JustCurious 173 Posted March 19, 2015 ^^^ Might be proof that either Patty's collagen doesn't break down the way that a human's does or it could be Jean-Denis Rouillon is right. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kitakaze 1,112 Posted March 19, 2015 "Medically, physiologically, anatomically breasts gain no benefit from being denied gravity." - Jean-Denis Rouillon Not to mention that of the 330 women Rouillon studied, they were all between 18-35 years of age. Patty is no spring chicken. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted March 19, 2015 I don't see any missiles. And didn't Patterson draw flat saggy breasts on his 'old lady'? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted March 19, 2015 (edited) Patty is no spring chicken. Where do you come up with this stuff. I knew girls in high school that one might say were as endowed as Patty. Then again I have seen middle-aged women who were well endowed and very well preserved compared to women half their age. Edited March 19, 2015 by Bigfoothunter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Backdoc 676 Posted March 19, 2015 ^^^^^Patty must " no spring chicken". It helps the hoax theory. That is where the stuff comes from. It comes from the patty-must-be-a--hoax bucket. Just reach in and grab something else. Backdoc Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SweatyYeti 2,105 Posted March 19, 2015 Patty's hairy missiles are nothing like that of an older woman's. kit also wrote...regarding Patty: I see an animal, not a costume- can't change it no matter how hard I try. http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/45868-flap-on-the-right-foot/page-5 kit vs. kit... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DWA Posted March 19, 2015 (edited) I don't see any missiles. And didn't Patterson draw flat saggy breasts on his 'old lady'? I might think Patterson's drawing reflected a meeting with Elvis before I'd think it reflected one with Patty. Making that drawing the blueprint for that film would be sufficient proof of delusion in a court of law. Edited March 19, 2015 by DWA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted March 21, 2015 I do not know of a single person who was not already fully convinced by the PGF being compelled or persuaded by that book to thinking the PGF depicts an actual Bigfoot, yet ironically the book is said to be written primarily for the benefit of people who have not made up their minds. How can a book said to contain proof of Bigfoot have such limp support from the Bigfoot community? Fishing again? I have not yet read the book. But what difference would it make to you if the entire Bigfoot community gave their full support in favor of the book - I do not believe it would effect someone like yourself who proclaims to be on a mission to show the PGF to be a hoax. So is there a data base that you have used to proclaim that there is 'limp support' of Munns book or was it just something you wanted to say as part of the mission. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JustCurious 173 Posted March 21, 2015 After a study involving 330 female volunteers aged 18 to 35, Professor Jean-Denis Rouillon concluded that “medically, physiologically and anatomically†breasts gained no benefit from having their weight supported. What the French know as the “soutien-gorge†could, in fact, be positively harmful in terms of posture and muscle tone. Wearing a bra means “supporting tissues will not grow and even they will wither and the breast will gradually degrade,†Mr. Rouillon, a sports scientist, warned. New York Times 4/11/2013 Jean-Denis Rouillon conducted his study for 15 years, so if he followed the same volunteers, his 35 year olds would have been 50 when he released his preliminary findings. There is no way from the PGF film that we can tell the age of the subject. Bill Munns makes it clear that it is his subjective opinion that Patty is aged. He says that's what he sees when he looks at the subject. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted March 21, 2015 There is no way from the PGF film that we can tell the age of the subject. You are correct. We can reasonably say the subject isn't an infant, but no one knows at what point a Sasquatch reaches maturity. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roguefooter 1,374 Posted March 21, 2015 Here is an interesting report I found that happened almost 2 years after the PGF, about 150 miles southeast- Notice the similarities to Patty- hair on it's head standing straight up, large forehead, flat nose, the "gray tipped hair" covering the body like Patterson described. This subject though is taller with the breasts lower, and larger feet. They don't report any hair on the breasts, although that could just be the wording of the report. Like an older, slightly larger version of Patty. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Backdoc 676 Posted March 22, 2015 ^^^^ Very interesting. Thanks for the post. Backdoc Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JustCurious 173 Posted March 22, 2015 roguefooter, how did you come across this report? In other words, was it from official sources or second hand? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
roguefooter 1,374 Posted March 22, 2015 (edited) It was posted on the NABS website. According to him obtained direct from the Butte County Sheriff's Office. Edited March 22, 2015 by roguefooter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
