Jump to content

What Sparked Your Interest in the PGF?


Squatchy McSquatch
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, dmaker said:

Could it not have been Gimlin in the suit?

I don't think so. For the same reason it is not Bob H. Not tall or large enough. 

Logic teaches us that it must be fabricated. Not sure how. The mime would have to be tall and uniquely built 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a 7 footer myself. I think the film subject is tall and muscular like myself. 

No consensus. I have heard from.  6' to over 7 '

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dmaker wrote:

Quote

That's not a problem for everyone. I have no problem accepting that your perceived limb ratio theories can be accounted for by lack of clarity in the film quality and costume distortion-likely by design. 

 

 

I really don't care about your opinions, dmaker.  Why should I?!  :) 

 

It is a problem for the skeptics, though....because it cannot, and will not, ever be replicated. 

 

 

1 hour ago, dmaker said:

Is there a consensus on Pattys height?

 

 

 

Yes....she had some.  

 

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dmaker said:

That's not a problem for everyone. I have no problem accepting that your perceived limb ratio theories can be accounted for by lack of clarity in the film quality and costume distortion-likely by design. 

 

1 hour ago, dmaker said:

Is there a consensus on Pattys height?

 

 

Why should anyone care to answer someone who doesn't care and has a consistent history of stating so?

 

And for the record, writing like a twelve year old girl should not be construed as some kind of slam. There are more intelligent, well written, and unbelievably smart 12 year old girls out there who would challenge your holding them up as some kind of inferior mentality. Talk about immature, you take the cake. In other words, I don't care about your opinions. The 12 year old girl remark really sucked and just proves you're incapable of engaging any adult in anything close to an adult dialogue by stooping that low in such a callous and thoughtless fashion. And if you thought it was somehow a demeaning thing to compare someone's writing to a 12 year old girl you have really lost your grip and your edge. Clean it up or get lost.

 

And if you don't care to agree it would be typical of you.

Edited by hiflier
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^

 

Very well said, hiflier.  :) 

 

That garbage post of dmaker's is an example of what I meant by referring to the BFF as "Little Jref". 

 

It was a 100% pure 'personal attack'....and the scoftics seem to be free to engage in them, here. 

 

The worst of it is....the proponents of the forum engage them regularly, and just help it to continue. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It baffles me why people don't put certain people on ignore so you won't see posts from them. I've got four on ignore and it is pleasure never having to see their written word again. Ever!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, SweatyYeti said:

The worst of it is....the proponents of the forum engage them regularly, and just help it to continue. 

SweatyYeti, buddy, you can't complain about us when you're doin' the exact same thing with dmaker. 

 

Myself, I try an address their BS, not them, comes a point when there is no use with some. However I think some of us folks who have been around for a spell oughta look out for the truth...call the BS when they present it.

 

SweatyYeti, have you ever in all you years ever heard anyone try an claim these as bein' from the PGF trackway ?

 

Pat...

 

 

bluffcreektinsnips.thumb.jpg.13298886fe0bdc0dad9e6fa9939f2f28.jpg.03ad08930d7311c2d8a3c6f0fea9f426.jpg

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Well said, Pat. :drinks:  I see more rhetoric about putting people on ignore than I see actual engagement with the scofftics.  And then some proponents just reply to what another proponent called out anyway.  That's just silly.  Everyone here is free to engage whomever they choose as far as I know and it's important to call out the BS.  If every proponent were to just "ignore" the scofftics then, they would be free to spread misinformation unchecked and they would certainly continue to do just that.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

xspider1,

 

K...not the next one...but the one after that...is to ya ! haha ! To conversin' an callin' out the BS ! :drinks:

 

Pat...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PBeaton

Those tracks that you have posted look way to odd in my opinion for some reason. Just some thing wrong with the toes and how the feet are place with in that track way.  They are just to uniform where some of the tracks that I have found the toes are usually spread out with in the soul or even dirt or leaves. The toes are not so close together like they are on that photo. When you place your fingers in the toes they are more spread out as the creature makes it next step. You can feel the difference in deepness in pressure as it steps. I see this in people with shoes as well when hiking in differences as to where they step more with there right or left and even right or left or right small or big toes or ball. Those look stamped but then I could be wrong and yes I am no expert and do not claim to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, PBeaton said:

 

SweatyYeti, have you ever in all you years ever heard anyone try an claim these as bein' from the PGF trackway ?

 

Pat...

 

 

No, I never have, Pat.  :)  

 

It takes a kitakaze, or his No.1 supporter....Squatchy....to do that. ;)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ShadowBorn,

 

These are not PGF tracks ! Are you familiar with the known PGF film subjects tracks, be it from what remains of reel 2 of the PGF, the Laverty photos or the casts by Patterson an Gimlin or Titmus ? Not tryin' ta give ya a hard time, just curious. 

 

Squatchy McSquatch tried to pass these off as part of the PGF trackway, when told that's BS, he said try an prove that he didn't know they weren't...so I did. It was easy, he had been apart of the conversation in which Joshua used these tracks all the time, repeatedly, he had even specifically mentioned the 1963 date on multiple occasions. Squatchy McSquatch was in on the conversation, even addin' a image that he may have even modified, in order to point out specifics regardin' the tracks.

 

Somehow he claims to have forgotten all of that...from only last year !

I had to laugh when at the beginnin' of this very thread he claims to recall not just memories but his actual thoughts when he was 4 years old !  

 

Like I said, if they're goin' ta present BS, it oughta be called just that.

 

Pat...

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, PBeaton said:

Haha ! "bigfoot fanboi fantasy to haphazardly crunch a bunch of estimated figures in their attempt to prove their delusion."  As apposed to the delusional fan boy fantasy about a guy in a suit with his arms tucked inside or...haha...without arms...could move its suit arms perfectly natural, swingin' them in unison with the legs, etc !  

 

"..arms are tucked inside or the dude has no arms at all."..."half a brain.." ;);) 

Image result for rofl imoji gif

 

 

Talk about 'ridiculous', Pat...  :lol: ....those suggestions of Faenor's 'take the WACKO cake'! 

 

I've just recently been thinking of starting a thread called...."It's Fun to Play 'Make-Believe' With The PGF". 

 

The idea was inspired by a few things....but, most recently....SWW's suggestion that the film subject's odd 'arm proportion' could be the result of a human being with  freak-ish....(1-in-a-million)....skeletal dimensions/proportions.  

 

MK Davis' "Bigfoot Massacre" theory would make a great addition to such a thread. 

 

But, it is the Scoffers and the Trolls who have made the most ridiculous, laughable, brain-dead...and far-out proposals, relating to the film. :popcorn:  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • gigantor locked this topic
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...