Jump to content
salubrious

Was Bob Heironimus Patty? Pt 2

Recommended Posts

salubrious
Moderator

Please continue the discussion here.

 

This continues the discussion that started at this link:

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/2546-was-bob-heironimus-patty/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

A Q we could ask along these lines is What would it take for Bob Heironimus to BE Patty?

 

 

Bob would have to just hate money:   We know from Bob's own words he told on Roger and Bob by showing several people the suit in the trunk of his car the very next day.  He had not been paid yet. Since he hates money so much he did wht he cold to reveal a hoax before he was paid.

 

Bob just hates friendships:  Bob H stated Roger and Bob selected him since he could be trusted. We are told by poster Kit that Bob H lives just 9 doors down the street from Bob G.  We are told Bob H tried to protect Bob G. when a reporter came knocking since Bob G and Bob H are friends.

 

Bob just loves to work hard for free:   We must guess it takes a lot of work to hike into Bluff Creek, put on a suit, risk getting shot, and haul a suit all the way back to town.  So to make sure he gets paid for all that work (about $5000 in today's dollars) he shows others the evidence of a hoax.

 

Bob cannot remember his suit:   Most people can describe the type of makeup they wore in some movie.  "Well, it had a glue on scar on the face that itched like heck.  I had to show up 2 hours early each morning and just sit there while it dried.  By friend Sally would bring us doughnuts each morning and play cards while it dried"   Yet, for poor Bob, we are to believe he does not know enough things about the suit that he cannot say to Mr. Morris, "Look Morris, I know you think you sold Roger this suit, but I can tell you as the guy who wore it, it was not like this."

 

Bob just is scared to death of reporters:  We are to believe Bob only talked to Long, not because he was on a witness stand or Long had law enforcement powers, but because long just showed up and started asking Q.  I mean naturally who wouldn't buckle and give up a friend after pressure like that from a completely powerless reporter.

 

Bob forgets he wore an ape suit other times to scare people:   Witnesses talk of Bob H owning a suit and scaring people with it.  So even though it should help his credibility to admit this he keeps it quiet.  it would make more sense if he said, "yea I was experienced in ape suits. I had one and we used to scare people with it. Just ask anyone.  So it was reasonable Roger came to me about this hoax."  Since when does someone who is begging to be believed in one hoax hide the fact he had fooled other people before in similar pranks?

 

Bob gets lost real easy:   We are to believe Bob H went up to bluff creek and camped there as was there all morning and set out after breakfast to film the film hours later.  We are to think in spite of this he cannot describe the details of roads, distance, and colors properly.  How many times do we talk to someone who states, "Hey I am from Smallville USA just like you.  Now, I don't remember the mini mall but when I lived there, there was a icecream stand on the corner"   We know they were from that town.  Those details speak for themselves in normal conversation.  How many of Bob H details fit reality on the subject of the location?

 

Bob had developed a new method of air conditioning:  Bob tells how hot it was in the suit.  No worries.  Instead of going in the shade, just jump down in a hole to cool off.  Has anyone ever felt the need to do this is real life or observed a friend do this?  

 

 

 

This list could go on and on.  Don't worry. HIs defenders will be to the rescue pretty quick.

 

Backdoc

Edited by Backdoc
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Was Bob Heironimus Patty? 

 

No.

 

We can end this now. :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JiggyPotamus

Bob strikes me as the kind of guy who would not have worn a suit that was so obviously female, haha. What I do not understand are those individuals who will attempt to explain away sasquatch eyewitness reports by questioning every single detail, searching for the slightest hint of deception or inconsistencies, and if something of this nature is found it is used as evidence against the witnesses' credibility, memory, or in some other way implies that their report is worthless. Yet I get the impression that some of these same people, in their quest to essentially attack the idea of bigfoot, think the numerous holes in Bob H.'s story are meaningless. I have long noticed a similar double-standard in the bigfoot community. And unfortunately it exists in broader areas than the sighting record. I do not think there is any intent to fail in this area on the part of certain individuals, rather I think they're just blinded by their own zeal most of the time, and thus they overlook facts like this. Perhaps zeal is not the right word; agenda is more appropriate, although I would bet they are not consciously aware of their own agenda, or that they are grasping at any and every argument that can be used against the existence of bigfoot, which is why they overlook the fact that they are using the same arguments they condemn.

 

Backdoc brought up some interesting points, some of which I had never really thought about before. It is really hard for me to wrap my head around the fact that Bob did or said things that contradict his other statements and actions. I would like to focus on the payment and trust aspects, although this is just one of numerous oddities to this case.  How much time was said to have elapsed from when Bob (allegedly) wore the suit to when he exposed the hoax? Oh, he told people about it the next day? That was not the only time either. Surely he had every hope of being paid a considerable sum of money, therefore why risk not getting paid by blabbing? If this was a big hoax then Bob certainly realized that for him to get paid the hoax would have to succeed, and by exposing the hoax he was essentially hurting himself. The little details like this that do not make sense are those that expose a lie in my opinion, although this is better illustrated in some of his other statements. At the time Bob says something, like most people, he is not considering what it implies or how it compares with his other statements. The weaving of a tangled web and all that. It is not impossible that he would have shown the suit to people the next day, but this is not the only inconsistency either. Plus, didn't he say he was chosen because he was supposedly friends with the guys, and trustworthy? He implies how trustworthy and how good of a friend he was to the alleged hoaxers, but he stabbed them in the back the day after filming, which shows he is very untrustworthy. Even if his story were true, which would be a stretch in my opinion, we are still left with the fact that he is untrustworthy.

 

Another thing that makes no sense to me is the fact that he could not keep his mouth shut for more than a day, but he waits YEARS before really trying to bring his story to light. Those actions are inconsistent in my opinion. He apparently had no problem revealing his story on multiple occasions, so it cannot really be said that he waited so long to come forward because he did not want to expose the hoax. As I said, he had already done so.  He is either trustworthy and can keep a secret or he is not. If he wanted to get paid he would keep the secret, and he made it abundantly clear that he wanted to be paid, so why did he not keep the secret? The only real argument that could be made against this hypothesis is that of human nature. He didn't want to spill the beans on a large scale, but could not help himself when it came to telling a handful of people, maybe because he trusted them. But this still makes him untrustworthy. Again however this is just a small facet of the overall story, and is not even one of the best inconsistencies in my opinion.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

"Bobby In The Sky-yyy With A Diaper"... 

 

BobbyInTheSky12_zpsdufw6xnu.jpg

 

 

A little music, to go along with the scene... :) ...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS7BS6A9z8s

 

 

So, kit....you never answered my question....did any of the "Three Principals" who confessed to you tell you definitively that Bobby was Patty?? :popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OntarioSquatch

Just listening to BobH talk is enough to know he's not telling the truth. He sounds nervous as if he's hiding something. I wonder what it is he's trying to hide?  ;)

 

He's the opposite of Gimlin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Bombshells incoming at a later date. Dont worry, kit will deliver the goods. Hes just too busy to bother exposing the hoax right now. Important stuff to do in Japan guys. So busy infact, he still manages to keep posting here often. Kits on here just as much as when he claimed he was heaviy involved in his documentary. Whats that tell you?

Off topic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

So this is the bombshell. This is the heavy artillery. The Big Guns.

Bombshells incoming at a later date. Dont worry, kit will deliver the goods.

I don't mind if you attempt to taunt, but doing so in a consistent fashion would be preferable.

My participation in the forum can tell you whatever you would like to imagine. I live in Sapporo, Japan. From here I can participate on an Internet forum on the World Wide Web. I have time for interests unavailable to me in Tokyo where I have lived since 2001. From here what I can not do is continue work on my documentary project. Like Jeff Pruitt's Patty recreation, or the late Michael Dennett's skeptical investigations, or Bill Munns' various PGF endeavours, they are activities peripheral to our actual lives. The last time I was able to devote any sustained effort on my documentary project was in the fall of last year during a couple months spent in Canada.

I am not promising now to be the first to reveal any bombshells regarding the PGF. I have stated countless times that those bombshells will almost certainly be revealed by family members of the PGF principles upon their passing in the same fashion as that of Ray Wallace's passing in 2002. That was something I was attempting to come out ahead of when I was the most immersed in my documentary project, but my life here in Japan makes that unfeasible. You may want to suggest why don't I make exposing the PGF my ticket to fame and fortune. If you think doing so would result in actual fame and/or fortune, I would suggest you vastly overrate the PGF's importance outside of the subculture of belief you participate in. You can look to the tepid sales of both Greg Long and Bill Munns' book for an indication of how much the real world really cares.

For most of western society the PGF is a silly bit of 60's/70's Americana that was dismissed long ago and has no impact on science and the humanities whatsoever.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

But it certainly impacts you. :)

 

In fact, it bothers you so much, that you go to the extreme of trying to 'kill it' via irrelevant people....like Ray Wallace/the BCM trackway, and Jerry Lee Merritt.

 

You even went and interviewed two other irrelevant people...in Bob Heironimus, the guy who didn't wear "the Patty suit"....and Phil Morris, the guy who didn't supply "the Patty suit".

 

Hey, here's an idea for you, kit...why don't you post another picture of the Face on Mars?!...(being irrelevant, as it is.)

 

Maybe one more picture of it will defeat my analysis.........of this "irrelevant" Film. :)

 

 

 

 

 You may want to suggest why don't I make exposing the PGF my ticket to fame and fortune. 

 

 

Because you can't. 

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

For most of western society the PGF is a silly bit of 60's/70's Americana that was dismissed long ago and has no impact on science and the humanities whatsoever.

 

Most of western society doesn't know a **** thing about the PGF: When it was filmed, where it was filmed, who filmed it, what the circumstances were, which scientists supported it, how its a fact it is unlike any ape suit or bigfoot suit ever made, that the guy who filmed it went to his grave swearing it was real etc etc. They are completely in the dark. These are the same people who don't really care a jot and have zero interest about bigfoot in general or any such mystery creatures or rare species and don't even know that giant apes up to maybe 12ft tall once lived on planet Earth. I'll guarantee you more people in today's western society have heard of bigfoot than of Gigantopithecus or Homo Floresiensis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

I am not promising now to be the first to reveal any bombshells regarding the PGF. I have stated countless times that those bombshells will almost certainly be revealed by family members of the PGF principles upon their passing in the same fashion as that of Ray Wallace's passing in 2002.

 

Oh? You mean family members of passing PGF members will make fools of themselves in the same way the Wallace family did. That they will make outlandish claims and when asked to demonstrate and allow experts to scrutinize their alleged evidence - they will first agree and then evade with lame excuses like the Wallace family. In other words - just more alleged bombshells that didn't have the bang of a popcorn fart.

 

That's what the field needs - more nonsense.

For most of western society the PGF is a silly bit of 60's/70's Americana that was dismissed long ago and has no impact on science and the humanities whatsoever.

 

And this poll was taken when? How many people were polled as most of western society?? You are sounding more like ex-member Kerry more and more.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

Most of western society doesn't know a **** thing about the PGF: When it was filmed, where it was filmed, who filmed it, what the circumstances were, which scientists supported it, how its a fact it is unlike any ape suit or bigfoot suit ever made, that the guy who filmed it went to his grave swearing it was real etc etc.

 

I  believe you are correct. Most people must rely on the internet which has become polluted with those who make claims as if they have proof and do not. On one side we have jokers claiming to be having contact with Sasquatch on a regular basis and on the other side we have people claiming a stomper made a track in a particular substrate who cannot comprehend how recess impressions transfer in fine dust. We now have shows claiming that most every bump in the night is a Bigfoot and on the other side we have confessed hoaxers who can't seem to tell the same story consistently.

 

As Thomas Steenburg has said - this field has become an asylum that has been over-run by the inmates from both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

 

And this poll was taken when? How many people were polled as most of western society?? You are sounding more like ex-member Kerry more and more.

 

 

Here is an example where a skeptic really believes what they believe must be the prevailing wisdom.  Views on a subject like Bigfoot are complicated.  A subset issue is the PGF-even more complicated. Just look at how many posts on the BFF PGF thread alone.    There have been polls taken many times over the years on subjects such as the JFK assassination.   That is an issue polling- wise that have been followed more scientifically on opinion polls (Gallop poll of the JFK assassination views).  It is also a subject most baby boomers and older had some direct exposure to.

 

We don't know how many 'scientists' think <this or that> about Bigfoot, Aliens from outer space, or whatever.  First you would have to define who is even a scientist.

 

The great math expert and polling expert is Nate (moneyball) Silver. Nate states one of the most accurate ways to determine what people really believe is to see where they are placing their bets.  When money is put on the line people tend to vote with the wallet most accurately.  Say a guy loves the Cubs.  He will say, "My Cubs will win the division this year"  That is a hope.  Yet, if you ask that man, "how much will you bet the Cubs will win the division?"  They might reply "Oh I love the cubs but I am not going to BET on the cubs"

 

Sadly, the skeptics believe their own press and assume the rest of the world does as well.  Kit lives in Japan.  Ask the Japanese who get reports of the Chinesse 'wildman' how many believe the Chinesse Wildman is possible?  I am sure it would not be less than 1%.  It might still be a small number but a significant number none the less.

 

Backdoc

Edited by Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

As I have said before seeing, as the majority of the western world (and also the majority of the world in general) buys into things far sillier and illogical than bigfoot, I don't really care what the majority thinks about the subject of bigfoot. They have their own far sillier belief systems for me to chuckle at. Bigfoot is just a primate. Big deal. 


I  believe you are correct. Most people must rely on the internet which has become polluted with those who make claims as if they have proof and do not. 

 

Even with the ones who seem to think they know something about the subject, the most often heard claim is that the guy who made the film confessed on his deathbed. I have no idea where these people get that from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...