Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Daniel Perez

P-G Film Notes

Recommended Posts

Bigfoothunter

kitakaze,

 

Are you trying to make Rene sound like a really real bad man as well ?

 

You claimed to have found the second reel, an said it proved it was a hoax(although everything proves it was a hoax in your opinion, yes, yes, I know really, real bigfoots don't exist), I asked you already not long ago, was Chico in the second reel footage ?

 

Pat...

 

 

Pat,

 

Don't you know that one must wait until all those present in 1967 who saw the 2nd reel in Vancouver must be dead so not to get debunked like Laverty did with Heironimus about the tracks being made a week or so earlier than 10 - 20 - 67. Kitakaze is way too smart to make that kind of a mistake .... I think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Ha ! I already got me a bag of marshmallows for when kitakaze claims his so called suit goes up in flames !  ;)

 

marshmellows.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

^^

 

Considering that where Bob and Roger camped has nothing to do with the film or the fim site ... let us all agree that the two men had a camp somewhere.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Drew

Well, i would say that the timeline difference is pretty important, whether they were 1, 2,  or 3 miles from teh film site, and had to go back to get plaster, then go back the filmsite, and then go back to the truck to head into town.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Even at a 5mph travel pace, they could be to the camp and back in just one hour if the camp was 2.5 miles away.

The " average " marathon runner finishes a marathon in 4 hrs 30 min. (5 hours for a bad runner) A marathon!

4:19 is the average finishing time of all male runners. (Just over 2 hours for the winners/ elite runners).

There was a lot of time to do what these guys said they accomplished in the time allowed. Lots of time.

Backdoc

Edited by Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

What niggle are they gonna niggle on next?  The only story that has remained utterly constant through all of this is that - one story! - of Patterson and Gimlin.


You are correct in my opinion and from what Iearned from both Green and Dahinden who knew both of these men. When Gimlin described why they were in the area that the film was taken - he stated that they had been up in that area a few times. In my view its no different than Roger saying he saw the creature squatted by the creek and Bob saying it was standing up when he first saw it. This was just another time that a statement is made that could be taken a couple of different ways. I guess when nothing new is able to reported in this field, then a meaningless play on words is introduced to stir the pot or to add excitment.

...and to distract from the essential, telling, and damning fact that the skeptics can offer no evidence pointing to a fake.  Don't forget that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

Well, i would say that the timeline difference is pretty important, whether they were 1, 2,  or 3 miles from teh film site, and had to go back to get plaster, then go back the filmsite, and then go back to the truck to head into town.

 

 

Really .....  Please explain the significance of whether the film site was one mile a way or two when it came to getting to town after dark to call Al Hodson back to the hardware store?

 

And please explain how that would make a difference as to what is seen on the film?

Edited by Bigfoothunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

IF WE FOUND OUT TOMORROW THAT P AND G WERE NEVER IN CALIFORNIA, EVER...IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY ZERO DIFF.

 

We know when the film was shot.  It was impossible to fake.  That is called "done here, except for those in extreme denial."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

For reference, here are some old Google Earth images I put together showing Louse Camp to the PGF site according to Ron Moorhead's geo-coordinates (which IMO were accurate). The distance was ~3 miles as the crow flies, much more by horseback.

Louse2PGF_zpsff1ciqrj.gif

Distances_zps9vo1prgq.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Here is the PGF site to the nearest logging road, 12N13(b )

PGF_Site2_zpsyvqrlygc.gif

Edited by Gigantofootecus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Giganto,

 

Thank you.  That is a very helpful perspective.

 

Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

 

 

In his Newsletter, Roger said it was "a little over a week"...

 

Roger-Newsletter1_zpsp7huq4gz.jpg

 

He also said they tracked Patty for about three miles. Impossible timeline again. Since this is a newsletter, let's take it over the interview the night night of the 20th in which Patterson says they came to the area just under a week earlier...

 

Last Saturday they arrived to look for the tracks themselves and to take some films of these, riding over the mountainous terrain on horseback by day and motoring over the roads and trails by night.

 

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/firstpgf.htm

 

Just over a week is nowhere near three. There is no other second location that Patterson and Gimlin were camping at for two weeks before Bluff Creek. Patterson and Gimlin did undeniably have Chico. Heironimus says it was 8 days, IOW, a little over a week.

 

Gimlin's account reflects both the actual filming and the staging of the hoax event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kitakaze

IF WE FOUND OUT TOMORROW THAT P AND G WERE NEVER IN CALIFORNIA, EVER...IT MAKES ABSOLUTELY ZERO DIFF.

 

We know when the film was shot.  It was impossible to fake.  That is called "done here, except for those in extreme denial."

 

 

I've always been fascinated by the correlation between fortean fundamentalism and giant technicolour all caps pounding. What exactly is it that makes you think this is effective communication? So if it is discovered P&G were never in Bluff Creek, it does not affect the film's veracity in any way. You could not make this stuff up if you tried.

 

DWA, for the record, if either or both Patterson and Gimlin had made a confession that the film was a hoax, would it in any way affect the veracity of the film?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...