Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
OkieFoot

If the PGF is fake, all of this has to be true.

Recommended Posts

Bigfoothunter
2 hours ago, OkieFoot said:

 So it would make you wonder how Roger's actor was able to maintain the gait but others can't. ;)

The guy should have won an Academy award.

 

Now you are touching on the lunacy that skeptics must offer up to make people believe the film is a hoax. For instance: to demonstrate just how big of a liar Heironimus was - he said that Patterson brought a lot of varying plaster cast on his trip and used a hammer to pound them deep into the sandbar, thus creating the trackway. Of course him having not ever been in Bluff Creek - he was unaware that the majority of the Sandbar was littered with gravel. One strike of a cast with a hammer would have broken it into pieces.

On 11/14/2017 at 2:51 PM, OkieFoot said:

By inviting scientists to view the film, trying to get people to go to the film site to look for evidence, choosing a film site that was not in a remote location where they knew they wouldn't be discovered, and by choosing a Friday afternoon, which is probably the most likely day people would take off to go camping, fishing, etc., taking the film to movie studios,

 

 

The story that the film site was in a remote location was false. The film site was right next to a road that had been being used. Laverty crew was taken over that road on occasions. Richard Henry said he drove McClarin - Bennett - and himself there in his wagon. He went on to say that a car would have had no trouble driving to and from the film site.

richard-henry-pgf-site-bft-11-2004.jpg

17 hours ago, hiflier said:

Squatchy! My, my. Impressive. Now....about those moving lips on the 'face mask' under the head piece with the football helmet? Here's were your imagination will be put to the test. Of course you have the solution right? Lemme guess, Hieronimus pulls his hand back through the arm hole, slithers it up into the mask and moves the lips by twiddling his fingers. I mean bloke in a suit correct? ;) 

 

Heironimus being in the suit is even too far fetched even for McSquatch as he has said he didn't believe Bob H's story. And its worth saying again for those who may have missed it - the head is proportionate to the bulk of the subject. In other words ... a human head would be too small for the body. In other words the lips and facial muscles would not belong to a man.

Share this post


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

 

Can we see some of your examples actually moving?  Why are they always still shots.  Amazing what happens when you ask something to go from standing still to moving:

 

 

Every one of these things looks like they could work until the are called upon to actually function.

 

I only watched about a minute of that but none of them really looked like they would have worked and a few were comically bad lol.   There was some interesting contraptions there!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

^^

 

ha, true.  

 

Back in the day those who put fourth that effort did think they would work.  

Share this post


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

Can we see some of your examples actually moving?  Why are they always still shots.  Amazing what happens when you ask something to go from standing still to moving:

 

Sorry Doc I don't have any moving footage of the bearskin costumes.

 

Do you have any moving or still photos of a Bigfoot/Sasquatch? For the sake of comparison? Wrt the PGF? Besides failed flying machines?

Edited by Squatchy McSquatch

Share this post


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

 

Sorry Doc I don't have any moving footage of the bearskin costumes.

 

Do you have any moving or still photos of a Bigfoot/Sasquatch? For the sake of comparison? Wrt the PGF? Besides failed flying machines?

 

 

Apples to apples comparisons are the most reasonable ones.  Since the PGF and Patty are at issue other films said to depict bigfoot don't apply.  We have the PGF.  the issue is a suit comparing to patty.  Patty moves.   The suit used to compare should move as well.  Don't you agree?

 

 

Share this post


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

 

 

Apples to apples comparisons are the most reasonable ones.  Since the PGF and Patty are at issue other films said to depict bigfoot don't apply.  We have the PGF.  the issue is a suit comparing to patty.  Patty moves.   The suit used to compare should move as well.  Don't you agree?

 

 

The comment McSquatch made to you in asking if you have any moving Sasquatch images to compare to Patty relies on Patty not being a Sasquatch. So rather than to break down her movements like Donskoy did or apply the evidence found on the sandbar to her movements - he throws out another handful of scat that overlooks that Patty could very well be a Sasquatch. In other words - do not address Patty and how she moves - just insist on having another Sasquatch to compare her to. Typical wacky response from the great contributor.

7.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

Interesting topic. Great points of conjecture and speculation. 

The film is just fantastic. I am no expert and can't explain how this all came about. Of course I reasonably convinced the creature does not exist. That doesn't take away my respect and admiration for this awesome film. 

One thing I am very sure of is Bob H.does not make an appearance in the film. 

Edited by Patterson-Gimlin
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

The comment McSquatch made to you in asking if you have any moving Sasquatch images to compare to Patty relies on Patty not being a Sasquatch. So rather than to break down her movements like Donskoy did or apply the evidence found on the sandbar to her movements - he throws out another handful of scat that overlooks that Patty could very well be a Sasquatch. In other words - do not address Patty and how she moves - just insist on having another Sasquatch to compare her to. Typical wacky response from the great contributor.

 

 

He only "contributes" because people like yourself, and Backdoc, continue to accomodate him with your responses. ;) 

 

Did you ever consider simply ignoring him? 

 

 

2 hours ago, Patterson-Gimlin said:

Interesting topic. Great points of conjecture and speculation. 

The film is just fantastic. I am no expert and can't explain how this all came about. 

 

 

That's because the subject is/was real. 'Men in suits' don't look fantastic....instead, they look pathetic, and obvious.  :) 

Edited by SweatyYeti
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot
18 hours ago, Bigfoothunter said:

 

Now you are touching on the lunacy that skeptics must offer up to make people believe the film is a hoax. For instance: to demonstrate just how big of a liar Heironimus was - he said that Patterson brought a lot of varying plaster cast on his trip and used a hammer to pound them deep into the sandbar, thus creating the trackway. Of course him having not ever been in Bluff Creek - he was unaware that the majority of the Sandbar was littered with gravel. One strike of a cast with a hammer would have broken it into pieces.

 

The story that the film site was in a remote location was false. The film site was right next to a road that had been being used. Laverty crew was taken over that road on occasions. Richard Henry said he drove McClarin - Bennett - and himself there in his wagon. He went on to say that a car would have had no trouble driving to and from the film site.

richard-henry-pgf-site-bft-11-2004.jpg

 

Heironimus being in the suit is even too far fetched even for McSquatch as he has said he didn't believe Bob H's story. And its worth saying again for those who may have missed it - the head is proportionate to the bulk of the subject. In other words ... a human head would be too small for the body. In other words the lips and facial muscles would not belong to a man.

 

Regarding the gait: a question that comes to my mind is where did Roger and /or his actor get the idea to have the actor walk with a bent knee gait. Back in 1967, how many people that were not scientists, anthropologists, those that studied biomechanics, etc, were familiar with the bent knee gait?. Correct me if I'm wrong but I would bet the bent knee gait in Sasquatch only became more widely known due to studying Patty in the PGF.

I recall reading about Grover Krantz going over the film with Roger and saying Roger started looking lost when he was discussing technical aspects of the subject. And what are the odds the actor himself was very  knowledgeable about the bent knee gait and decided to incorporate it in his "walk"?

 

On the bolded part; it's amazing how Roger was capable of producing this brilliant hoax Bigfoot film but then just threw caution to the wind and chose to make the film on an early Friday afternoon on a spot where someone could have driven right to the site.

Imagine if Laverty had driven by the spot early in the afternoon three days earlier than he actually did. :wacko:

Roger didn't act like a hoaxer; he did things that could have got him exposed, (seeking out movie studios to view his film is another example).

Share this post


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

 

 

He only "contributes" because people like yourself, and Backdoc, continue to accomodate him with your responses. ;) 

 

Did you ever consider simply ignoring him?

 

I don't respond to McSquatch - I respond to the poster that has quoted him.

Share this post


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

 

 

He only "contributes" because people like yourself, and Backdoc, continue to accomodate him with your responses. ;) 

 

 

 

I am uneasy with the idea of blocking person.  Maybe it's time.   Closest I ever came was [Kerry] who eventually was taken away.  Fine by me.  

 

I don't want this to be a believers only forum.  I'll keep in mind what you are saying though.

Share this post


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

 

I don't respond to McSquatch - I respond to the poster that has quoted him.

 

That doesn't really matter, Bill.....it is both being responded to, and talked about, that attracts people like Squatchy.  You are giving him exactly what he wants.....attention.

 

Scoffers, like SMS, are mainly interested in having fun with us "lowly, stupid Bigfoot proponents"....by way of insulting us, mocking the subject of Bigfoot, posting garbage analysis.....and receiving attention.  You, and others, give them all the attention they could ever ask for. And, personally....I think it's a shame. This forum deserves better, than having the discussions run chiefly by the scoffers, and BS artists of the world. 

 

I think they should simply be ignored. 

 

 

17 minutes ago, Backdoc said:

 

I am uneasy with the idea of blocking person.  Maybe it's time.   Closest I ever came was [Kerry] who eventually was taken away.  Fine by me.  

 

I don't want this to be a believers only forum.  I'll keep in mind what you are saying though.

 

 

It would be an improvement, Backdoc.  The skeptics/scoffers bring precious little to the discussions....and detract from them, in a very big way. 

Edited by SweatyYeti
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigfoothunter
31 minutes ago, SweatyYeti said:

The skeptics/scoffers bring precious little to the discussions....and detract from them, in a very big way. 

 

That is an understatement. I think we could make a better argument for skeptics than what they do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor

^^^ depends on the skeptic :)

 

For sure, some are not intellectually honest IMO. Doesn't mean all skeptics are the same....

 

I'm still not sold on the diaper-butt issue. Then again, the fact that nobody has been able to reproduce an approximation to Patty keeps me from falling over the fence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
26 minutes ago, gigantor said:

I'm still not sold on the diaper-butt issue

 

You mean like this guy, g?

 

DiaperButt.jpg

The thing is one cannot just pick out one thing about Patty. One has to consider the entire enigma, Shoulders, walking style, length of stride, toe curl, mouth movement, compliant gait, arm length, foot tarsal flex, depth of foot prints, muscle movement, calf muscle definition.........everything. It's only the whole package that defeats those who scoff. And the point I brought up a while back: if it was a hoax then why did Bob G. and Roger P. ride three miles back to camp for the plaster to make casts. A hoaxer would have had the stuff with them. I actually had a skeptic try to tell me that carrying the plaster would have tired out the horses LOL. Had I had them on ignore I would have missed an enormous belly laugh ;) 

Edited by hiflier
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×