Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Backdoc

If Roger and Bob did not have the camera ready at Bluff Creek that day, a report similar to one posted by Roguefooter would be the only thing we would have from that famous day.  We would have the Patterson Gimlin report or encounter and no one would ever notice.  It would be just 2 guys out in the woods who said they saw a large hairy something.  If they had not have plaster that day, we would only have Lyle Laverty's photos.   

 

Most witnesses don't carry around a camera; especially back then.  We can be thankful Roger had a camera that day. It gives us something solid to debate and consider.  

 

Backdoc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an interesting report I found that happened almost 2 years after the PGF, about 150 miles southeast-

 

 

 

Great find. There is a picture of this guy and his son in the Janet and Colin Bord book. The Evidence for Bigfoot and other Man-Beats, page 31.

 

There was a spate of bigfoot reports near Oroville in the summer of 1969, by different witnesses. I believe Patterson himself took a trip down there to investigate them soon after. I wonder if he looked in on Bluff Creek along the way?

Edited by Neanderfoot
Link to post
Share on other sites
JustCurious

Thanks roguefooter.  The reason I find that report so interesting is because years ago I was talking to my aunt and she surprised me by saying she believes bigfoot exists.  Her best friend of many, many years had moved to Montana some years prior and her friend said she was using the outhouse one day and a bigfoot came and was watching her from about 10 feet away.  Unfortunately, at that time in my life I didn't consider older reports of value because there was no physical evidence to investigate. In other words, it was just a story.  Interesting though to find another report related to outhouses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
JustCurious

This article about creating a lifelike exhibit of Samson the gorilla might be of interest to the topic of this thread.  http://onmilwaukee.com/buzz/articles/samsonexhibit.html

 

 

But perhaps the greatest exhibit-related labor of love is being performed by MPM taxidermist and artist Wendy Christensen-Senk, who -- for the next year -- will painstakingly and publicly finish a life-sized, extremely life-like re-creation of Samson.

Using sculptural techniques and drawing on her knowledge of anatomy, zoology and taxidermy techniques, Christensen-Senk's job is part artist, part MacGyver, tinkering and testing and creating parts and techniques where none already exists.

For example, she custom made Samson's eyes and she had to adapt the gorilla skeleton she bought "off the rack." On the day I visited she was testing a new tool and technique she created to put the hair on Samson's face and head.

"A taxidermist is an artist," Christensen-Senk told me. "My job is so cool because it is a little bit of everything. It's hard to explain because obviously we have to have a lot of art skills and talent but I also have a lot of ability to understand and interpret anatomy. But then I do all kinds of mold making and casting."    --OnMilwaukee.com Jan 10, 2007

 

Bolding: over a year. 

If you google images of Samson the gorilla, notice the hair. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
JustCurious

My computer was crashing earlier and I didn't want to lose what I had already written in the above post, so I hurried up and posted it.  Then I had to leave to go to work.  NOW, I can finish what I was going to say.

 

Granted, this taxidermist was constructing the whole gorilla starting with an "off the shelf" gorilla skeleton, but her efforts took over a year to complete.  If it would have been easier and faster to 'make a suit' I would think that's what would have been done.  It begs the question, why wasn't a suit used?  I think I'm going to contact her and ask that question just to find out.

 

If you googled the images of Samson, the two things that jumped out at me were the scraggly look to the fur/hair and the fur/hair cover on the chest area.  Samson must have been a gorilla in a Patty suit!  Why, Samson even did a Patty impersonation with this lookback (image 27): http://www.jsonline.com/supergallery?id=28683594&ddd=y&item=10661944#

Edited by JustCurious
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Bigfoothunter

^^

 

I recall Greg Long saying he could see a light reflection in Patty's, thus proving it to be glass as a real eye would not reflect light as such, The first photo of Samson shows such a reflection of light, as well as the fourth photo of the two infants. At times I thought Long just made stuff up as he went ... it was as if he didn't know how to check to see if his theories were correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If you googled the images of Samson, the two things that jumped out at me were the scraggly look to the fur/hair and the fur/hair cover on the chest area.  Samson must have been a gorilla in a Patty suit!  Why, Samson even did a Patty impersonation with this lookback (image 27): http://www.jsonline.com/supergallery?id=28683594&ddd=y&item=10661944#

 

And what's with those very odd looking suit seams on his arm? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

^^

 

I recall Greg Long saying he could see a light reflection in Patty's, thus proving it to be glass as a real eye would not reflect light as such, The first photo of Samson shows such a reflection of light, as well as the fourth photo of the two infants. At times I thought Long just made stuff up as he went ... it was as if he didn't know how to check to see if his theories were correct.

I've always thought that the whole business about a glass eye was a lot of talk over nothing. There would be no perceptible difference in the way a glass eye would reflect light vs a real one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

Because the realistic features...(like extra-long arms with bending fingers, and apparent calf muscle contraction)....weren't convincing enough, by themselves?? :wacko:

 

 

Roger sat there....gazing at his masterpiece....thinking to himself "it just needs something....just one more killer detail....what could it be??? Help me out here, Bob"...  :paint:

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch

The simple reality is when the film image data supports a specific conclusion, all the gossip, anecdotes, and fuzzy recollections are unnecessary, and if they contridict the film image data, those stories are wrong.

 

Your fiberglass mask contradicts what we see in the film image data.

 

 

 

Honestly and seriously this isn't going to go away. The only conclusion to be made here is Bill Munns' head doesn't fit in the Patty profile he created.

 

No reason to rule out a bloke in a suit.

post-18602-0-71620500-1427257129_thumb.j

Edited by Squatchy McSquatch
Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Your fiberglass mask contradicts what we see in the film image data.

 

Honestly and seriously this isn't going to go away. The only conclusion to be made here is Bill Munns' head doesn't fit in the Patty profile he created.

 

No reason to rule out a bloke in a suit.

 

 

Bill arrived at his mask shape by tracing the outline of Patty's head, Squatchy...so, how far off could his 'mask shape' be??

 

 

Here is a montage of head images, showing how the 'apparent slope angle' of the head varies, as the orientation of the head changes...

 

Munns-PattyHead-SamsonGorilla%20Montage6

 

 

Thanks for posting that image of Samson the gorilla, JC. :)

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

Honestly and seriously this isn't going to go away. The only conclusion to be made here is Bill Munns' head doesn't fit in the Patty profile he created.

 

No reason to rule out a bloke in a suit.

 

If someone's attempt to make a mask is the deal breaker, then one is trying to hold onto something that is made from nothing. There are so many aspects pertaining to the film - the film site - the subjects movements - and the evidence that was left behind that rules out a bloke in a suit as far as I am concerned.

 

The subject in the PGF turns to look back towards Roger and Gimlin and yet I have been unable to find the slightest hint that the body right up through the subjects face had shown any bunching up/folding. Did not Heironimus claim the head was a separate piece of the alleged costume and yet I see the head remain in sync with the subjects body before - during - and after the turn.

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