame_0017_zpssz6kenzh.jpg

 

 

Patty's left leg is also distorted...it appears narrower than it does in the steady frames.

 

It appears, to my eye, that you use a version much blurrier than even the zoomed in view I presented in my link/example.  This view you give us to prove its not an artifact darn near shows the PGF films leg  to be a deformity that looks thin/small enough to break under Patty's supposed weight. The "artifact" is about as wide/thick as her whole leg.  Again, is this a case of "special pleading"??  Who in their right mind but blind proponents looks at my example and says, nope artifact, but sees your calf constriction as real despite that, as was pointed out by Dmaker I believe, the whole portion from calf to lower ankle/foot seems to disappear/blend away from view.  

^^^^

Are we to believe anatomy opinions like Grieve and others mean nothing? It does not make the PGF real but clearly not an obvious fake to those with specialized knowledge. They see things in the PGF and are not easily fooled. Muscle groups move in an impressive and functional way on Patty. Read the opinion of Grieve and others on the movements.

B D

Opinions, not facts.  Do their opinions hold more weight than someone like me?  Sure, they should but does not make it fact,again, it does not make their OPINION a fact.  In the end its an opinion, just as possible of being right as it is of being wrong.  Many, and I mean many opinions regarding science have been wrong in the past, science is always a living document being changed and adjusted daily. 

 

Indeed.  However the document that registers bigfoot as a confirmed species in the real world of science and academia remains blank.  So yes there will need to be adjustments in order for the aforementioned institutions to take it seriously.

Now about those muscles.  Let's assume for a moment that we're seeing the anatomy of a real animal in action.  Let's just say the film is the genuine article.  Where then are the examples of others of it's kind?  Where did they go?  Where were they before?  The most telling argument against the film is the vacuum of quality evidence left in it's wake.  Why does it take layer after layer of excuses to explain the vacuum as anything other than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

 

The Bombshell Thread has been locked for some time now.

 

That could have something to do with it.

 

 

kit could still answer Giganto's questions if he wanted to. He could answer him via PM...or, in the 'Was It A Suit' thread. The topic of "the Patty suit" itself is not off-topic in that thread. 

 

Besides, there has been an off-topic conversation going on lately, about tranquilizing a Bigfoot. Is that conversation a "posting crime"??? 

 

 

Actually the 'Bombshell Thread' has been locked for a couple of weeks. However, KItakaze had been repeatedly asked what specifics did he see on the alleged feed that caused him to believe he was looking at 'the suit'. It's obvious that there isn't anything specifically that he can say because at best he saw a pile of fur and like Chicken Little he started claiming the sky was falling. You see - Kitakaze is up to his eyeballs in support for Heironimus being the one in the suit and the more detail he gives, then the more about what he saw in the alleged video feed - the more damage it does to his propaganda campaign.

 

In the end there was no-bombshell at all.

^^

 

Crowlogic

Now about those muscles.  Let's assume for a moment that we're seeing the anatomy of a real animal in action.  Let's just say the film is the genuine article.  Where then are the examples of others of it's kind?  Where did they go?  Where were they before?

 

They are in the countless sightings both before and after the Patterson film was taken.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

TWIST,

 

Clearly there is all kinds of distortion goin on in your frame 306. Here are the frames you use side by each an another look at a few of those frames, notice the overall distortion in the subject in frame 306 compared to the clearer frames 304 or 307, it's as if her left side almost disappears. The distortion also appears visible in the trees in the background. 

 

Pat...

(click to enlarge)

 

Pat, I have never understood how anyone in their right mind would seriously choose a frame riddled with motion and panning blur over a clearer frame to make arguments of hoaxing. The level of understanding concerning the effects of these things as represented in the critics post is very unimpressive in my view. I equate it as someone seeing a match light and claiming it must be black magic.   :)  

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The Bombshell Thread has been locked for some time now.

 

That could have something to do with it.

 

 

kit could still answer Giganto's questions if he wanted to. He could answer him via PM...or, in the 'Was It A Suit' thread. The topic of "the Patty suit" itself is not off-topic in that thread. 

 

Besides, there has been an off-topic conversation going on lately, about tranquilizing a Bigfoot. Is that conversation a "posting crime"??? 

 

 

Actually the 'Bombshell Thread' has been locked for a couple of weeks. However, KItakaze had been repeatedly asked what specifics did he see on the alleged feed that caused him to believe he was looking at 'the suit'. It's obvious that there isn't anything specifically that he can say because at best he saw a pile of fur and like Chicken Little he started claiming the sky was falling. You see - Kitakaze is up to his eyeballs in support for Heironimus being the one in the suit and the more detail he gives, then the more about what he saw in the alleged video feed - the more damage it does to his propaganda campaign.

 

In the end there was no-bombshell at all.

^^

 

Crowlogic

Now about those muscles.  Let's assume for a moment that we're seeing the anatomy of a real animal in action.  Let's just say the film is the genuine article.  Where then are the examples of others of it's kind?  Where did they go?  Where were they before?

 

They are in the countless sightings both before and after the Patterson film was taken.

 

Anecdotes are not evidence. Reports are not evidence.  Where is the actual evidence?

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

dmaker wrote:

 

 

Where is the actual evidence?

 

 

The Patterson Film is one piece of evidence....(of substance). 

 

Now you're learning... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't tend to agree, but the current question, as posed by Crowlogic, was where is all the evidence before and after the PGF?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

 

 

 

The Bombshell Thread has been locked for some time now.

 

That could have something to do with it.

 

 

kit could still answer Giganto's questions if he wanted to. He could answer him via PM...or, in the 'Was It A Suit' thread. The topic of "the Patty suit" itself is not off-topic in that thread. 

 

Besides, there has been an off-topic conversation going on lately, about tranquilizing a Bigfoot. Is that conversation a "posting crime"??? 

 

 

Actually the 'Bombshell Thread' has been locked for a couple of weeks. However, KItakaze had been repeatedly asked what specifics did he see on the alleged feed that caused him to believe he was looking at 'the suit'. It's obvious that there isn't anything specifically that he can say because at best he saw a pile of fur and like Chicken Little he started claiming the sky was falling. You see - Kitakaze is up to his eyeballs in support for Heironimus being the one in the suit and the more detail he gives, then the more about what he saw in the alleged video feed - the more damage it does to his propaganda campaign.

 

In the end there was no-bombshell at all.

^^

 

Crowlogic

Now about those muscles.  Let's assume for a moment that we're seeing the anatomy of a real animal in action.  Let's just say the film is the genuine article.  Where then are the examples of others of it's kind?  Where did they go?  Where were they before?

 

They are in the countless sightings both before and after the Patterson film was taken.

 

Anecdotes are not evidence. Reports are not evidence.  Where is the actual evidence?

 

 

 

Eyewitness accounts are evidence and are used in courts all the time to get convictions.

 

Footprints are evidence and the information they hold are used in courts all the time to get convictions.

 

Someone who remains uniformed does not eliminate evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

dmaker,

 

I respectfully disagree. Anecdotal evidence is still evidence, eyewitness testimony is used as evidence all the time. The PGF is evidence, the tracks are evidence, these things are indeed physical evidence, something was filmed, the tracks were witnessed by multiple witnesses, those tracks were also filmed, photographed an cast. All these things are evidence.

If he isn't aware of the before an after the PGF, he is simply sitting there with his eye closed.

 

Pat...

Edited by PBeaton
Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

 

 

 

Actually the 'Bombshell Thread' has been locked for a couple of weeks. However, KItakaze had been repeatedly asked what specifics did he see on the alleged feed that caused him to believe he was looking at 'the suit'.

 

It's obvious that there isn't anything specifically that he can say because at best he saw a pile of fur and like Chicken Little he started claiming the sky was falling. You see - Kitakaze is up to his eyeballs in support for Heironimus being the one in the suit and the more detail he gives, then the more about what he saw in the alleged video feed - the more damage it does to his propaganda campaign.

 

In the end there was no-bombshell at all.

 

 

That's right, Bigfoothunter....there aren't any specific details that kit can mention. If there were...he would have simply mentioned them. 

 

In his recent reply to you...

 

 

BH's question about what I saw that convinced me I was seeing the the PGF suit was answered within the first seven pages of the original Bombshell thread. It was answered countless times since then. In the OP from the person who started it and in post #139 when I first responded to that specific question.

 

 

....he said his answers could be found in the Opening Post, and in Post #139 of the "Bombshell Pt.1" thread. But, in actual fact, there aren't any specifics listed in either post.

 

Here are a couple of highlights from the OP:

 

"The suit was heavily aged, but looked like Patty. "

"...he claims it "looks like Patty".

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/30016-kitakazes-patty-suit-bombshell/page-1

 

 

And....from Post #139:

 

"1) The damage to the suit is mainly to the face and hands which are made out of hide and are now extremely dry and cracked. I can't say anything about the exact details of the suit ..."

 

 

So, BH....kit's "answer" to your question...(looking for specific details)...can supposedly be found in Post #139...where he says that "he can't say anything about the exact details of the suit."   :lol:

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor pinned this topic
  • gigantor unpinned this topic
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
  • gigantor featured this topic
×
×
  • Create New...