Jump to content

The 50th Anniversary of the amazing Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot film has arrived and there is no debunk in sight! 8 )


Recommended Posts

PBeaton

Cotter,

Sadly...when all three have passed...an nothin' changes with his hoax claim...those skeptics will wipe the egg of their faces...rinse...an repeat...haha !  

 

Pat...

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch
4 hours ago, Cotter said:

Would you (can you) say if the 'true' hoax scenario has been discussed on this forum?  Or are the hoax scenarios that have been discussed not even close?

 

I will not comment any further at this point in time.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1

I'm guessing that Squatchy picked up on a conspiracy theory somewhere and is just throwing it at the wall.  That would explain why there is almost no substance to what he said about 1 of 3 people passing and why this isn't happening:

 

atthewall.png

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by xspider1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Cotter said:

What is the circumstance that makes it only necessary for 1 of 3 or more people to pass before the hoax is revealed?  (This isn't one of those 'I was the guy in the suit' deals is it?)  Or rather, perhaps you can share if Bob H is the man in the suit?

 

"At least"?  So there are more than 3 people that are involved?  Again, why does one of them passing trigger a release?

 

Would you indulge the forum with your version of how the hoax will be revealed and how it was pulled off?  Please do not include any names.

 

 

 

 

 

It would seem it is the Kit Glass Case Suit Fantasy scenario.  You know the one where someone close to Al Deatly goes via mysterious video phones and enters Al's study where he keeps the bigfoot Patty suit under a glass trophy case with a pic on top of the patty turn back.  This conspiracy goes so deep that Al is involved, rips off the conspirators still expecting their silence, to pass away before others in the family will come forward with the suit and alert the news media.  Yes I know it is shocking that some actually believe that.  Yes the suit in a glass case kept by Al and he will bring a law suit to anyone who dares accuse him while he is alive.

 

Absolute Nonsense.  It could be what SM is referring to.  Maybe he believes that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

You mean the scenario nobody wanted to Q K about??? ;) 

 

I guess it's more entertaining to just say "could be"...."maybe"...."the conspiracy goes"....and....."it would seem". 

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

 

Neither will the person who "wore it".  

 

I suspect the person who "destroyed him"....(in accordance with Rule #2)......will never be found, either.  ;) 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with what spider said in an earlier post saying if someone came out now and said that it was all a hoax, it won't change anything about the film subject. If you can't prove the film is a hoax through analysis of the film itself, somebody saying it's fake isn't going to change anything; Patty's arms are still going to be too long for humans and her body proportions will still be far outside human range, her track depth will still be 5-6x deeper than actual human tracks left behind.

 

 

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

^

 

You mean the scenario nobody wanted to Q K about??? ;) 

 

I guess it's more entertaining to just say "could be"...."maybe"...."the conspiracy goes"....and....."it would seem". 

 

I used "It would seem" since I don't know for certain SM believes the Kit Suit Saga which it seems his post references.  I can't believe too many people would be crazy enough to take ownership of the suit saga nonsense which is why I added, "maybe he believes that"   I can't read SM's mind.  It is one thing to think Patty is a man in a suit. It is another to think the Kit Suit Saga is remotely reasonable.  To understand Kit's story, he posted something along these lines:   Al has the suit.  When Al dies the family for some reason will alert the media and show everyone THE suit so we can all know it was a hoax.   

 

I don't believe it, but that is what I got out of it.

 

 

As far as Qing Kit,  I Q him so much that some posters had asked why I even engaged in any dialog with Kit at all.   I Q him many times specifically on this Kit Suit Saga and the many moving parts to it.  Some may have took the story and swallowed it hook line and sinker but those posters would mostly be skeptics who accept anything so long as it agrees with their world view.  That is, if it points to Patty being a man in a suit then they believe it no matter what the merits or logic.  Then why Question it? SM may not have wanted to Q kit and maybe that is what you are referring to.  

 

Skeptics on the BFF claim to Q a lot of things. They claim they are reasonable, scientific, and so on.  Yet, few if any on the BFF apply that to the Kit Suit Saga.   You would think they would.   

 

I was always so busy dealing with Kit on the suit subject I never stop to notice if SM believed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you be able to list the skeptics on here that supported Kits suit saga?  

 

I know for a fact fact that I stated that I did not support the story.  What I do recall is myself and other skeptics being critical of SY’s obsession with following Kit to every thread and bringing the subject up.  

 

I also recall defending the idea that jailbreaking a cell phone was not unheard of, not supporting anything to do with the suit, just the technology that could or could not have been used at the time as Kit suggested.

 

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

I agree with what spider said in an earlier post saying if someone came out now and said that it was all a hoax, it won't change anything about the film subject. If you can't prove the film is a hoax through analysis of the film itself, somebody saying it's fake isn't going to change anything; Patty's arms are still going to be too long for humans and her body proportions will still be far outside human range, her track depth will still be 5-6x deeper than actual human tracks left behind.

 

 

 

All of that makes sense.  What if those conclusions, no matter how compelling, are somehow wrong?

 

People like me have one main issue with the PGF:  If it is a hoax then it should be easy to show us a suit or a reproduction of one in a same or similar manner as Patty.  But we need to be completely honest and apply that to the whole story.  If someone did make such a suit we would have to strongly consider it.  If further such a suit resulted in the arms and body proportions and so on being near or the same, what more could be say?  It would seem it could be a man in a suit, and maybe was.

 

Now that all being said, to date this has not occurred and it seems like the more time goes on the more it looks like an impossible task to accomplish.

 

We might say if someone confesses it doesn't change what is on the film.  But confessions or not, if what we see on the film is duplicated then it proves the PGF could be duplicated by man.  This may mean the same methods or similar methods which duplicated such a suit could have been used by Roger in 1967.

 

As far as confession go, I wonder what we would say if Gimlin came out tomorrow and said, " It was a fake.  i have been lying to you folks"   Does that have any bearing on the PGF?   Such a confession by Gimlin might have added details to make us go, "ahhhhh  OK, I see how they did it now.  Clever."   A Bob Gimlin confession would get my attention more than Joe Blow down the street.

 

If we say "Make a suit" and someone does in all those Patty behaviors, then it means Patty could be a man in a suit.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Squatchy McSquatch
16 minutes ago, Backdoc said:

 

I used "It would seem" since I don't know for certain SM believes the Kit Suit Saga which it seems his post references.  I can't believe too many people would be crazy enough to take ownership of the suit saga nonsense which is why I added, "maybe he believes that"   I can't read SM's mind.  It is one thing to think Patty is a man in a suit. It is another to think the Kit Suit Saga is remotely reasonable.  To understand Kit's story, he posted something along these lines:   Al has the suit.  When Al dies the family for some reason will alert the media and show everyone THE suit so we can all know it was a hoax.   

 

I don't believe it, but that is what I got out of it.

 

 

As far as Qing Kit,  I Q him so much that some posters had asked why I even engaged in any dialog with Kit at all.   I Q him many times specifically on this Kit Suit Saga and the many moving parts to it.  Some may have took the story and swallowed it hook line and sinker but those posters would mostly be skeptics who accept anything so long as it agrees with their world view.  That is, if it points to Patty being a man in a suit then they believe it no matter what the merits or logic.  Then why Question it? SM may not have wanted to Q kit and maybe that is what you are referring to.  

 

Skeptics on the BFF claim to Q a lot of things. They claim they are reasonable, scientific, and so on.  Yet, few if any on the BFF apply that to the Kit Suit Saga.   You would think they would.   

 

I was always so busy dealing with Kit on the suit subject I never stop to notice if SM believed it.

 

Has nothing to do with Kit.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Squatchy McSquatch said:

 

Has nothing to do with Kit.

 

 

 

Good enough.  I prefer to let others speak for themselves before I jump to too many conclusions.  You could tell us more of what you are talking about then or direct us to a thread where you already covered it.   

 

While we are on the topic, would you say you believe in any way Kit's suit saga or any part of it?

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

Would you be able to list the skeptics on here that supported Kits suit saga?  

 

Sounds good to me.

 

Quote

 What I do recall is myself and other skeptics being critical of SY’s obsession with following Kit to every thread and bringing the subject up.  

 

 

I have to disagree with you on this one.  SY questioning of Kit and his many claims is VITAL to finding the truth.  We don't know how many people read these threads and take what Kit would engage in his many KIT- isms .  Someone needed to stand up to that at each turn. That someone would also have to be 1) A person with a strong knowledge on the details of the subjects involved and 2) have a long enough relationship to the many posts on the BFF to be able to say, "well, wait that is not what you said on the same thing just 6 months ago"

 

SY's efforts have been vital as far as I was concerned.  How SY went about it was fine by me.  Further, he was largely returning the treatment Kit had displayed. Kit would often use various techniques which were wrong or out of bounds.  SY called him on it.  He was doing us a Public Service.

 

There are multiple people having a dialog with Kit on the BFF on any given subject.   In that process, I don't think SY or others should just sit there and let Kit get away with his many KIT-isms.    It is not as if SY or others are just sitting around making their life mission busting on Kit.  It seems they were just chiming in like any of us has the right to do.  Almost always these were done as telling "the rest of the story" so to speak.   

 

Thanks SY and keep up the great work.

 

I say all this as one of the few posters who might disagree with Kit often but was OK with him.  There aren't many in that club.  I think I am being fair about this.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Backdoc
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor unpinned this topic
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
  • gigantor locked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...