Jump to content
masterbarber

The realism of the Patterson-Gimlin Film subject cannot be replicated with a costume so; what are the possibilities? (2)

Recommended Posts

Huntster
9 hours ago, Squatchy McSquatch said:

pattyleg.gif.6442704b52b6a311273c0ecac62789e6.gifgemoralegs.JPG.6ce6f7030b83b963a28003400d5d56eb.JPG

 

Left: Patty                                                                             Right: Gemora gorilla legs (PRE-PGF)

 

(arms and hands hanging roughly the same length/level)

 

(similarly 'high' crotch area)

 

Let's see a 6'6" man (not Bob Heironimous) get filmed in that Gemora suit walking on a river bar and leave some deep footprints.

 

A rodeo cowboy supposedly did it in 1967. Let's see you do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

As a non believer I was embarrassed by his outrageous claims of chicanery and false proof. 

 

I was surprised his banishment took so long to come to pass 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
6 hours ago, Twist said:

Lmao,kitikaze still owns so much space in sweaty yetis head after all these years I bet SY still believes Kit is the guy that cuts him off in traffic each day. 😂

 

Has kit graduated from tricycles to driving automobiles?

30 minutes ago, SweatyYeti said:

My take on kita-KABOOM-ze…..he is a psychologically troubled individual..........

 

Actually, he all but admitted psychological trauma or struggling, which I felt sorrow for him about. I continue to wish the best for him, just as I feel anger at the satanic cult known as ISF for playing him for their entertainment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Patterson-Gimlin

Sweaty, 

One might also ask how you explain your obsession with him continues even today. 

Long after this pathetic individual as long been banished. 

 

One thing you two both have in common is closed mindness 

The film subject, although quite compelling is no more proven as being a Sasquatch than not being one. 

No body to examine means no proof 

Edited by Patterson-Gimlin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti
17 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

Has kit graduated from tricycles to driving automobiles?

 

Actually, he all but admitted psychological trauma or struggling, which I felt sorrow for him about. I continue to wish the best for him, just as I feel anger at the satanic cult known as ISF for playing him for their entertainment.

 

I don't feel sorry for the guy, Huntster…..he put a little too much effort into irritating others, on a few forums....for me to feel any sympathy for him. 

 

He's a jerk…..to put it mildly. :) 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
23 minutes ago, SweatyYeti said:

 

I don't feel sorry for the guy, Huntster…..he put a little too much effort into irritating others, on a few forums....for me to feel any sympathy for him. 

 

He's a jerk…..to put it mildly. :) 

 

I understand and respect your opinion of him. I feel differently because I did the same thing, but to "the other guys"........all of those things that are good for the gander. But I didn't do it because I got hoodwinked into supporting a lawyeresque fabrication played out before an intentionally ignorant jury, but because I hate the satanic, lawyeresque types who do this to society for their own profit, whether that be mannon, cheap thrills, or false ideology. I absolutely love fighting scum like that.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rockstar
13 hours ago, Patterson-Gimlin said:

Sweaty, 

One might also ask how you explain your obsession with him continues even today. 

Long after this pathetic individual as long been banished. 

 

One thing you two both have in common is closed mindness 

The film subject, although quite compelling is no more proven as being a Sasquatch than not being one. 

No body to examine means no proof 

 

Well this film if faked by a low educated cowboy with no film fx experience using a 1967 gorilla suit somehow still cannot be replicated 50 years later. Some of the things this "dumb" cowboy simulated was skin over flexing muscles, changing facial expressions, "bouncing boobs".... And the real kicker is that he found a human with a deformed cranium, because the human cranium cannot simultaneously fit inside the mask to align with the eyes and mouth end yet be SO very small on the top, not counting the sag-crest. This must have been on mighty messed up human with a small brain. No skeptic ever takes on the matter of the inhuman head.

 

So no body, no proof. I just watched a Himalayas show that feature a rare snow leapord. Should I be skeptical and pose the question of how did the filmmakers fake fat? 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rockstar

My tablet is horrible and chooses goofy words ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Twist

A snow leopard is not some unknown creature, not an apples to apples comparison.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster

Auto correct is rarely correct. I hate it.

Share this post


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

 

I understand and respect your opinion of him. I feel differently because I did the same thing, but to "the other guys"........all of those things that are good for the gander. But I didn't do it because I got hoodwinked into supporting a lawyeresque fabrication played out before an intentionally ignorant jury, but because I hate the satanic, lawyeresque types who do this to society for their own profit, whether that be mannon, cheap thrills, or false ideology. I absolutely love fighting scum like that.

 

That's understandable, Huntster. :) 

 

I could enjoy telling-off some of the scoftics, myself...but, these days, I'm just not interested in getting into word battles with the irrelevants of the world. 

 

I have better, and more important things to do with my time....like analyzing the PGF, for one.  As one example of my recent analysis...not too long ago, I had posted images showing an interesting aspect of Patty's right foot.  The toes appear longer, viewed from the top-side of the foot, with the toes lifted-up....(around F307)…..than they do when seen from the bottom side of the foot, with the foot held vertically, and the toes in a relaxed state....(Frame 61).

 

I plan on adding to what I've posted already, on that detail....by constructing a 'costume foot'...14.5" in length....with loosely hinged toes, which can re-create the flipping-up of the toes as seen in/around F307....and also replicate the lengthy appearance of the toes. I will then take a picture of how those lengthy, loosely-hinged toes appear from the bottom-side of the foot...with the foot held vertically, as it is in Frame 61. 

 

My guess is....(and this is just a wild guess, on my part)….the toes will appear just as long as they do, when viewed from the top side of the foot. 

 

The result of the experiment will probably show that a simply designed fake foot...with loosely-hinged toes.....does not replicate what we see with Patty's right foot/toes. 

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
5 minutes ago, SweatyYeti said:

........I had posted images showing an interesting aspect of Patty's right foot.  The toes appear longer, viewed from the top-side of the foot...(around F307)…..than they do when seen from the bottom side of the foot....(Frame 61)........

 

Huh. I'll have to go back and find that post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

^

I'll look for it tomorrow. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster

I looked at some of your previous posts. They didn't include pics, but they made me look at my foot. I understand what you're talking about. I never noticed it before, even on my own foot! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xspider1
16 hours ago, Patterson-Gimlin said:

As a non believer I was embarrassed by his outrageous claims of chicanery and false proof. 

 

I was surprised his banishment took so long to come to pass 

 

+1 Well said and, although I am a believer (or, a credulous 'bleever' as kit might say: ) lol, I agree! 

 

One funny thing is that being credulous or "having or showing too great a readiness to believe things" is, at least in my experience, more of a PGf detractor characteristic than a characteristic of those who "believe".   Anywho, chastising kit is a great pastime but, we're better than that!  I would much rather chastise his arguments which were: L    A    M    E, lame.  🤩

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...