Jump to content
masterbarber

The Actual Developing Of The Pgf (2)

Recommended Posts

hiflier
BFF Donor

Dropping one though may only be the beginning? If they are out still there then no one can be totally sure they are dealing with only one. And I say IF they are still out there because even though I'm 100% convinced that Patty was real, short of a body, I sure would like to see at least another video equally as good a quality as the PGF. But until then I will do all I can do to narrow down the odds of getting that video. It is what prompted the idea for the SRN because I am convinced that there are those out there that think as I do: GET THAT VIDEO!!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot
BFF Donor

Regarding the idea that the film was a hoax but Bob Gimlin was not in on it. I think a TV show years ago did a segment with Bob and posed a question to him if he thought it was possible he himself was hoaxed. When you think this scenario through, it's Occams Razor once again; there are too many far fetched ideas that would have to be true if Bob was not part of the hoax, and too many unanswered questions.

 

In a scenario of a hoax not involving Bob, it means:

1. The three men could not travel down to Bluff Creek together. One of the items they would have to pack and take with them would be the fur suit and you don't want Bob to see it. So the actor would have to get to Bluff Creek by himself, bringing the suit with him, and once he gets there he has to avoid being seen by Roger and Bob. 

2. Roger had to have picked out the exact film site weeks ahead of time since the actor had to know beforehand just where to be and at the right time. Since Roger lived in Washington, did he study maps and found what looked like a good open spot to make his film? He didn't have Google earth to look at.

I'm hoping someone else will know know this; Would maps have shown just how to get to the film site, so Roger could show the actor how to get the spot? I had thought the only roads near the film site were logging roads and not anything shown on a map. 

3. What if the actor would have had vehicle trouble on the way and either couldn't get there at all or couldn't get to the film site on time? Car trouble isn't unheard of. How would he tell Roger he couldn't get there? Would Roger just purposely lead Bob to the film site at the right time but find no one there?

 

4. How did the actor get himself to the film site? By horseback or did he drive there? (driving there

gets back to #2) If he went by horseback, he would need to make sure he tied the horse up some distance away because horses have good sense of smell, good hearing and can detect danger. I've read horses will whinny when they smell or detect another horse nearby to tell the other horse his location. Bob might have wondered why he was hearing a fourth horse when there should only be three and they were with him and Roger. If it was close by, would the actor's horse have smelled Patty and acted up?

If he drove there, where would he park his vehicle so it was out of sight? Just by the side of the road isn't really out of sight. Regardless how the actor got to the site, he would have to either put on the suit and walk some distance through the woods or carry it with him, then put it on and be in place to stand up when RP and BG came around the bend.

5. After the film was done, the actor had to continue walking up the draw and through the woods since Roger and Bob tried to track it for a little while. How would the actor know when Roger and Bob stopped following so he would know when he could stop? Did he peek around a tree and see them turn around?

6. To get back to his horse or vehicle afterwards, the actor couldn't go back through the film site because Roger and Bob were at the film site making casts of the tracks, so he would have to go back a different route. What are the odds the actor would know the area well enough to know where he was going? 

 

Does all this make logical sense? This is what happens when you come up with an idea or theory and then start to think through the details. 

 

(What would the actor have told his wife why he had to be gone a couple of days? ;))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

Skeptics will not ask those kinds of questions though will they? I guess they just ASSUME everything was so perfectly planned, which matches well with the construction of the perfect bloke in a suit?  And all of it was perfectly planned and perfectly executed by a perfectly ingenious cowboy on a perfect day in a perfect place with perfect weather and ALL without letting Gimlin knowing anything the entire three weeks? Out of contact with anyone anywhere, and yet that bloke in a suit and Roger pulled off a one minute meeting on the sandbar out in the middle of nowhere? Not knowing if Gimlin would panic and actually shoot that bloke in a suit? That Roger and the bloke in the suit would be stupid enough to think Gimlin wouldn't shoot?

 

Can anyone see any skeptic asking themselves these kinds of questions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

Hoaxes have been pulled off in regards to BF and other subjects MANY times.  

 

A clear(ish) video of BF has supposedly only been shown to happen once.

 

Based in those two statements which is more likely?    

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

The track depth negates a hoax...that excludes Gimlin. The tracks also negate a hoax...in my opinion.

 

Twist,

Based on witness reports, the footage itself an its tracks, etc., I'm goin' with the latter. 

 

Pat...

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS
1 hour ago, hiflier said:

Skeptics will not ask those kinds of questions though will they? I guess they just ASSUME everything was so perfectly planned, which matches well with the construction of the perfect bloke in a suit?  And all of it was perfectly planned and perfectly executed by a perfectly ingenious cowboy on a perfect day in a perfect place with perfect weather and ALL without letting Gimlin knowing anything the entire three weeks? Out of contact with anyone anywhere, and yet that bloke in a suit and Roger pulled off a one minute meeting on the sandbar out in the middle of nowhere? Not knowing if Gimlin would panic and actually shoot that bloke in a suit? That Roger and the bloke in the suit would be stupid enough to think Gimlin wouldn't shoot?

 

Can anyone see any skeptic asking themselves these kinds of questions?

 I suspect that many skeptics who have lived their entire lives with cell phones, have no idea how difficult it would be for Roger to pull of a hoax on Bob in 1967 without the ability to communicate.    How would they even time Patty walking by when Roger and Bob were moving faster than someone wearing a suit could walk.  The suit wearer could not simply follow them.      Even with cell phones, that would be difficult to pull off.   The timing and location of the encounter would have to be perfectly timed so that Patty intercepted the path of Roger and Bob on horses through the woods.    Without communication, that would be very difficult.     Bob had to be in on it for the reasons mentioned  or Patty had to be real. I have not been there but I would be very surprised if even today there is cell phone coverage in the area.   It is way too far off the I-5 corridor.    

Edited by SWWASAS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist
2 minutes ago, PBeaton said:

The track depth negates a hoax...that excludes Gimlin. The tracks also negate a hoax...in my opinion.

 

Twist,

Based on witness reports, the footage itself an its tracks, etc., I'm goin' with the latter. 

 

Pat...

 

 

 

Fair enough,  we are all entitled to our opinions.   I choose to sit on the fence and lean towards hoax.   As I’ve said multiple times, I’m perfectly ok with being wrong and would pleased to be wrong.  Can’t get over my gut feeling though that something is fishy about the PGF.   

4 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

 I suspect that many skeptics who have lived their entire lives with cell phones, have no idea how difficult it would be for Roger to pull of a hoax on Bob in 1967 without the ability to communicate.    How would they even time Patty walking by when Roger and Bob were moving faster than someone wearing a suit could walk.  The suit wearer could not simply follow them.      Even with cell phones, that would be difficult to pull off.   The timing and location of the encounter would have to be perfectly timed so that Patty intercepted the path of Roger and Bob on horses through the woods.    Without communication, that would be very difficult.     Bob had to be in on it for the reasons mentioned  or Patty had to be real.   

 

On the flip side, I find the very tight timeline for developing is hard to pull off without cell phones.   Especially if we are talking after hours processing at a a Kodak facility plus lining up a pilot on the fly...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

If the processing was planned out ahead of time and the pilot arranged and alerted they were in California, then it would have just take one or two phone calls to set things in action.     I would expect that weekend processing would have to have been prearranged before hand anyway.   How would you even know who to call unless you have planned out the transportation and the processing?   You sure did not have internet to find anyone and phone booths were notorious for missing books or whole sections of yellow pages missing because they were torn out.    I can still remember how phone booths always smelled like urine.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
BFF Donor

 

3 hours ago, hiflier said:

Can anyone see any skeptic asking themselves these kinds of questions?

 

3 hours ago, Twist said:

Based in those two statements which is more likely?

 

Answering a question with a question is really not an answer? But hey, that is OK, I have gotten used to many skeptics dodging direct questions :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot
BFF Donor
3 hours ago, hiflier said:

Skeptics will not ask those kinds of questions though will they? I guess they just ASSUME everything was so perfectly planned, which matches well with the construction of the perfect bloke in a suit?  And all of it was perfectly planned and perfectly executed by a perfectly ingenious cowboy on a perfect day in a perfect place with perfect weather and ALL without letting Gimlin knowing anything the entire three weeks? Out of contact with anyone anywhere, and yet that bloke in a suit and Roger pulled off a one minute meeting on the sandbar out in the middle of nowhere? Not knowing if Gimlin would panic and actually shoot that bloke in a suit? That Roger and the bloke in the suit would be stupid enough to think Gimlin wouldn't shoot?

 

Can anyone see any skeptic asking themselves these kinds of questions?

 

This, in addition to SWW's comments, shows just how perfect the timing would have to be to pull off the hoax with Bob G. totally unaware. Bob G. told John Green the (film site) area was "a desolate type area down a couple of canyons". I don't know how big these canyons were or the distance to the film site so I don't know how easy or difficult it would have been for Roger to time his arrival at the film site.

 

As for the actor: he couldn't park or tie up right by the film site so he had to walk a little ways to get there. Once he left his truck or horse and headed to the film site, he couldn't look at his watch ;) while on his way so he wouldn't know if he was running behind time or not.

What if Roger and Bob actually came around the bend too early, while the actor was still on his way? There was no way to tell the actor "Let's try again tomorrow." 

 

Since it wasn't a remote location, the actor really couldn't plan to get there way head of time and just bide his time by the creek until Roger and Bob got there; what if someone else such as any timber cruisers happened to go by and see a "Bigfoot" by the creek?

Or what if some bear hunters came by and saw him? :blink: "Honest Ranger, we all heard it; the Bigfoot actually yelled "Don't shoot!". 

 

Imagine if Bob would have suggested to Roger that right after lunch they go search in a different area than where the pre-selected film site was. Roger would be in a bit of a pickle. Since Bob G. had to be kept in the dark, would Roger insist they could not go into that area and that they really should go into the area where the pre-chosen film site was? 

 

Just one pitfall could mess things up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist
2 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

If the processing was planned out ahead of time and the pilot arranged and alerted they were in California, then it would have just take one or two phone calls to set things in action.     I would expect that weekend processing would have to have been prearranged before hand anyway.   How would you even know who to call unless you have planned out the transportation and the processing?   You sure did not have internet to find anyone and phone booths were notorious for missing books or whole sections of yellow pages missing because they were torn out.    I can still remember how phone booths always smelled like urine.  

 

 

Were P&G not down in CA. For a couple weeks?  So was the weekend processing and weekend flight people both just sitting by the phone, after hours mind you, just waiting for a call from two guys going to film a trackway? That’s what they went down there for originally,  correct, follow up on a trackway?   That’s big money to keep on retainer for trackway film.   Why would you set this all up in advance for tracks?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SWWASAS

You obviously do not know how aircraft charter works.   Pilots are payed to fly not sit around.   No fly, no pay.   That is even true for airline pilots.   The pilot would be notified they might need him but he would be free to do other flying.   Charters are pretty rare anyway.  If the flying was part of bank check processing,   he would simply divert from a normal route to pick up the film and go on his way.    It may not have been much of a diversion if his territory involved flying to the Check distribution centers in San Francisco.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Pat wrote:

Quote

The track depth negates a hoax...that excludes Gimlin.

 

 

It is as simple as that, Pat. ;) 

 

If the film were a hoax...the trackway had to have been faked...….and Bob Gimlin would have to have been aware of the trackway being faked. 

 

Bob Gimlin could not possibly have been unaware of a "PGF hoax" perpetrated by Roger.  

Edited by SweatyYeti
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc
BFF Donor

If the PGF was a hoax Gimlin had to know as there is no way he could have been hoaxed.   Also roger would not tell Gimlin to cover him as he would not want to take a chance Gimlin might shoot.

 

being an honest guy Gimlin reasonably said it was Possible he Could have been hoaxed.   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot
BFF Donor
39 minutes ago, Twist said:

 

 

Were P&G not down in CA. For a couple weeks?  So was the weekend processing and weekend flight people both just sitting by the phone, after hours mind you, just waiting for a call from two guys going to film a trackway? That’s what they went down there for originally,  correct, follow up on a trackway?   That’s big money to keep on retainer for trackway film.   Why would you set this all up in advance for tracks?   

 

Roger's intent was to try and film a real Bigfoot. Some reported tracks on a new road in the Bluff Creek area was the reason he went to that area but his hope was he would encounter a real Bigfoot and get it on film. Remember he practiced getting the camera out the saddle bags quickly in case he encountered a Bigfoot. There would be no need to do that just for a film of tracks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×