Jump to content
kitakaze

Thoughts About Munns' Book - " When Roger Met Patty "

Recommended Posts

Guest

Unless you know that your film has a finite amount of footage to be filmed on and that you want it to run out in a specific fashion - Bigfoot walking off into the distance. Where is the rest of the Bluff Creek footage? Why do we have only film from the day he filmed Bigfoot? "

 

I thought you had that Kit, wasn't that one of your great claims?

 

I am not sure, there has been so many.....

Edited by JohnC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Yet we know he was in Northern California and filming locations there. He was filming open logging areas and a creek that looks extremely like Bluff Creek. Why is he filming those things? We can not say for certain, but if one is to argue why not film at Mt. St. Helens, and Roger's last described trip was 1964, then we are ignoring that Roger was in NorCal in May of 1967 filming things that look very much like the location of the PGF. 

kitakaze,

 

While you call them "locations", I'd call them scenery. An you know Vancouver Island, if you go off the main highway every where ya look pretty much looks like that, it's wilderness. How does the creek look extremely like Bluff Creek ? How does it differ than most creeks ? Was he filmin' for his documentary on sasquatchs which live in the woods kitakaze ? Most loggin' areas are by roads kitakaze, but you should know that, how does one drive out to the wilderness...on the same roads the loggers use.  

 

Here's some typical off the highway scenery...the creek looks more like Bluff Creek than the image you provided. 

 

Pat...

 

ps:

"Roger would not be thinking in film maker mode with the logistics of a movie shoot because despite his pretentions, he's not a film maker."-kitakaze

 

He wasn't a professional Hollywood costume maker either, but...???

post-279-0-06952900-1407213046_thumb.jpg

post-279-0-90601000-1407213758_thumb.jpg

post-279-0-56994300-1407214096_thumb.jpg

Edited by PBeaton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

 Pat are you suggesting that an experienced and well rounded researcher like Kit has spent so little time in the wilderness that he cannot understand that everything looks alike out there? I mean, hikers never get lost right? Because there are so many unique readable features......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

kitakaze,

 

While you call them "locations", I'd call them scenery. An you know Vancouver Island, if you go off the main highway every where ya look pretty much looks like that, it's wilderness. How does the creek look extremely like Bluff Creek ? How does it differ than most creeks ? Was he filmin' for his documentary on sasquatchs which live in the woods kitakaze ? Most loggin' areas are by roads kitakaze, but you should know that, how does one drive out to the wilderness...on the same roads the loggers use.  

 

Here's some typical off the highway scenery...the creek looks more like Bluff Creek than the image you provided. 

 

Pat...

 

ps:

"Roger would not be thinking in film maker mode with the logistics of a movie shoot because despite his pretentions, he's not a film maker."-kitakaze

 

He wasn't a professional Hollywood costume maker either, but...???

 

The creeks look extremely similar in their width, the size of the rocks in their banks, the height and angle of the banks.

 

No, Roger was not a Hollywood suit maker. You'll note that this thread starts with a discussion of Bill asking why suit would show a flaw such as the arcing hip line if the suit was made by a competent suit maker. Roger could not have made a believable suit vs Roger would not have made a flawed suit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

I didn't think it was bluff creek since heironimus tells us bluff creek is white as snow.

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Good point Backdoc, and if there is something I have learned from Kit, that is BobH is completely reliable. Like when he said the bulge in Patty's thigh was his keys, through the waders, in his pocket.......hahahahahahaha

Edited by JohnC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Unless you know that your film has a finite amount of footage to be filmed on and that you want it to run out in a specific fashion - Bigfoot walking off into the distance. Where is the rest of the Bluff Creek footage? Why do we have only film from the day he filmed Bigfoot? "

 

I thought you had that Kit, wasn't that one of your great claims?

 

I am not sure, there has been so many.....

 

Have what, exactly? There is no other footage in existence, neither reel 1 or 2, that is supposed to be of any other day than October 20th. I do not claim to own reel 2 footage, only to have located the person who does. 

 

The only footage we have ever had is supposed to be from the same day as Bigfoot is filmed. In all that what, 3 weeks, one week, whatever, just footage that is supposed to be Bigfoot day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Kit, don't ask me what you have exactly. I can't keep track of all the claims you have made, hell I am impressed you can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

Good point Backdoc, and if there is something I have learned from Kit, that is BobH is completely reliable. Like when he said the bulge in Patty's thigh was his keys, through the waders, in his pocket.......hahahahahahaha

 

That would be Kal Korff and Philip Morris, not Heironimus, who said that... 

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/32956-bob-h-and-the-thigh-bulge-from-his-keys/#entry618428

 

You don't seem to really know who said what...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

That's right Kit, somethings are not worth noting, garbage in, garbage out, I confess, that happens a lot when I am reading "internet skeptic" stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

It was worth enough noting to bring it up here and put the words in Heironimus' mouth. You'd think you'd be better informed about it if you're going to want to use it for rofl's. 




 

Here's some typical off the highway scenery...the creek looks more like Bluff Creek than the image you provided. 

 

 

Ah-ha...

 

Bigbluffcreek5.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

kitakaze,

 

Richard Henry who was there with McClarin the first time he was there to investigate, noted the filmed subject took the 28-30 inch bank in one step.  

 

I darkened the image you suggest looks "extremely similar", still think the creeks look "extremely similar" ?

 

Pat...

 

ps : I don't get the Ah-ha ?

post-279-0-24578900-1407217398_thumb.jpg

Edited by PBeaton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

I didn't think it was bluff creek since heironimus tells us bluff creek is white as snow.

Backdoc

 

Having experienced the same and not having one eye behind a mask, I can understand remembering things that way. You do not want to hear Bill talk about human frailty, do you?...

 

Skeptics seize these conflicting accounts as proof of some kind of deception. They aren’t. They are just the simple fact of human frailty, and the fact that our recollections are not perfect and can change over time. We may also describe an event differently in different contexts of discussion.
 
Munns, William (2014-07-24). When Roger Met Patty (Kindle Locations 1698-1700).  . Kindle Edition. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

It was worth enough noting to bring it up here and put the words in Heironimus' mouth. You'd think you'd be better informed about it if you're going to want to use it for rofl's. 

 

Ah-ha...

 

 

 The rofl's are all yours Kit, from keys in pockets, to glass eyes, to bent stirrups, to scratched cars, to monkey suits in trunks, to scaffolding to make tracks,to face melting suits, to impending documentaries.......you have to understand Kit, the specifics of who said what really does not matter, its all just grasping for straws, to pure make belief,....the entire "skeptical" argument coming out of that camp is the very definition of the "woo" you all are out to save the world from.

 Don't write a paper, don't do any real research, ride on the coffers of the proponents research, attack it, even if you have to use stuff you already know is wrong.....repeat.....repeat....repeat.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

kitakaze,

 

Richard Henry who was there with McClarin the first time he was there to investigate, noted the filmed subject took the 28-30 inch bank in one step.  

 

How very interesting...

 

McClarin an Richard Henry went to the film site on Nov. 5th, of '67, when the trackway was still very clear, they were impressed with the natural appearance of the trackway. Of interest was that they noted the bank on the far side of the creek was 28-30 inches high, the filmed subject took the bank in one step. That's a good step up in my opinion.

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/7117-pattys-feetand-the-footprints/page-42

 

Richard Henry expressed "mixed emotions" about the event recorded by the tracks, since he stated that, "I could not find (tracks) where they started" and the sequence of footprints looked "symmetrical and mechanical."

 

http://books.google.ca/books?id=G3z5VVbGfbgC&pg=PA170&lpg=PA170&dq=richard+henry+bigfoot&source=bl&ots=jF17X3N2Pr&sig=MLkVwWmrw-l_OioJnyfZynICA1o&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dHDgU9uJIsa68gWQwoKwCw&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=richard%20henry%20bigfoot&f=false

 

What is your source for the one step up the bank and how was that noted?

 

I darkened the image you suggest looks "extremely similar", still think the creeks look "extremely similar" ?

 

 

Yes, size of creek, angle of bank, height of bank, size of rocks in the bank, type of vegetation in the banks. Don't know what you think darkening does, since they are all different film types anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...