Jump to content
masterbarber

The Actual Developing Of The Pgf (2)

Recommended Posts

SweatyYeti
6 hours ago, Bill said:

Sweati:

 

A lab technician at a Kodak Licensed facility can still do an "under the table" processing, if he's willing to break a few rules. You'll just never find the person who will admit he broke rules. Human nature is like that.

 

Now why Al doesn't want to admit to or recall how he got it processed, that's an issue for Al. 

 

But I would concur, Al is likely just protecting himself, not a lab technician.

 

Bill

 

 

Thanks for the reply, Bill. :) 

 

Then, it seems like we are in agreement....concerning the potential scenario of Al dealing with a film lab technician who was involved in developing films which were illegal....i.e...adult films. 

 

If that scenario was not the case, then I don't see why Al would be concerned with his reputation.....if his only "crime" was coercing a Lab technician to do some film developing 'after hours'. 

I just can't think of anything Al could have been involved in, that would cause him to be reacting the way he did....so many years 'after the fact'....other than the 'adult film' scenario. 

 

 

But, regardless....even if you don't think that was the case....the significant detail here is what you specifically agreed with....that Al was most likely protecting himself.

That detail is significant, because it speaks against the reason behind Al's secrecy being to "protect the legitimacy of the film". 

Al wouldn't stand to lose anything, regarding his reputation....if he were to reveal that the film had been shot a week earlier than it was claimed to have been shot. He was saying that he thought the film was most likely a hoax, anyway. There wouldn't have been any harm, to him, if he provided some evidence in support of that proposal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

Unless somebody investigates Al as thoroughly as people have investigated Roger, we'll likely never know what he's hiding.

 

I let go of it because I don't expect to find an answer, and the film itself tells me everything i need to know to determine that it's authentic and not a guy in a suit. That's the only truth I need to get to. So I chalk Al's role in the film processing as just one loose end that doesn't impact on the truth of the film, and a loose end we'll most likely never tie up and resolve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

I have been saying the exact same thing, Bill.  :) 

 

I don't think the matter needs to be investigated further....or that Al DeAtley needs to be, or should be, questioned further.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Q to the Skeptics:

 

In order for the PGF to be filmed before Oct 20th Bob Heironimus would have to be a liar. That is, he stated the film was filmed on the 20th and even gives elaborate details about this and the aftermath. This was not slip of the tongue but his detailed opinion.   Therefore, is there a single skeptic who thinks: 1)  the PGF was filmed before Oct 20th and 2) somehow still thinks Bob H was not a liar?

 

Please sign you name here:   __________________________________

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch
2 hours ago, SweatyYeti said:

^

 

I have been saying the exact same thing, Bill.  :) 

 

I don't think the matter needs to be investigated further....or that Al DeAtley needs to be, or should be, questioned further.  

 

Yet you have no problems throwing about allegations of his involvement with organized crime and pornography; both of which are baseless.

 

Deatley should  absolutely be questioned further.

 

He’s the only person still living who was connected with the development.

 

Sweaty your investigative skills are self-serving and a disservice to anyone with an interest In the PGF hoax.

 

Carry on, elbow boy... :)

 

 

 

Edited by Squatchy McSquatch
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

^ Calling someone a PGf 'elbow boy' is a compliment in my opinion.  Do you really think that the location of a primate elbow can be faked in images where their arm is bent, McSquatch?  really??  Perhaps you can show us how to do that with a bigfoot costume made of, what material were you planning to use for your less than $500 suit, carpet!!?  pleeez

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Faenor

Its relativly easy to fake a primate elbow.  The easiest way to do it is to put another primate in a make believe primate costume.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

We're not talking about faking a primate elbow; we're talking about faking the location of the elbow when the arm is bent.  Surely, anyone can see the difference.  To draw an analogy: it's like comparing night and day.  :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot

You're correct spider, you cannot fake the location of the elbow. You can't arbitrarily move the elbow up or down the arm to create a desired effect. When we see Patty's arm bend, that's where her elbow is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist
9 hours ago, xspider1 said:

We're not talking about faking a primate elbow; we're talking about faking the location of the elbow when the arm is bent.  Surely, anyone can see the difference.  To draw an analogy: it's like comparing night and day.  :huh:

 

Pretty sure his joke went right over your head......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

Faenor said:  

 

"Its relativly easy to fake a primate elbow.  The easiest way to do it is to put another primate in a make believe primate costume", Twist.  If that was a joke then I guess it was over my head because I certainly did not laugh.  I don't find misinformation funny at all, perhaps you do.  Anywho, it is interesting that Faenor said "a make believe primate costume" because from what we can discern from the PG film images vs every Bigfoot costume to date, the notion that she was a primate in a costume is apparently make believe, so at least that part was true.  :thumbsup:

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

Whooosh!!!  :thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch

Nothing but net!!  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Getting twisted into knots:

 

When the debate of 'how tall is Patty' comes up, it seems my straw poll of most skeptics would be man sized.  I don't know if this is from  observation and measuring things in the PGF or it could be they just need Patty to be 6' tall so as to make it easier for a 6' person (Bob H?) to fit into a suit.  

 

That is all well and good.  

 

This does not explain HOW it would be possible to change the pivot points in a suit.  The knees and elbows are pivot point which are not changing.  Since Patty is walking , the knee pivot points are more easily demonstrated.  A person walking might be able to fake the arm movement for a while by keeping a straight arm with extension or whatever.  yet, Patty at some point Patty even bends her elbow presenting the same problem.  Back to the knee.  That knee is bending and there is no doubt at all where it bends.  There is no doubt at all how it must bend.

 

This means this 6' person many skeptics say is in a 6' Patty suit Cannot change the knee bend and elbow bend and still accomplish walking.  Patty not only accomplishes walking but does that as smooth as a cat.  

 

Say Patty is 5'10'' or 6' 1'' all you want.  Fine.  Just tell us How that person can bend where they bend.   A 6' foot person bends where all 6' people bend aside from an medical condition.  Patty's bend reveals proportion problems for a suit.  It is clear to anyone wishing to see it. 

 

You can't have it both ways.   Tell me how tall the man in the suit is.  Then, fit him in that suit and how me how he is going to pivot.  Extra Credit:  Now have him walk over varied terrain maintaining a walk in a smooth way Patty does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

^^^ What skeptics exactly are you polling BD?  Around here there are only about 3-4 skeptics active usually.  Just curious.   

 

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...