Jump to content
Admin

Ray Wallace Hoaxing And The Pgf (2)

Recommended Posts

Backdoc

Having a fairly decent science background I was not offering the king cheetah anything other than what it is. Let's assume if I posted a 2 min video to make a point I just may have taken 2 minutes to watch the points it made before posting them. The posting deals with what in the demonstrative sense show the concept of assuming an animal might exist in whatever form or reason. That is, to be unknown in the animal world save very limited evidence. Had they not continued to look for the king cheetah encounters would have been more by random chance and rare.

Kit, the fact you told me bob hieronimus was the guy in the patty suit and yet you do not offer his suit HE claims is the suit replica as evidence of the suit replica is about as weak as it gets. Your posts can be informative but I see them mostly existing not so much to make a point as they are existing for you to practice veil insults and to get a dose of feeling smarter than those believing fools.

In discussing a crypto it is your conclusion no cyrptiod could exist since there is no established evidence. This naturally forgets to little fact if there were solid evidence the subject would not in fact be a cryptoid.

You have for your own reasons your own conclusions. Let me just focus your own standard your way. So correct me if I have any of this wrong:

A person who goes by kit has determined the PGf is a hoax

With that pre conceived notion he searches for a suit.

He claims to have found the suit via a picture he saw over his phone that he offers no copy of and refuses to give other details about.

Thus, he went out to find evidence of a hoax and then happened to find this rare evidence of the hoax.

No proof of the claim. Whatsoever. So I pretty much got that part understood.

The part I don't get is you --like roger -- sought out something where you thought it would be. We are told by you Rogers reason to happen to find what others were never able to find is suspect. I mean it is not suspect in you only roger. Then, unlike roger who let's us get details of the encounter, location and so on and examine the film you offer Nothing. Not even a crumb. You give no details. And that is the standard by which we are to not judge you by but we are to judge roger by.

My earlier point is clear for all to see. You choose to look for operate distract. I mean are you really telling me the king cheetah had been filmed up until that time. Obviously not. Watch the clip. That is my point. There is no way you can be that far gone not to understand it.

Just another day for those engaging in "I found the suit foolery"

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Ahhhhh, but does not the scientific study of the evidence force the uninformed to become informed. Does it not allow us to call upon the lesser of two evils - Possibility / Probability.  Then one can consider whether the hand-dug trackway and scaffold theory was supported more from the known evidence or if the weight of the evidence favored the existence of yet another unknown primate.

 

May the force be with you, it's as possible / probable as Santa Clause and I've seen him so hang in there kids. :crazy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
McGman

Kerry, what one man can do another man can do. Don't you agree? Why is the PGF the exception?

Backdoc.

Just curious. Do you apply that same standard about filming a bigfoot?

 

If Patterson filmed it surely someone else has right? Is there another clip you think is a bigfoot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

McG,

 

In time it could be.  Yes I do apply the same standard. But it could also be the man on the moon standard. That is, a few people have walked on the moon.  There are over 6 Billion on the planet. I have no doubt many of those could as well but we must admit a lot of things would have to fall into place first.

 

So Yes, I think another person could do it.  If one person did it another could do it.

 

There was a confluence of events that lead to Rogetrs success if real.  That would be hard to reproduce.  The main things is to go out often in an area where there was recent suspected activity.  Billy the kid robbed banks becasuse that is where the money was.  Roger went to an area of recent activity.

 

Now, lets look at the suit two cowboys made. If one person did it another person (such as Blevins) could....OOPS  Guess not.  If another person cannot it may mean  the first person did not make a suit either. 

 

As far as another clip of bigfoot, i have not seen too much on any other clip that gets my interest.  I am focused only on the PGF but would review what is offered.  I am not married to the film or the belief in Bigfoot one way or another.

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Just curious. Do you apply that same standard about filming a bigfoot?

 

If Patterson filmed it surely someone else has right? Is there another clip you think is a bigfoot?

 

 

The Memorial Day Video may be legitimate...and the Freeman Footage may be, also.

 

There are also a few others that I've seen, which may be legitimate....but the resolution is just too low to make any kind of solid determination. :)

 

 

Regarding the Memorial Day Video.....back in 2007, I had sent Lori's father an email...asking him for information on the video camera that was used to shoot the footage.

 

Here is part of his reply to me...

 

"Sony model CCD-F70 video camera recorder.  Auto full zoom 8x.  Video is super 8.  Not sure how old it is except Owen thought that he had purchased it in the mid 80's.  Incidentally, the camera has already gone thru quite an extensive testing by Doug Hajicek and his crew at White Wolf Industries out of Minneapolis, Mn. 
 
The subject was 900 feet away but was up the side of a mountain.  I saw the area and I would say that there was near a 30 % incline, maybe a bit more.  That's 3 football fields and that is a long way.  The zoom, however, did pull it in enough to get some details.  Maybe not enough to satisfy all the people out their with 'perfect pictures' of what they think that this animal should look like.  But, there was enough to raise the hair in back of your neck.  Human? I just do not think so.  You are talking about someone walking up there just to fool us? And, with a kid?  And with a uniform that must have weighed close to 50 pounds?  This 'thing' was only 5 foot 3 inches tall, estimated by the forensic team.  I had estimated 5 foot 6 inches, allowing for some stoop. If this really was a young woman up there, s he would have had to weigh around 200 pounds without all of the additional crap that she was carrying.  I don't think so.  I really think that this was a real female Sasquatch, weighing well over 200 pounds, carrying a child.  The frames do NOT indicate that it was a human which later in the run sequence, removed a mask because it was too hot in that uniform.  No Way! 
But that is only part of the story.  Four days earlier another witness, separate from the Memorial Day witnesses, saw a Bigfoot standing behind a 5 foot fence, looking at him.  He put his binoculars on him and zoomed in.  They looked at each other for about 5 minutes before the creature ducked.  The witness estimated that about 2 feet of the creature protruded above the fence.  That puts it at seven feet in height.  Two hours later it appeared a second time to this witness in a near location.  He looked at it with his binoculars for another 2 minutes.  This report was not filed with the BFRO site until 11 years after it had occurred.  It was filed independently of the MD occurrence.
Now, Owen when he had seen the animal he thought that the animal was close to 6 1/2 to 7 feet tall.  This did not match the height of the animal on the hill.  This confused the Bigfoot researchers because they all thought that it was the same animal.    Now all of a sudden, 11 years later we began to realize that Owen was correct in his assessment.  What in reality we were looking at was a young Sasquatch family, a male, a young mother, and a child.  The location of the earlier sighting was probably less than 100 yards from the Memorial Day sighting.
 
Now, add to this mix the location of Lake Chopaka itself, and you have one awesome sighting.  I want you to do something else for me.  Get on the internet and using the Yahoo Search Engine, search for 

"digital quads and quarter quads for Washington State" and when that site comes up, you will see a map of Washington State. "

 
 
 
There was a little more to his reply, about the location of their sighting/video. One thing that impresses me about the video, is how Lori's father became interested in the subject of Bigfoot after it was shot. 
 
Looking at the potential 'hoax' scenarios....it is very unlikely that Lori and Owen were involved in doing this as a hoax, themselves....since, if they did....either Lori's father was willingly going along with the hoax....or Lori lied to/hoaxed her own father. Either way....the odds of either of those scenarios being true seems extremely low.
 
And, if the Pate's didn't create the video as a hoax....then how does one account for Owen's sighting testimony...where he claimed he saw a Bigfoot up-close, higher-up on the hillside, before they shot the video.
 In addition to his sighting testimony...it was at his request, when he got back to the campsite, that Lori got the camcorder out...in case the creature came back into view. 
 
The various potential hoax scenarios all have trouble accounting sensibly for all of the related details of their video, and verbal testimonies.....including Lori's father's. :)
Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch

And that has everything to do with Ray Wallace and the Hoaxing of the PGF.

 

In the absence of any evidence you argue amongst yourselves and still find a way to blame skeptics for your Lack Of Monkey.

 

Don't worry though, I heard 2014 is gonna be the year of the SamSquantch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Squatch,

 

Who do I blame for that suit your were going to build?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

McG,

 

In time it could be.  Yes I do apply the same standard. But it could also be the man on the moon standard. That is, a few people have walked on the moon.  There are over 6 Billion on the planet. I have no doubt many of those could as well but we must admit a lot of things would have to fall into place first.

 

So Yes, I think another person could do it.  If one person did it another could do it.

 

There was a confluence of events that lead to Rogetrs success if real.  That would be hard to reproduce.  The main things is to go out often in an area where there was recent suspected activity.  Billy the kid robbed banks becasuse that is where the money was.  Roger went to an area of recent activity.

 

This would be the recent activity referred to...

GreenBkCover.jpg

 

Bluff Creek was a hoaxer gong show for nearly 10 years when the film was shot. The recent activity was a hoax. The prints made have been largely abandoned by the Bigfoot researcher community and it is a very small and intransigent few that continue to cling to them as evidence of Bigfoot.

 

The modern Bigfoot myth started on a Ray Wallace work site, with the alleged activity of Bigfoot vandalism coming from Shorty Wallace, the sighting coming from Wallace's own men...

 

classiclayout.JPG

01-01-1994-issue%20number%2033-%20Wester

 

(click to enlarge)

Bigwallace34.gif

 

The fact the modern Bigfoot myth started with hoaxing doesn't invalidate anything not directly connected to that hoax, but it is important that history be correctly understood and that Bluff Creek's context be recognized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
clubbedfoot

Ray Wallace could twist tree limbs and small tree trunks with his bare hands....he was born with an extra ligament in his wrist which gave him a huge mechanical advantage...(not true but wish it was---it would have been awesome)

Edited by clubbedfoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Sometimes I think the most amazing thing roger accomplished that day at bluff creek was to bother kit so much.

Operation distract is effect again I see.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wheellug

Is it Operation Distract or Operation Misdirection?

 

I'm inclined to believe that the School of Heironimous is trying to stay afloat with fervent vigor to the point that someone will fight against all that believe in open and honest study of a cryptic creature such as bigfoot are in danger.

Edited by WV FOOTER
Edit Text

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Kit does not believe (from previous postings anyway) Wallace was involved with the PGF. He does offer an idea Roger was either inspired by Wallace fake prints or even goes so far to suggest Roger borrowed some wooden track makers from Wallace and altered them somehow for Bluff Creek.

 

This is why I think it is funny in spite of all of this he continues to talk about 'Wallace this..."  or "Wallace that..."   Oh well.

 

i think that is a laugh. I will say Kit is informed.  You ask the average person on the street who thinks bigfoot is fake who John Green, Jim McClarin, Bob Titmus, and others are and they have no clue.  Kit has a good knowledge of all the players on the team.

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

Too bad his words don't carry good weight. :)

 

Have you ever heard of the story of 'The boy who cried Suit', Doc?  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

^^

The boy cried suit and they all came running.

"Is there a bigfoot suit I hear?" asked the townspeople

"HA HA you believed it" said the boy.  Off went the townspeople.

"SUIT SUIT SUIT" cried the boy!

The townspeople came running.

"Did you finally find the suit" asked the townspeople.

"I DID and it will melt your face" said the boy

"Can we see it?  How about a picture?" ask the excited townspeople.

"I don't have one" said the boy.  " I saw it over my phone.  I had no measurements of it, no permanent picture of it, and I refuse even to say who and how I know about it.  In spite of all of this I am certain I found the suit.  What is more, I am satisfied I did so I will not pursue it further" said the boy.

The townspeople walked away and never believed the boy again.

The End.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^^

 

Very good, Doc... :lol:

 

 

Here is more, from 'The boy who cried Suit'.....from March, 2012...

 

 

"Proof of the PGF hoax is not a hypothetical. My finding it has involved equal parts luck, effort, and willingness to stick to the source and be Axel Foley about it. The proof of that hoax is not one thing, it is three. They are...

1) The suit. It exists. It was not destroyed. The reason it still exists is more vanity and pride than anything else.

2) The confessions. These exist as well. The confession comes actually in three to four parts. Four if I can make cooperation happen, three if I don't. All of them the sources of the PGF.

3) Proof of the hoax on the film itself, specifically the second reel. The first and second reel both exist fully intact and the person who had it hated the subject of Bigfoot, hated bigfooters, and wanted nothing to do with them. This in the end was to my greatest advantage.

What exactly I have found and what I have done and what I am doing now remain the subject of a documentary. This journey I've been through deserves at least that much."

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/7117-pattys-feetand-the-footprints/page-30

 

 

In October, 2012...as final plans were being made for him and Bill to go see/inspect "the Patty suit"....kitakaze re-located to Japan....and "lost interest" in the subject of Bigfoot. :)

Edited by SweatyYeti
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...