Jump to content

Thoughts About Munns' Book - " When Roger Met Patty " (2)


Recommended Posts

The "elbow reach" ultimately exposes Bob H as the BSer glory seeker that he is. Cut from the same cloth as Morris. Otherwise, they're both great guys! ;)

 

 

His dry creek, snow white sand and large hole that he hid in already does that before we even get to analysis of Patty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

His dry creek, snow white sand and large hole that he hid in already does that before we even get to analysis of Patty.

 

And Heironimus could have only gotten the idea for his story from looking at images that were lightened which turned the grayish sand color white - on film.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^

 

Yes and the fact that the wet flowing creek wasn't widely known to be visible in the PGF until fairly recently, including in Bill Munns' composite of the landscape. You can see the wet flowing creek in the first few frames of the PGF. Heironimus claimed it was dry. That alone busts him as a phoney. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

It sure can be seen flowing, Neander...

 

Creek%20Flowing-AG6_zpsmbvcwjwt.gif

 

 

 

If I ever get better images to work with, I can put together a slightly better animation. :)

Edited by SweatyYeti
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

^

 Heironimus claimed it was dry. That alone busts him as a phoney. 

 

Sometimes I wonder if that moron (Heironimus) had only seen a still image from the film before making his claims. To not see the water flowing over the rocks in the creek - to claim the sand was white - and to think hair was missing of the subjects body - thus claiming Patterson made the alleged suit that way to make the subject appear to be shedding its fur .... going into winter of all things. Shame on Long or any skeptics that didn't call Heironimus on those gross blunders.

Edited by Bigfoothunter
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes I wonder if that moron (Heironimus) had only seen a still image from the film before making his claims. To not see the water flowing over the rocks in the creek - to claim the sand was white - and to think hair was missing of the subjects body - thus claiming Patterson made the alleged suit that way to make the subject appear to be shedding its fur .... going into winter of all things. Shame on Long or any skeptics that didn't call Heironimus on those gross blunders.

 

Well, remember.  Bigfoot skeptics aren't.  They are in fact some of the most credulous folk I have encountered.  Science flat *ejects* Bob Hieronymous from the conversation.

Edited by DWA
Link to post
Share on other sites

^

 

It sure can be seen flowing, Neander...

 

Creek%20Flowing-AG6_zpsmbvcwjwt.gif

 

 

 

If I ever get better images to work with, I can put together a slightly better animation. :)

 

 

Yes that's it Sweaty. Bluff Creek was clearly wet and in flow and from what I have read Bluff Creek never runs dry. The only way to get onto that sandbar was to cross it, yet Heironimus claimed the creek was dry. Nobody who had actually been there would ever have said the creek was dry.

Sometimes I wonder if that moron (Heironimus) had only seen a still image from the film before making his claims. To not see the water flowing over the rocks in the creek - to claim the sand was white - and to think hair was missing of the subjects body - thus claiming Patterson made the alleged suit that way to make the subject appear to be shedding its fur .... going into winter of all things. Shame on Long or any skeptics that didn't call Heironimus on those gross blunders.

 

It's clear to me now that Heironimus only ever saw lightened still images or bad copies of the footage and made his whole story up from there. The fact is that if you looks at the bad copies on t.v or in the early days of the internet or from lightened still images then you wouldn't notice the creek and you would think the soil is white. This explains why Heironimus got it all wrong. He was never there and only had those bad copies of the footage and stills to look at.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Yes that's it Sweaty. Bluff Creek was clearly wet and in flow and from what I have read Bluff Creek never runs dry. The only way to get onto that sandbar was to cross it, yet Heironimus claimed the creek was dry. Nobody who had actually been there would ever have said the creek was dry.

 

 

I guess, as the old saying goes, Neander...Bob Heironimus is "all wet"... :haha:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

It's clear to me now that Heironimus only ever saw lightened still images or bad copies of the footage and made his whole story up from there. The fact is that if you looks at the bad copies on t.v or in the early days of the internet or from lightened still images then you wouldn't notice the creek and you would think the soil is white. This explains why Heironimus got it all wrong. He was never there and only had those bad copies of the footage and stills to look at.

 

Greg Long has only two options for not calling Heironimus on those points - Long didn't bother to study the film in any detail and certainly didn't bother to ask anyone who had been to the film site as to what color the sand was - or else he knew better and didn't care that Heironimus was playing him for a fool so long as he got the story he was after.

 

I emailed Long about some the things Heironimus was not being truthful about and I found the man to be arrogant and uninformed. Others who met Long in person have said the same thing. That doesn't mean Heironimus wasn't somehow involved in pranking people with a fake monkey suit of some kind as I could fathom Roger adding some recreations in his documentary, but that is only a speculation I am making. I don't recall anyone ever saying they had seen 'Patty' running across roads and so on in Yakima once the Bluff Creek film was in the publics eye and people saw what that creature looked like. And then the film subject that Roger did get in Bluff Creek was a alleged by Heironimus to be a suit that had only been on him once for a fitting and again on 10-20-1967.

 

Would it not be something to see both Long and Heironimus stand before Judge Judy - she would have a field day with those two clowns!  :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

^^

 

One more thing - when I bought Long's book .... I was very interested in seeing what he had allegedly uncovered. Upon reading the book and writing an article about it .... I gave my copy away just so another poor sap wouldn't waste their money on it as I did.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Greg Long has only two options for not calling Heironimus on those points - Long didn't bother to study the film in any detail and certainly didn't bother to ask anyone who had been to the film site as to what color the sand was - or else he knew better and didn't care that Heironimus was playing him for a fool so long as he got the story he was after.

 

I emailed Long about some the things Heironimus was not being truthful about and I found the man to be arrogant and uninformed. Others who met Long in person have said the same thing.

 

 

 

Greg Long should publish a revised version of his book, with a new chapter added...."100 Really Good Reasons To Think Bob Heironimus Is Making It All Up".  :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pinkmoon67

Greg Long should publish a revised version of his book, with a new chapter added...."100 Really Good Reasons To Think Bob Heironimus Is Making It All Up".  :)

I really wish you would get your facts right Mr long shouldn't be asked to publish "100 good reasons to think ....." it should "10000 good reasons....."
Link to post
Share on other sites

^^

 

One more thing - when I bought Long's book .... I was very interested in seeing what he had allegedly uncovered. Upon reading the book and writing an article about it .... I gave my copy away just so another poor sap wouldn't waste their money on it as I did.

Saved the money.  Read the Foreword.  If a trash can had been next to me at that moment:  book would have gone right into it.  Maybe the biggest waste of trees in publishing history...and that is going some.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

Long said himself in the book that when he first asked Heironimus if he participated in the PGF - Heironimus denied it. I forget her name at the moment, but he also wrote about a woman who overheard Heironimus, her husband(?), and another individual sitting around and talking about coming up with a story to sell for $$$.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So of course when H. denied his denial - moving to what Long wanted him to say because Long would Put His Name In Lights if he said it - H. said it.  Gob.Smack.Me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...