Jump to content
kitakaze

Wally - Walas Bigfoot Suit And Patty.

Recommended Posts

dmaker

"Until one reads the backstory that makes a human about as unlikely as Patty being one, that sounds like a cool story, bro." DWA

 

 

 

 

There was an outdoor tribal function in Oklahoma. They stopped to take some pictures while cleaning up after the event and claim the figure was seen in the background while taking a pic.

 

What, exactly, makes it so impossible for it to be a human or a hoax, for that matter, given this staggeringly fantastical backstory? There was no pursuit and no investigation done at the site at that time. 

 

 

I see nothing in the backstory to rule out human or hoax. The picture was taken at a gathering of humans, for pity sake. And no effort was done at the time to determine what the figure, obscured by leaves, actually was.  They were cleaning up after a tribal event. This is probably just one of the participants who slipped off into the leaf cover to have a leak.  He even appears to be in that staring downward, classic outdoors taking a leak pose. 

 

Your claim that the backstory adds legitimacy makes no sense at all and exposes your bias. 

 

To most people, the reasonable explanation is a guy taking a leak after a couple of beverages at an outdoor event.  To DWA and NAWAC: A really, real (fat) bigfoot.

 

 

baggywoodape_zpskoy2f0wd.png

Edited by dmaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

I wasn't poking anything. I was merely stating that I do not believe that BFH has ever seen a bigfoot.   For no reason that means squat.

 

 

And BD, you should realize that the higher the number of bigfoot reports vs the amount of time there remains zero proof, just makes bigfoot as a real animal less believable.  Logic fail on epic scale.  But hasn't this been done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

dmaker,

 

I'm not sold on it bein' the left hand. If a still from video of it walkin', if he's walkin' relatively normal, with the right hand extended forward, what appears to be the left leg forward, that should position the left hand down or back.

 

The red line is angle bein suggested, yellow line is more likely, blue is just to highlight what may be in between camera an guy, perhaps a branch ?  (just rough lines, not tryin to suggest actual joints or anything)

 

These images really are quite poor, so hopefully what we might see later will be more useful.  

 

Pat...

click to enlarge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crowlogic

This just in Patricia bigfoot is not without a buldge.  Soooo which do you go with?  Either both are real or both are fake or maybe it's a silly argument in the first place.  I'll go with suits have buldges like the one's being discussed

 

img064b_zpsgbpquovy.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

SweatyYeti: "Fortunately, though....kit says there is a "reasonable chance" that they exist in the PNW....so I have plenty of hope, that we will eventually get a clearer video/picture of one. "

 

I thought you don't normally trust things that Kit says? Suddenly, he is filling you with hope?

  

 

 

 

For the most part, I don't agree with what kitakaze says.....but, on occasion.....when he contradicts himself....I will agree with what he says....(which may or may not reflect what he actually thinks). :)

 

 

Besides, I just get a kick out of posting kit's statement about Bigfoot's existence being a "reasonable probability".  That statement of his contradicts/negates all of his insulting/condescending rants against Bigfoot, over the last 10 years or so... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

If Kit considers the existence of sasquatch a reasonable probability...that undercuts practically everything else he has said here, because discounting all that evidence (which of course one cannot reasonably do) makes the probability of existence unreasonable to assert.

 

I love bigfoot skepticism.  Fun to watch!

Edited by DWA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
salubrious
Moderator

No, I was just being polite and trying to avoid saying things like ridiculous, etc.  But if bigfoot could hardly get any less believable for me, I am sure there are others who have yet to reach their tipping point.  Keep increasing the number of reports as high as you can, and maybe you'll push a few of them off the edge. Can you imagine? 1,000,000 bigfoot reports and not a single shred of proof? That is where this is headed. 

 

I've noticed that so far, no skeptic I've challenged has come back with anything. I've challenged Crowlogic and Kit on this a number of times but I don't recall doing it with you.

 

Patty has distinctive proportions that are non-human. Try as one might, no-one has been able to show how a human form could fit in her dimensions and retain her joint locations. This is assuming of course that a suit would have been a flexible thing worn by a human of normal proportions (and not a mal-formed freak of some kind).

 

This is why I've said in the past that the PGF is better proof than even a body (as its a pretty sure thing that if a body were ever to be obtained, no-one would ever see it; we get to analyze the PGF all we want.).

 

IOW, there is a 'shred of evidence' and its so good it constitutes proof. However if you don't cause your hand to move and do the homework of actually either proving it or disproving it (either approach works for science), then you can't really make an honest claim that there is no evidence. 'Gut' feeling isn't science.

 

So- you up to it? Can you go where Crowlogic, Kitakaze and Squatchy McSquatch refused to go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DWA

No, he can't, and we have seen enough - by the end of last year if not months before - to know it.

 

For the last time, guys.  You're the ones who do not know what is up here.  Proponents have to show nothing to you.  You need to show you are paying attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

 

No, I was just being polite and trying to avoid saying things like ridiculous, etc.  But if bigfoot could hardly get any less believable for me, I am sure there are others who have yet to reach their tipping point.  Keep increasing the number of reports as high as you can, and maybe you'll push a few of them off the edge. Can you imagine? 1,000,000 bigfoot reports and not a single shred of proof? That is where this is headed. 

 

I've noticed that so far, no skeptic I've challenged has come back with anything. I've challenged Crowlogic and Kit on this a number of times but I don't recall doing it with you.

 

Patty has distinctive proportions that are non-human. Try as one might, no-one has been able to show how a human form could fit in her dimensions and retain her joint locations. This is assuming of course that a suit would have been a flexible thing worn by a human of normal proportions (and not a mal-formed freak of some kind).

 

This is why I've said in the past that the PGF is better proof than even a body (as its a pretty sure thing that if a body were ever to be obtained, no-one would ever see it; we get to analyze the PGF all we want.).

 

IOW, there is a 'shred of evidence' and its so good it constitutes proof. However if you don't cause your hand to move and do the homework of actually either proving it or disproving it (either approach works for science), then you can't really make an honest claim that there is no evidence. 'Gut' feeling isn't science.

 

So- you up to it? Can you go where Crowlogic, Kitakaze and Squatchy McSquatch refused to go?

 

What you consider proof, and what actually is proof, are two different things. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch

 

No, I was just being polite and trying to avoid saying things like ridiculous, etc.  But if bigfoot could hardly get any less believable for me, I am sure there are others who have yet to reach their tipping point.  Keep increasing the number of reports as high as you can, and maybe you'll push a few of them off the edge. Can you imagine? 1,000,000 bigfoot reports and not a single shred of proof? That is where this is headed. 

 

I've noticed that so far, no skeptic I've challenged has come back with anything. I've challenged Crowlogic and Kit on this a number of times but I don't recall doing it with you.

 

Patty has distinctive proportions that are non-human. Try as one might, no-one has been able to show how a human form could fit in her dimensions and retain her joint locations. This is assuming of course that a suit would have been a flexible thing worn by a human of normal proportions (and not a mal-formed freak of some kind).

 

This is why I've said in the past that the PGF is better proof than even a body (as its a pretty sure thing that if a body were ever to be obtained, no-one would ever see it; we get to analyze the PGF all we want.).

 

IOW, there is a 'shred of evidence' and its so good it constitutes proof. However if you don't cause your hand to move and do the homework of actually either proving it or disproving it (either approach works for science), then you can't really make an honest claim that there is no evidence. 'Gut' feeling isn't science.

 

So- you up to it? Can you go where Crowlogic, Kitakaze and Squatchy McSquatch refused to go?

 

 

sigh....

post-18602-0-74495000-1446057606.jpg

post-18602-0-54400500-1446057633_thumb.j

post-18602-0-29810400-1446057665.jpg

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

Sal, your proposal is not very scientific. That you feel the limb proportions to be out of range for a costumed human is not exactly falsifiable. Also, I do not know how PnG executed their hoax, so there is a potential disadvantage there for me. As a scientific experiment, it is a subjective mess and not worthy of anyones time in my opinion.

How about this instead? Why don't you go to ICZN with some red circled PGF stills or footage, along with your claim about limb proportions as proof,  and see if you can get a new species declared? No conflicting, subjective ideas of proof would be involved. You would be dealing with the same standards as anyone else trying to prove a species. I see no point in anyone attempting to recreate something to meet the subjective satisfaction of a group who demonstrate strong resistance to any challenge. Why not deal with absolute standards? If you feel you have "proof" in hand, then why are you not pursuing this further? Talking about your "proof" in a PGF thread on a bigfoot forum, is not going to get your "proof" to the world at large. 

That sounds more helpful and productive. Why don't you do that? It seems to me that if anyone needs to rise to the challenge and do the work, it is you, not I.

Edited by dmaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Hey Squatchy....what the hell happened to Bob, in your image???...(on the right).... :wacko: ...

 

 

RegularBob%20FunkyBob2_zpsrxzl8weu.jpg

 

 

 

Somebody's been manipulating images. :popcorn:

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch

pulled it off google as is. if it was manipulated it was that way when I found it.

 

Sweaty I'm tired of comparing BobH and other costumes with the PGF.

 

Do you have a picture of a Bigfoot other than Patty that I may draw my comparisons from?

 

Getting back to the topic of this thread:

 

Do you think the Walas bigfoot is a real bigfoot, or a guy in a suit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

 

 

No, I was just being polite and trying to avoid saying things like ridiculous, etc.  But if bigfoot could hardly get any less believable for me, I am sure there are others who have yet to reach their tipping point.  Keep increasing the number of reports as high as you can, and maybe you'll push a few of them off the edge. Can you imagine? 1,000,000 bigfoot reports and not a single shred of proof? That is where this is headed. 

 

I've noticed that so far, no skeptic I've challenged has come back with anything. I've challenged Crowlogic and Kit on this a number of times but I don't recall doing it with you.

 

Patty has distinctive proportions that are non-human. Try as one might, no-one has been able to show how a human form could fit in her dimensions and retain her joint locations. This is assuming of course that a suit would have been a flexible thing worn by a human of normal proportions (and not a mal-formed freak of some kind).

 

This is why I've said in the past that the PGF is better proof than even a body (as its a pretty sure thing that if a body were ever to be obtained, no-one would ever see it; we get to analyze the PGF all we want.).

 

IOW, there is a 'shred of evidence' and its so good it constitutes proof. However if you don't cause your hand to move and do the homework of actually either proving it or disproving it (either approach works for science), then you can't really make an honest claim that there is no evidence. 'Gut' feeling isn't science.

 

So- you up to it? Can you go where Crowlogic, Kitakaze and Squatchy McSquatch refused to go?

 

What you consider proof, and what actually is proof, are two different things. 

 

 

Well you are being challenged by more than a gut feeling, so why not just answer the question instead of making it obvious that you can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

I answered the question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...