Jump to content
xspider1

The realism of the Patterson-Gimlin Film subject cannot be replicated with a costume so; what are the possibilities?

Recommended Posts

SweatyYeti

Gee....what would I say, if Bob Gimlin said the film is a hoax???  That's a great question. But I have a better one... :) ...

 

What would a skeptic say, if this was a real calf muscle???... 

 

CalfContractionBobboAG1_zps00s01ugm.gif

 

 

I prefer to deal first with reality.....before playing 'make believe', with hypotheticals.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Twist,

 

Havin' chit chatted with Bob, I know it ain't happenin' ! haha ! Just the same, folks have already pretty much addressed it, he would have to account for the how. 

 

Pat...

Edited by PBeaton
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1
BFF Donor

I guess we'll just have to wait until McSquatch decides that the time is right for an earth-shattering, face-melting confession. :D just joking!  I'm still trying to wrap my mind around how anyone just suddenly saying that it was a hoax after over 50 years would change anything about it.  I'm not much of a "credule" when it comes to that.

Edited by xspider1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

For the record, I personally believe the chances of Gimlin ever admitting to, or even eluding to the PGF being a hoax at less than 5%. 

 

Im just curious in a “what if?” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
13 minutes ago, xspider1 said:

I guess we'll just have to wait until McSquatch decides that the time is right for an earth-shattering, face-melting confession. :D just joking! at.

 

 

No need to wait for anything, or anyone, xspider.....when it comes to the PGF.......we are there.  :bbq:   

 

The physical analysis is 100% on our side, as you well know.....and the 100% LACK of evidence is on the skeptic's' side. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc
BFF Donor

There is one person on the entire planet that knows conclusively and for certain if the PGF is real or not. That person is Bob Gimlin. he's either lying or telling the truth and he knows if he's lying or telling the truth.  If he's lying he knows.  Other eyewitnesses might feel like they saw what they saw and confidently feel the same way but they do not have the video evidence that Bob has.  They have a story.  Bob has the film.   

 

Think what it would be like to be Bob and to know for sure. He can even play it back 100s of times.   We might hope it.   Bob KNOWS if it is a real creature .

Edited by Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

Depends who you ask Backdoc.  I agree there is most likely at least 1 that knows 100%.  Could be a few more if it were a hoax and they aided in some way.  The more involved the less likely it’s a hoax and still this well kept as a secret.  Ppl tend to talk....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Twist,

 

I'm kinda busy at the moment, so don't have time ta look for the quote, but do you remember DeAtley once told Byrne he new it was a hoax, that there's no way Roger could be so lucky, say he's goin' ta film one, an then go film one. If DeAtley was involved in a hoax, or if he new it was a hoax...as he claimed...why guess/say there's no way Roger could be that lucky ? 

 

Pat...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1
BFF Donor

^ That is an excellent point!  It's almost like saying "The PGf isn't real because I don't believe in Bigfoot."  "Knowing it was a hoax" would need to entail knowing at least one detail of said hoax and that would almost certainly involve multiple people.  Yet no one has ever indicated any such thing that makes any sense and there is no "hoax evidence" that passes the laugh test.  The hyper-critical opinions of this film baffle me sometimes in light of the lop-sided arguments indicating that, at the very least, it is an Enigma which defies explanation as a costume.        

Edited by xspider1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Starling
7 hours ago, PBeaton said:

xspider1,

 

Agreed, the movie angle is interestin'. How did he create a suit that Hollywood couldn't ?

 

Twist,

 

"..a good suit and poor camera quality.." We have to remember, the folks in the business at the time viewed the film, an I'm sure we all know what they said regardin' recreatin' it. 

 

Pat...

 

This 'what they said ' statement is apocryphal. Some of them perhaps and under dubious circumstances I reckon. Not one of them even saw the suit up close. If the Andre the Giant Bigfoot had been filmed by Roger some folk would be claiming details in his get up would be impossible to fake. 

7 hours ago, SweatyYeti said:

Gee....what would I say, if Bob Gimlin said the film is a hoax???  That's a great question. But I have a better one... :) ...

 

What would a skeptic say, if this was a real calf muscle???... 

 

CalfContractionBobboAG1_zps00s01ugm.gif

 

 

I prefer to deal first with reality.....before playing 'make believe', with hypotheticals.  

 

Unfortunately the apparent definition you claim is there could easily be accounted for by movement causing a change in the lighting. There's just no way you can be so certain with such terrible quality imagery.

 

7 hours ago, SweatyYeti said:

Gee....what would I say, if Bob Gimlin said the film is a hoax???  That's a great question. But I have a better one... :) ...

 

What would a skeptic say, if this was a real calf muscle???... 

 

CalfContractionBobboAG1_zps00s01ugm.gif

 

 

I prefer to deal first with reality.....before playing 'make believe', with hypotheticals.  

 

:lol:

4 hours ago, Backdoc said:

There is one person on the entire planet that knows conclusively and for certain if the PGF is real or not. That person is Bob Gimlin. he's either lying or telling the truth and he knows if he's lying or telling the truth.  If he's lying he knows.  Other eyewitnesses might feel like they saw what they saw and confidently feel the same way but they do not have the video evidence that Bob has.  They have a story.  Bob has the film.   

 

Think what it would be like to be Bob and to know for sure. He can even play it back 100s of times.   We might hope it.   Bob KNOWS if it is a real creature .

 

Except of course that he's lying about that.

 

I really don't understand where the mystery is. I don't care if you've met the guy...the world is FULL of grade A liers who tell untruths through their front teeth for their whole lives and for a staggeringly vast spectrum of reasons, both simple and complex. 

 

Sincerity does NOT always equal veracity.

 

What's hilarious is I'm smart enough to give Bigfoot the benefit of the doubt, even if it is less than half of one per cent. Those who claim there's zero chance the film is a hoax? Now that's just hilarious.

1 hour ago, xspider1 said:

^ That is an excellent point!  It's almost like saying "The PGf isn't real because I don't believe in Bigfoot."  "Knowing it was a hoax" would need to entail knowing at least one detail of said hoax and that would almost certainly involve multiple people.  Yet no one has ever indicated any such thing that makes any sense and there is no "hoax evidence" that passes the laugh test.  The hyper-critical opinions of this film baffle me sometimes in light of the lop-sided arguments indicating that, at the very least, it is an Enigma which defies explanation as a costume.        

 

It only defies explanation if you don't acknowledge that none of us have seen this hyper grainy thing properly! And even then many of us can see when a fold is a fold and not some lame excuse (think hernia)' 

2 hours ago, PBeaton said:

Twist,

 

I'm kinda busy at the moment, so don't have time ta look for the quote, but do you remember DeAtley once told Byrne he new it was a hoax, that there's no way Roger could be so lucky, say he's goin' ta film one, an then go film one. If DeAtley was involved in a hoax, or if he new it was a hoax...as he claimed...why guess/say there's no way Roger could be that lucky ? 

 

Pat...

 

Roger wasn't that lucky. He wasn't able to fool all the people all of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Starling
10 hours ago, Squatchy McSquatch said:

 

The clearest image we have from the pgf is an estimated hundred or so feet away. Of course the suit would look quite different up close.

 

Anyone who's ever ridden a tram through Universal Studios can confirm that Jaws looks much less realistic and menacing up close than it does on the big screen.

 

Yup...I imagine even those crummy Outer Limits era aliens would look convincing to the credulous if viewed under such circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

"What's hilarious is I'm smart enough to give Bigfoot the benefit of the doubt.."

Image result for spitting out coffee gif

 

starling's cockamamie theory.JPG

 

From the guy who claimed Roger filmed his own footprints for reel two, when reel two shows them walkin' along side those very footprints etc ! An the kiddy boot...haha !  ;);) 

 

Edited by PBeaton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS
14 hours ago, Backdoc said:

There is one person on the entire planet that knows conclusively and for certain if the PGF is real or not. That person is Bob Gimlin. he's either lying or telling the truth and he knows if he's lying or telling the truth.  If he's lying he knows.  Other eyewitnesses might feel like they saw what they saw and confidently feel the same way but they do not have the video evidence that Bob has.  They have a story.  Bob has the film.   

 

Think what it would be like to be Bob and to know for sure. He can even play it back 100s of times.   We might hope it.   Bob KNOWS if it is a real creature .

Bob and every other BF witness, many of whom are forum members, do know.      What is frustrating for witnesses, is not skepticism, it is the people who cannot know, who demean them and call them all the names.     Along with that is the assumption by many who want to be witnesses,  that it will be a wondrous and glorious event.     It is certainly life changing,  many never get over it,   and could very well  be the most frightening thing you have ever experienced.      Post BF witness experience is for the most part PTSD management.  Bob and other witnesses have had to work through all of that.    Bob has been able to share his experience speaking at conferences.      Many never step into the woods again.    Some may spend the rest of their life trying to repeat the experience.       I am not sure which is the healthier option.    

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot
BFF Donor

Maybe reminder is needed. When talking about graininess and blurriness in the PGF and does it hide some features, let's remember there are several aspects of the film that graininess and blurriness have no effect on and does not change.

Among them are:

The depth of Patty's tracks and how they compare to the human tracks left behind.

The length of Patty's stride/step.

The amount of time it took Patty to cross the sandbar. As I understand people that have tried to duplicate Patt'sy crossing of the sandbar failed to do it in the same amount of time as Patty. And they weren't even wearing a fur suit.

The nonhuman length of Patty's arms, with no extensions.

The curling and uncurling of the fingers.

The nonhuman body proportions.

The bent knee gait and the lateral rotation of the knees as Patty walked. My impression is this type of gait for a Bigfoot wasn't known until the PGF was studied.

I'm sure there's more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

The vertical elevation of the heel which suggests midfoot flexibility which correlates to the midfoot flexibility evident in the tracks.  

bob an patty.jpg

4frames.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×