Jump to content
Daniel Perez

P-G Filmsite, 1967 and 2018

Recommended Posts

SweatyYeti
4 hours ago, starchunk said:

 

Actually..... gravity slightly compresses both poles making the Earth a slight ovoid, so it's neither

 

 

Too bad you're not as discerning, when it comes to the differences between a real creature.....and a laugh-a-minute suit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SackScratch
On 10/23/2018 at 11:42 PM, norseman said:

I have a ponderosa snag on the ranch still standing thats almost as old as I am...... And hand split cedar fence posts probably pushing 100 years old.

 

 

 

The untreated wood fence posts holding up the barbed wire fence separating the trailer park I live in from the wilderness area next to it were put in the ground about 56 years ago and never replaced according to the owner who's 83 years old! Vines and Trees have grown up around them in most places but they're still there after all these years! If not seen with my own eyes I would have assumed that dry-rot and termites would have dissolved those fence posts long ago!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SackScratch
On 10/3/2019 at 8:49 AM, OkieFoot said:

 

I just think what discrepancies there are between Roger's and Bob's accounts isn't a matter of one must be right and one must be wrong; any digging isn't going to lead anywhere. Imagine if Roger's and Bob's stories years apart were almost identical with very few discrepancies. People are free to knock themselves out with these details but my main point is it won't lead anywhere and isn't going to change anything. As I said before; the film was shipped out, it got developed and Al D. had the film at his house on the 22nd.; nothing in the details will undo this. For me, the developed film that can be analyzed is the bottom line.

That's why I mention the alligator and the swamp story, it does have practical applications. 

 

If Bob H. said they left camp around 10:30 and since he only needed one take, couldn't they have done their casting and been in Willow Creek by 1:30 to 2:00 in the afternoon? ;)

 

 

 

Luckily their names weren't... 

Sweaty and Sack!!! 

 

Edited by SackScratch
misspelled word!
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SackScratch

Sweaty and Sack... 

    ... Road out that Day... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

FYI

 

Oct 20th is just 6 days away.   

 

If anyone is doing any experiment of sun angles, daylight, and so on you have just 6 days to get your homework ready.

 

This year I am going to try to pay special attention to a later time of filming 3:30 vs 1pm since a later filming time has been offered.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


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

FYI

 

Oct 20th is just 6 days away.   

 

If anyone is doing any experiment of sun angles, daylight, and so on you have just 6 days to get your homework ready.

 

This year I am going to try to pay special attention to a later time of filming 3:30 vs 1pm since a later filming time has been offered.

 

 

 

Good idea, and suggestion, Backdoc. ;)  

 

I'll try to do some experimenting, with a replication of different scenarios....involving the 'time of day'...tree angles....and path angles.

 

But, such replications don't have to be right on the 20th....they can be done a few days before, or after.  The sun angles don't change all that much, from one day to the next. 

 

One thing is for sure....you'll see that a 1:00 to 1:30 'filming time' will not replicate the direction of the shadows seen in the PGF. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Backdoc

Color:

 

The fall leaves in the PGF (maples) look a lot like the fall leaves here in Iowa.  I know leaves turning colors varies in diff parts of America.  When I look at the PGF red trees it seems like October filming would be a safe bet.  However, I am using a faulty reference point comparing Iowa to the PNW of northern Cali.  I realize this is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison .  Does anyone know if the Bluff Creek area fall colors typically match what is observed on the PGF?

 

At one time I read a post suggesting a late Sept filming date.  I just don't see how based on the fall tree color.

 

(I know there are many other strong points which support the PGF beyond this point)

 

Doesn't it seem just based on the color of the trees any hoax would have to be filmed pretty darn close to the date Roger and Bob claimed?

Edited by Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

Typically leaves turn color roughly the same time each year, the primary factor being light.   With that said other conditions can change the timing some such as drought.   Just an FYI. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gigantofootecus
On 10/4/2019 at 2:56 AM, Patterson-Gimlin said:

I am the resident scoftic/skeptic. lol.  I can't explain how the film was made. I can only assume it is great effort by  Patterson and a tall skilled mime .

I can explain Bob H's roll. It is the same as all of ours . We weren't there and neither was he. 

I like this thread and appreciate all the information and awesome information. 

 

Hey PG, you're a big guy, right? What's the length of your radius + humerus (arm bones, wrist to shoulder) divided by your height? Patty's arm/height ratio is > .4. Her arm span to height (ASH) ratio is 1.39. Since we know there were no leg extensions, the only thing we need to prove is that Patty had no arm extensions. In which case, this comes down to pinpointing the articulating elbow. Then if the arms are proportional the ASH ratio will be accurate which puts Patty out of the human range.

 

ASH.jpg.3e87a8d2bab1be276325d6f0f1b31d61.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wiiawiwb

Great work Gigantofootecus. The ASH ratio of 1.39 is far outside human dimension and is based on a height of 6'3".  If we are extremely generous and use 7'2", which some people over the years have claimed Patty's height to be, that still yields an ASH ratio of 1.21. Even at 7'2",  Patty ASH ratio is beyond human dimension with the possible exception of only a handful of humans in the world. 

 

Can anyone provide the name of any human on earth that is 7'2" and has an ASH ratio of 1.21?  Kevin McHale's ratio, at 1.17, is the highest tall-human ASH ratio I know of but he was only 6'10". Even at that, there is a vast difference between 1.21 and 1.17.

 

https://www.thesportster.com/basketball/top-15-most-impressive-wingspans-in-nba-history/

Edited by wiiawiwb

Share this post


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

 Kevin McHale's ratio, at 1.17, is the highest tall-human ASH ratio I know 

 

 

^^^^

(Love the old Celtics)

 

I have to say out of the many people on the planet, only a tiny % have the traits and are also skilled enough to go on to play pro sports.  Each sport has a dominating feature: We think of TALL= Basketball, SMALL= Kentucky Derby Jockey, and so on.

 

If we want to look for a good source of some of the best extremes for illustrative purposes sports is a great place to look.  Things like strength, height, wing spam, speed, and so on, can be illustrated to a rare extreme.  When the Memorial Day footage was tested they tested that running of the figure vs an elite runner since the issue in Q was how fast the figure was running.  An elite human runner was able to run much faster than the figure in the Memorial Day footage.  It doesn't make the footage a hoax (or real) it just shows a human runner could duplicate the run of the figure appearing on that video. Had it been the other way around (Olympic sprinter couldn't run as fast as 'bigfoot' on the video) that nearly proves the 'bigfoot' would be real.

 

Bob Gimlin talked about how Massive Patty was vs her height.   The Massive size was the primary trait impressive to Gimlin.  You can once again go to pro sports and find many 6'1'' or 6'2'' players out there who are Massive in size even though 6'2'' is not an uncommon height for humans.  Not many of those 6'2'' humans are also Massive, move well, and so on. This makes me think Patty would not have to be 7'5'' tall to be real.  'She' could be 6' and massive in size since an NFL guy shows that. 

 

As far as 1967, not many people out there were Big of Massive, they just were for the day.  They were not big like today and even high school football players can be bigger than some of the Steel Curtain Steelers of the 1970s on the measureables of height and weight.

 

If Kevin McHale ratio was short of Patty, that alone deserves a closer look on the consideration Patty is real.  If not, they how did they pull off making such a Ratio appear in costume form?  This could even be tested by taking movies of the era where apes appear, and seeing what the ratio was just as an example.

 

Kevin McHale was a lanky freak of nature.  If he was alive as an adult in 1967 (which he was not) could he even be made to be patty with the numbers that result when testing Patty?  Unlikely. Yes on height I am guessing but no on those limb ratios.

Edited by Backdoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot

Kevin McHale's arm span to height ratio really helps put Patty's ASH ratio in perspective.

McHale even edges out Manute Bol for ASH ratio. Manute Bol had a wider arm span than McHale; Bol's was 8'6, or 102 inches (widest in NBA history), but Manute was also 8-9 taller than McHale so his ratio comes out a slight bit less. 

Using 7'7 for his height, Manute Bol's ASH ratio is 1.12.

 

So we have:

Kevin McHale - 1.17

Manute Bol  -     1.12 

Patty   -               1.39  (it's a pretty safe bet she had no arm extensions)

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bill

More than a safe bet, it's a certainty Patty isn't a human wearing arm extensions. Arm extensions extend only the forearm, the wrist, and the hand. They do not move the elbow, so the upper arm length (shoulder to elbow) compared to the lower arm length (elbow to wrist) ratio gets thrown completely off in an unnatural proportion. So performers wearing arm extensions have to be careful to not bend the elbows  so the fake ratio is apparent. Patty, however, bends her arm at the elbow in exactly the way to allow us to see the upper arm/lower arm ratio, and it is natural and proportional. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

More than a safe bet, it's a certainty Patty isn't a human wearing arm extensions. Arm extensions extend only the forearm, the wrist, and the hand. They do not move the elbow, so the upper arm length (shoulder to elbow) compared to the lower arm length (elbow to wrist) ratio gets thrown completely off in an unnatural proportion. So performers wearing arm extensions have to be careful to not bend the elbows  so the fake ratio is apparent. Patty, however, bends her arm at the elbow in exactly the way to allow us to see the upper arm/lower arm ratio, and it is natural and proportional. 

 

 

Thanks for summing-up, to some degree, Bill....what I have been showing to be the case with Patty, for the last 15 years, or so. ;) 

 

I'll post some images/comparisons, sometime soon....to show how definitive it is that the film subject was not wearing 'arm extensions'.

 

 

For now...here are a couple of oldies...(note the proportion of 'upper-arm' to 'lower-arm')...

 

McHale2_Patty_ArmComp1.jpg

 

 

Humans....(of any height)....always have lower-arms which are significantly longer then their upper-arms...

 

 

McHale1.jpg

 

 

Patty does not...

 

 

F347-F360-ArmBend-Matt-AG1.gif

 

 

Neandertals had proportionally shorter forearms...as an adaptation to very cold climates...

 

Neanderthal-Skeleton1.jpg

 

 

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OkieFoot

Here's Manute Bol's arms.

He was really skinny; not surprising for being 7'7.  His pants only had one back pocket.

 

2044862869_mannybol.jpg.2cd5bb6afc778d6b32afd868faf11d00.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...