Jump to content
kitakaze

Wally - Walas Bigfoot Suit And Patty.

Recommended Posts

Backdoc

I do believe in being fair so I don’t want to mislead anyone.  Kit Did Not say he was going to alter an image using that exact term or word.  Even though my use of the term as a general term would mean to by me to generically effect the image it might give the impression he would be doing something to the image which might be something fraudulent.  That is not the case.   Look, I don’t agree with the guy on many things but since he is not here to defend himself I want to make clear from Old Morts Q makes me feel I need to further clarify.  I think of myself as a very fair minded person so I just feel it is only fair to further clarify that.  I can see this might be read by some the wrong way so I am making it very clear here.  I think we can get carried away with terms.  Thanks for allowing me to make all that clear.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

almost any alteration of an image can potentially effect the reliability of the data, so a responsible method meticulously documents the alterations and provides the source so others can examine the process of alteration to see if it does alter the data and conclusions.

 

But to alter an image in any way, and fail to disclose what was done, destroys the potential integrity of the image for any meaningful analysis.

 

However if one wants to indulge in meaningless analysis, one can play with the image all they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OldMort
38 minutes ago, Backdoc said:

Thanks for allowing me to make all that clear.  

 

Good enough :) !

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman

The only reason you would dumb down an image is to hide the zipper....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

Anything he said should be dismissed. 

He could not produce one shred of evidence to back his outrageous claims. 

 

He is an embarrassment to non believers  .I am so glad he was banned. 

That other outrageous character who proclaimed it was a bloke in a suit was just as stupid without explaining why. 

 

I agree with both of them in principle, but none of us can explain why. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc
Posted (edited)

Walas commented on this incident with Moneymaker.  Sounds like that needed to be cleared up and it seems Walas was the man to do it.  Good enough.   He refers to a Mockumentary in his commentary.

 

Is this a term Walas was using in general or was there some sort of actual documentary Walas was putting together exploring the Bigfoot subject? I would love to see some Munns Report effort by other make-up and creature effects people regardless if they support the PGF or claiming it was a hoax.

 

Does anyone know if such an effort was made?  How do we see it?

 

I am guessing it is just a term he was using vs some presentation.

Edited by Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

A little off-topic, but...here is an interesting video, for fans of NHL hockey.....(like Pat ;) )...

 

 

 

Besides the great video quality....it's interesting to see the differences in the game, from then to now.  The pace wasn't quite as hyper, as it is today.

 

To help this post be a little more on-topic....I think the Wally video subject looks ridiculous. :) 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

On Wally we seem to have just two sources for his origin 1) whatever kit said/claimed and 2) Walas response posted recently in response to a Moneymaker claim.

 

As I read it, does Walas even say this is a suit?  Could it be a computer animation pic?  If it is a suit, why did Walas even make the suit?  What is his Mockumentary about Bigfoot.

 

 

we know Walas made a giant “Cousin It”- looking suit for his Forbidden Valley show.  Obviously he took time to make it because he needed a suit for his film.  ( I never saw the movie and would assume few have).

 

So why make the CGI (?) or actual suit (?) of Wally?

 

 Where does Walas further comment on it since the only other source as I understand it is just what Kit claims?

 

if Walas really made some suit, why?   A suit takes maybe little money but it does take time and effort. 

 

Why the effort here?  That answer can tell us a lot about Wally and it needs to come from the maker himself not some other attributed interpretation.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...