Jump to content
Cotter

How much longer should we wait for a PGF recreation before it's determined it can't be done?

Recommended Posts

Backdoc
7 hours ago, SweatyYeti said:

 

 

 

Also, I recall reading that when Roger estimated Patty's height as about 7'...Bob disagreed with him, and said something about Patty being in the 6'+ range. 

 

 

In a Radio Interview early on after the PGF event, Roger talked about the size of Patty (maybe arm length instead of height) but Gimlin did not agree with Roger right off the bat by saying he thought the metric (height or arm length since I can't remember) was less than what Roger related.  He said he thought Roger was getting a little 'excited' about those points of size.  He did not agree with Roger's impression.

 

Seems genuine enough and would not seem like two people who have conspired to get their story straight as in rehearsed.

Edited by Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

W is Jack Webster, interview approx. Nov. '67   http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/radiopatterson.htm

 

W: Describe it to me, Bob.

B: It was a large hairy creature with arms that hang down beside its, you know, far down on its sides below its knees, and it was quite...

W: Do you agree with that ?

R:No, I think Bob's a little excited here, I don't believe they were below the knees, they were above the knees.

W: But they were well down on the sides. weren't they ?

B: Way down, right.

 

An...

 

W:Alright now, many of the zoologists that were people you consulted, have they given you any idea of the weight of this creature ? The height or the Wieght ?

B: They did on the height, measuring by the soles of the feet, in the picture, and they estimated the height to be approximately six foot, nine inches.

W: What was the length of the stride ?

R: Just pardon me, this was estimated on a fourteen and a half inch, excuse me a fourteen inch track and these tracks were fourteen and a half inches, which would, would add quite a considerable bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter
4 hours ago, Backdoc said:

 

In a Radio Interview early on after the PGF event, Roger talked about the size of Patty (maybe arm length instead of height) but Gimlin did not agree with Roger right off the bat by saying he thought the metric (height or arm length since I can't remember) was less than what Roger related.  He said he thought Roger was getting a little 'excited' about those points of size.  He did not agree with Roger's impression.

 

Seems genuine enough and would not seem like two people who have conspired to get their story straight as in rehearsed.

 

They were being honest in that aspect. Roger viewed the creature from near the  ground and Gimlin from sitting atop of his horse. The two different angles to the subject that each man had would make the arms seem to hang further down on the body for one man and possibly not so far down the body for the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc
18 minutes ago, Bigfoothunter said:

 

They were being honest in that aspect. Roger viewed the creature from near the  ground and Gimlin from sitting atop of his horse. The two different angles to the subject that each man had would make the arms seem to hang further down on the body for one man and possibly not so far down the body for the other.

 

 

It could be they were not good at executing a hoax by thinking of everything.  Instead, the fact they are not on the same page on a few points early on seems pretty honest to me.  Not rehearsed.  For instance:

 

ARM LENGTH:     Roger and Bob have diff descriptions there.  I guess it is Roger that disagrees with Bob's impression.

 

INITIAL ENCOUNTER:    Roger thoughts she was squatted down by the creek first while Gimlin said she was standing.

 

Those two points don't seem like the workings of two people trying to sell a hoax story.  It's not like Bob said she was standing and Roger quickly agrees or vice versa.  Each guy said what they thought and didn't wobble in the big picture details.   Gimlin seems more than fine to disagree with Roger and Roger with Bob on the arm length thing.  Gimlin seems more than fine to say more or less Patty was standing by the time he saw here (seconds later after and behind Roger).

 

Edited by Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PBeaton

Bigfoothunter,

 

That's what I was thinkin' reguardin' Bob lookin' down from the horse. He had also mentioned(in a different interview) somethin' similar regardin' his height estimate, since he was atop of his horse, he'd be lookin' down which could make her look shorter than she actually was.

 

Backdoc,

 

Does seem natural Roger seein' her first squatted down, she sees Roger an stands, as when Bob first seen her she was standin' lookin at them. 

 

Pat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
6 hours ago, Backdoc said:

 

In a Radio Interview early on after the PGF event, Roger talked about the size of Patty (maybe arm length instead of height) but Gimlin did not agree with Roger right off the bat by saying he thought the metric (height or arm length since I can't remember) was less than what Roger related.  He said he thought Roger was getting a little 'excited' about those points of size.  He did not agree with Roger's impression.

 

Seems genuine enough and would not seem like two people who have conspired to get their story straight as in rehearsed.

 

 

Thanks for the information/correction, Backdoc.  :) 

 

I must have misremembered that disagreement of Bob Gimlin's as relating to Patty's 'body height'....rather than to her 'arm length'.  I do recall reading their differing accounts of the arm length.

 

I'll have to listen to various interviews of Bob Gimlin....to see exactly what he has said, regarding his estimate of Patty's height. If he's talked about it a few times, or more....I'll create a transcript of what he's said, and post it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc
47 minutes ago, PBeaton said:

 

 

Backdoc,

 

Does seem natural Roger seein' her first squatted down, she sees Roger an stands, as when Bob first seen her she was standin' lookin at them. 

 

Pat...

 

 

Makes perfect sense really.  In this way we can say there is nothing in what they claimed early on which leads to any big smoking gun.     

 

This got me thinking about the next several seconds.   After the first couple of seconds in what I will call phase one [ kneeling patty gets up, then stands and starts to walk away], Roger and Bob are dealing with spooked horses in phase two.  Roger was trying to get to the saddle bag and get the camera while Gimlin was probably trying to steady the horses while still glancing toward Patty in shock and amazement.

 

During this time, it is hard to know if either guy saw anything for a few seconds and if there was anything to see other than Patty starting to walk away from them.  By Phase Three Roger yells 'cover me' and runs with camera in hand while Ginlin lets the horse go and steadies his own.  He then sees Patty from up on his horse while Roger does his obstacle course of on and off camera running.   At this time there is some thought the boys saw patty look back a time or two before the famous look back. One of these look backs appears only in the stable version of the PGF.

 

What did they see in phase two?

It all happened fast and they were dealing with things tied to spooked horses.  Hard to tell if any part of that could be described by Roger or Bob at that time.  Was Patty briefly at their 'back' or 'side' so for all practical purposes they loose track of here for a second?

40 minutes ago, SweatyYeti said:

 

 

Thanks for the information/correction, Backdoc.  :) 

 

I must have misremembered that disagreement of Bob Gimlin's as relating to Patty's 'body height'....rather than to her 'arm length'.  I do recall reading their differing accounts of the arm length.

 

I'll have to listen to various interviews of Bob Gimlin....to see exactly what he has said, regarding his estimate of Patty's height. If he's talked about it a few times, or more....I'll create a transcript of what he's said, and post it. 

 

 

Seems I had one part wrong Sweaty.   I thought it was Gimlin who said, "Roger is getting a little excited"   Instead, it appears it was Gimlin who felt the arms were long and it was Roger who interjects he thought they were not quite that long.   I had it the other way around. So it was really Patterson correcting Roger's impression of a longer arm length by saying instead the arms were shorter than Gimlin's impression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

All great information and thanks 

However, the subject was still 7' just like yours truly. :P

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
5 minutes ago, Patterson-Gimlin said:

All great information and thanks 

However, the subject was still 7' just like yours truly. :P

 

 

Patty was 7' tall.....only in your head, PG. ;) 

 

There are no lines of analysis indicating that height. 

 

Instead, here are two examples of the 'foot ruler' measurement...

 

F72-_Footruler-_Raw_Measurement1.jpg

 

 

PattyFootRulerB1.jpg

 

 

 

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

 

 

 

Then how do you explain her stride longer than mine. 

Edited by Patterson-Gimlin

Share this post


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

Patty was 7' tall.....only in your head, PG. ;) 

 

There are no lines of analysis indicating that height.

 

Incorrect.  Examples nullifying your opinion:

 

http://www.sasquatchcanada.com/uploads/9/4/5/1/945132/considering_the_math_--_revised.pdf

http://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2013/11/debunking-claimed-bigfoot-cosume-hoaxer.html

 

More to be had just by searching the net.

 

MIB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin
13 minutes ago, MIB said:

 

Incorrect.  Examples nullifying your opinion:

 

http://www.sasquatchcanada.com/uploads/9/4/5/1/945132/considering_the_math_--_revised.pdf

http://undebunkingbigfoot.blogspot.com/2013/11/debunking-claimed-bigfoot-cosume-hoaxer.html

 

More to be had just by searching the net.

 

See I knew it. Not only  heavier and bulkier than me. Two and a half inches taller. I know a 7 footer when I see one obviously. 

Share this post


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

 

 

Sorry to say, MIB...but both of those sources of 'height calculations' you linked to are flawed....and have derived incorrect heights, for Patty.

 

One of the links uses Bill Munns' incorrect finding of a 15MM Lens on Roger's camera....and hence....a bogus calculation of a 7+ foot height, for Patty. Bill's "finding" was wrong...and he has stated so, himself. 

 

The other link goes to a paper by Chris Murphy....and his calculation for Patty's height is flawed, also. He simply uses Jeff Glickman's (NASI Report) 'height calculation' for Patty of over 7' tall. But Glickman's analysis is highly suspect. He used pics of Hodgson at the filmsite, for height comparisons...but Hodgson was probably not standing in a spot on the sandbar which would make for an accurate height comparison.  Glickman also estimated Patty's weight as approx. 2000 lbs.  I doubt that is an accurate figure.  

 

Chris Murphy expanded on Glickman's height figure....(of 87")....by using the 'Photogrammetry equation', and determining that Patty must have been about 150' from the camera.

 

Here is the relevant quote of Murphy's.....from the article you linked to:

Quote

The DISTANCE we have is that determined by René Dahinden who used a questionable (moveable) object as a basis (102 feet). The IMAGE HEIGHT can be measured and is known (.0474 inches). The FOCALLENGTH is known because we know within reason what lens was on the camera Patterson used (.9842 inches). This is a 25mm lens. The distance of 102 feet for Frame 352, as mentioned, does not work. By using the formula to determine what the distance had to be to equal a sasquatch height of 87.5 inches, the result is 151.40 feet. The question now becomes, is it practical that the camera (Roger Patterson) was 151.4 feet from the bigfoot rather than 102 feet? In my opinion, he could easily have been at this distance.

 

 

That distance cannot be correct, or even close to correct.....given the very small level of detail visible on Patty's face. And if that distance is wrong....then the height figure Glickman determined must be wrong, also. 

 

Additionally, that distance doesn't "wash" with Patty's close distance behind tree TC-2....(only several steps after the F352 spot).

 

 

I should re-state what I said earlier, more properly....there is no solid analysis that indicates a height of 7' tall, for Patty.  

 

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wiiawiwb
4 hours ago, SweatyYeti said:

 

 

Patty was 7' tall.....only in your head, PG. ;) 

 

There are no lines of analysis indicating that height. 

 

Instead, here are two examples of the 'foot ruler' measurement...

 

F72-_Footruler-_Raw_Measurement1.jpg

 

 

PattyFootRulerB1.jpg

 

4 hours ago, SweatyYeti said:

 

 

 

I'll have to look again and find it but my memory of Gigantofootecus calculations were that Patty's standing height was 18% higher than her walking height.  If that is the case...6'3" walking would equal 7'4" standing.

 

Is my memory correct about the 18%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

I don't think it was quite that much higher, wiia....but I'm not sure.  I remember him posting that....but I have no idea which thread it is in.

 

Hopefully, you can find it. :) 

 

 

3 hours ago, Patterson-Gimlin said:

 

Then how do you explain her stride longer than mine. 

 

That's simple, PG....as wiia just pointed-out...Patty's full 'standing height' could be several inches taller than her 'walking height'. 

 

So, if Patty's 'walking height' was 6'5".....then her true/full 'body height' would probably be close to 7' tall. And, she would be able to walk with a lengthy stride.

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...