Jump to content
kitakaze

Wally - Walas Bigfoot Suit And Patty.

Recommended Posts

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?

 

 

sigh....

 

 

Apparently you've not noticed that the skeleton doesn't even fit! These images were debunked years ago. 

 

 

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.

Actually excellent analysis already exists.

 

The argument "That you feel the limb proportions to be out of range for a costumed human is not exactly falsifiable." has a problem in that the only way the limbs could be out of proportion and still be human would require a seriously deformed human to do the job. Limb proportions for all the the earth's human population vary by about 2%. Patty is well outside of that. There is something called the Human Intermembral Index that sheds some light on this. Here's the basic Wiki page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermembral_index

more to the point:

http://efossils.org/book/limb-proportions

 

From it you can see that there is a problem. The human index is 68-70; Patty is something other.

 

The real problem that we are dealing with is not that Patty is or is not real. The real problem is no matter what evidence/proof is presented, due to human nature it will never be applied; no-one wants to suffer the possibility of embarrassment/loss of career...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

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

 

 

smileyvault-cute-big-smiley-animated-013    I see the cat peeking out from under the coffee table again. McSquatch says he just took the image off of Google, but why? Does he want us to believe that he is so inept that we are to believe that he couldn't see just how distorted that image was .... not buying that one.

I answered the question. 

 

Yes - very evasively!    :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

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

 

 

 

What website was it on? And, what did you type into the search box, on Google?

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?

 

 

sigh....

 

 

Apparently you've not noticed that the skeleton doesn't even fit! These images were debunked years ago. 

 

 

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.

Actually excellent analysis already exists.

 

The argument "That you feel the limb proportions to be out of range for a costumed human is not exactly falsifiable." has a problem in that the only way the limbs could be out of proportion and still be human would require a seriously deformed human to do the job. Limb proportions for all the the earth's human population vary by about 2%. Patty is well outside of that. There is something called the Human Intermembral Index that sheds some light on this. Here's the basic Wiki page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermembral_index

more to the point:

http://efossils.org/book/limb-proportions

 

From it you can see that there is a problem. The human index is 68-70; Patty is something other.

 

The real problem that we are dealing with is not that Patty is or is not real. The real problem is no matter what evidence/proof is presented, due to human nature it will never be applied; no-one wants to suffer the possibility of embarrassment/loss of career...

 

That Patty is well outside the index requires the assumption that Patty is a real creature. If Patty is not a real creature, then who cares about limb proportion of a costume? 

 

I say again, you feel the limb proportion is "proof". Then why are you not doing the work and getting this "proof" accepted? Are you worried about your career? I see no point whatsoever in anyone trying to recreate the PGF to the satisfaction of people here. The notion is ridiculous. The goal posts would constantly be moved. It is a fools errand to say the least. 

 

What is not, however, is proving to the world that Patty is real. Nevermind asking one skeptic to try to prove to a group of zealots on a message board. Take your "proof" to the world, man!  If you are not willing to do that, then don't expect me to jump through hoops to create some costume that relies on you or anyone else here to "authenticate". No, thank-you very much. 

Edited by dmaker
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter

dmaker

That Patty is well outside the index requires the assumption that Patty is a real creature. If Patty is not a real creature, then who cares about limb proportion of a costume? 

That is one of the silliest things you have said and there have been many!     crazy_zps3rhzptfm.jpg

 

Patty being outside the index rules out a man in a suit. The alternative is she is real.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
salubrious
Moderator

 

 

The argument "That you feel the limb proportions to be out of range for a costumed human is not exactly falsifiable." has a problem in that the only way the limbs could be out of proportion and still be human would require a seriously deformed human to do the job. Limb proportions for all the the earth's human population vary by about 2%. Patty is well outside of that. There is something called the Human Intermembral Index that sheds some light on this. Here's the basic Wiki page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermembral_index

more to the point:

http://efossils.org/book/limb-proportions

 

From it you can see that there is a problem. The human index is 68-70; Patty is something other.

 

The real problem that we are dealing with is not that Patty is or is not real. The real problem is no matter what evidence/proof is presented, due to human nature it will never be applied; no-one wants to suffer the possibility of embarrassment/loss of career...

 

That Patty is well outside the index requires the assumption that Patty is a real creature. If Patty is not a real creature, then who cares about limb proportion of a costume? 

 

I say again, you feel the limb proportion is "proof". Then why are you not doing the work and getting this "proof" accepted? Are you worried about your career? I see no point whatsoever in anyone trying to recreate the PGF to the satisfaction of people here. The notion is ridiculous. The goal posts would constantly be moved. It is a fools errand to say the least. 

 

What is not, however, is proving to the world that Patty is real. Nevermind asking one skeptic to try to prove to a group of zealots on a message board. Take your "proof" to the world, man!  If you are not willing to do that, then don't expect me to jump through hoops to create some costume that relies on you or anyone else here to "authenticate". No, thank-you very much. 

 

 

Its my opinion that you have not thought this through: First I am not expecting a costume and never said anything remotely like that. I've bolded the text in my prior post which stated very clearly why we would care 'about limb proportion of a costume".

 

To put it more clearly, in order for the costume to work, it has to be worn by someone. That person thus expresses the joints seen in the costume. That is why the subject of this thread (Wally - Walas) is so easily seen to be a human in a suit, and why Patty defies the abilities of the best costume makers to duplicate her appearance. The best of the attempts, while excellent costumes in their own right, fail miserably in looking anything like Patty, and joint location is why.

 

If you want to make a valid argument showing that Patty is not the real thing, you have only to overcome this simple fact. You can't use 'gut' feeling, that isn't remotely scientific; you can't use images where the bone structure clearly would be exposed to the environment (real people and animals don't work that way) as Squatchy McSquatch did a few posts earlier, you really do have to in fact demonstrate a means at the very least showing how a human can be in a flexible suit and still have the joints where Patty's are. If you can't do that (and spoiler alert, you won't be able to) then the conclusion is Patty is not someone in a suit. This does not mean you have to fabricate a suit, it merely means that a way has to occur such that a human's joints can be found to be identical to Patty's.

 

Bonus points if you can make Bob H's joints line up!

 

Now if we don't see any effort (which might simply be a link or an image of demonstration) to debunk this particular issue, then the line between skeptic and scoftic is clearly crossed; IOW we can assume that you are here for discussion but not rational explanations.

 

If I can overcome your arguments then I will be in a better position to bring this to the attention of others in the science community; I am sure they will expect rational arguments that hold water.

 

There is the simple human factor of making others wrong so one's self can be 'right'. That is actually the biggest problem in these ceaseless debates. If one can set aside that rather common human tendency then its likely we can make progress with this topic, if not the topic will still be around for our grandchildren to deal with. So are you interested in the truth?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crowlogic

Of course there are those (myself included ) who have always said Bobby H didn't wear the suit.  He's somewhat tall but his height is all in his legs and his arms are no match for his leg length.  But then there's Jerry Romey who was in the ANE loop who has been said to have worn the suit.  Well Old Jerry ain't a bad fit.  He's nearly 7 feet tall and look kids his arms are longer than Bob's and his torso is longer with waist lower giving him somewhat different proportuions to Bobby.  I've scaled Bobby to Jerry even though Bobby isn't as tall as Jerry.  A man in a suit walked in front of that K-100 and where is it written in stone that Bobby H is the only possible candidate for the suit?

 

Copy%20of%20Jerry_zpsqypkqpwb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

I heard Jerry Romey was a hoax an that it was actually Bob Heironimus wearin' a suit of him...an Bob would wear his pants lower down like the kids do today...making his waist look lower an thus makin' his torso look longer...cell phones in each hand often made it look like his arms were actually longer as well. Someone once said they found what looked like a cowboy boot heel print in one of Jerry's sneaker foot prints as well...so Jerry's trackway is a hoax as well. 

 

dancing+monkeys.gif

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crowlogic

I heard Jerry Romey was a hoax an that it was actually Bob Heironimus wearin' a suit of him...an Bob would wear his pants lower down like the kids do today...making his waist look lower an thus makin' his torso look longer...cell phones in each hand often made it look like his arms were actually longer as well. Someone once said they found what looked like a cowboy boot heel print in one of Jerry's sneaker foot prints as well...so Jerry's trackway is a hoax as well. 

 

dancing+monkeys.gif

Oh for a moment I thought something of substance was going to be on this post of yours.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

"If I can overcome your arguments then I will be in a better position to bring this to the attention of others in the science community" 

 

 

But you have "proof". You have said so. My arguments (I have none other than my remarks based on my observation, i.e. it looks fake) are hardly any sort of barrier to bringing this to the attention of the science community. You must not be very confident in your proof. 

 

I guess bigfoot will have to await a more confident champion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

For the record, I don't believe anything can be proven, one way or the other, using the PGF footage.  If someone like Sal believes otherwise, then knock yourself out, go and prove it to the world.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Of course there are those (myself included ) who have always said Bobby H didn't wear the suit.  He's somewhat tall but his height is all in his legs and his arms are no match for his leg length.  But then there's Jerry Romey who was in the ANE loop who has been said to have worn the suit.  Well Old Jerry ain't a bad fit.  He's nearly 7 feet tall and look kids his arms are longer than Bob's and his torso is longer with waist lower giving him somewhat different proportuions to Bobby.  I've scaled Bobby to Jerry even though Bobby isn't as tall as Jerry.  A man in a suit walked in front of that K-100 and where is it written in stone that Bobby H is the only possible candidate for the suit?

 

Copy%20of%20Jerry_zpsqypkqpwb.jpg

 

The only thing that annoys me is tripe like this because I have to waste my time refuting it. You don't really want me to destroy all your straw men, do you?

For the record, I don't believe anything can be proven, one way or the other, using the PGF footage.  If someone like Sal believes otherwise, then knock yourself out, go and prove it to the world.  

 

I knew you would eventually show your true colours. And excuse me for not giving a rat's behind what you think can be proven. No one is interested in the opinions of special pleaders (scoftics), but fill your boots. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

Excuse me, but what colours are those exactly?  And that works both ways, bud. I don't give a rat's behind what you think the footage proves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

:D Obviously you don't care what ANYONE here thinks. You're a JREFer and you come here to vomit on the footers. But you used to be a bit more polite about it. Otherwise, your  "where's the monkey" posts are way past tired. ZZZzzz...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dmaker

I certainly don't care what YOU think. I had the same opinions of this topic before I had ever even heard of JREF.  In fact, I was a member here long before I ever joined JREF/ISF. Would you be so kind as to point out where I "vomited" on footers and where I was impolite? If anything, the derision and mocking has been mostly done by you and BH. 

Edited by dmaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...