Jump to content
ShadowBorn

Has this been asked about the PGF before

Recommended Posts

Patterson-Gimlin

The difference between having a film of a gorilla and a supposed Sasquatch is a very poor comparison. A close up of a gorilla which has been  documented ,studied, examined and with 

specimens in abundance is irrelevant.  Obviously, there are no documented, studied, examined  Sasquatches or specimens in abundance.

Therefore the  Sasquatch remains legend and mythical until proven otherwise with a body. That is exactly why I am pro kill. 

Edited by Patterson-Gimlin
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

Because it’s a Gorilla. If it was a Bigfoot? They would be looking for the zipper....

 

Not really, Norse.....at that close of a range...the subject in the film simply appears too real, for it to be something faked. 

 

 

Quote

Besides it’s not a popularity contest.

 

I agree, it's not. What it is, is a Probability contest.  Those with brains...have the ability to estimate 'probabilities', and hence....can make determinations based on such.

 

Quote

Science has stated long ago what they need to bring the creature from myth to reality. People like yourself just do not like the solution to the problem. But alas the problem will never be solved with a camera.

 

To be more precise.....scientists have stated what they need.  Too bad for them, if they never get their 'specimen'. :) 

 

I do not need to kill a living human-like being, in order to bring truth to a lazy-brained scientist. I know what I can see....especially if it is seen at very close-range....and for an extended period of time. 

 

I know how to think. :) 

Edited by SweatyYeti

Share this post


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

 

Not really, Norse.....at that close of a range...the subject in the film simply appears too real, for it to be something faked. 

 

 

 

I agree, it's not. What it is, is a Probability contest.  Those with brains...have the ability to estimate 'probabilities', and hence....can make determinations based on such.

 

 

To be more precise.....scientists have stated what they need.  Too bad for them, if they never get their 'specimen'. :) 

 

I do not need to kill a living human-like being, in order to bring truth to a lazy-brained scientist. I know what I can see....especially if it is seen at very close-range....and for an extended period of time. 

 

I know how to think. :) 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Wow….very realistic. Was that video footage taken from a drone? ;) 

 

I would agree, that these days...video has the drawback, with regards to believability, of high-tech CGI.  

 

But, nonetheless....video taken via drones can be very believe-able...

 

 

 

It all comes down to the probability of any particular video being a CGI creation....or legitimate footage.  As the old saying goes...."The devil is in the details".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
22 minutes ago, SweatyYeti said:

Wow….very realistic. Was that video footage taken from a drone? ;) 

 

I would agree, that these days...video has the drawback, with regards to believability, of high-tech CGI.  

 

But, nonetheless....video taken via drones can be very believe-able...

 

 

 

It all comes down to the probability of any particular video being a CGI creation....or legitimate footage.  As the old saying goes...."The devil is in the details".

 

Its NOT CGI. It’s animatronics..... 

 

https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/17/disney-showed-us-the-inner-workings-of-its-avatar-robot-and-its-just-incredible/

 

Science does not deal in probability in biology. They deal in bones, teeth, flesh, hair, scat, body parts or corpses.

 

Besides, to get that close to a Bigfoot? Your never gonna recover your drone. This isn’t a Chimp as a zoo. It’s gonna be in a 1000 pieces on the forest floor.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

Great. In either case....CGI or Animatronics.....the subject can be distinguished from a living creature. 

 

 

Quote

Science does not deal in probability in biology. They deal in bones, teeth, flesh, hair, scat, body parts or corpses.

 

Scientific analysis does deal in 'probabilities', Norse.  And scientific analysis can be done in the field of biology. 

 

So, you simply do not know what you are talking about. 

 

 

Quote

Besides, to get that close to a Bigfoot? Your never gonna recover your drone. This isn’t a Chimp as a zoo. It’s gonna be in a 1000 pieces on the forest floor.

 

Darn.  :) 

Share this post


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

 

Great. In either case....CGI or Animatronics.....the subject can be distinguished from a living creature. 

 

 

 

Scientific analysis does deal in 'probabilities', Norse.  And scientific analysis can be done in the field of biology. 

 

So, you simply do not know what you are talking about. 

 

 

 

Darn.  :) 

 

Sure. Because you thought it was something it was not.... fail.

 

Ok smart guy. Show me a creature scientifically named that “probably” exists......🤤

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

 

Sure. Because you thought it was something it was not.... fail.

 

The question is real animal vs. fake, Norse....not CGI vs. Animatronics. 

 

 

Quote

Ok smart guy. Show me a creature scientifically named that “probably” exists......🤤

 

"Scientifically named" is irrelevant, to whether or not one can be certain they are seeing a real, live creature in a video.  And, most people can distinguish the difference. Those who know how to use their brains, that is. ;) 

 

Others...they just know how to fire guns....and kill things. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rockstar
10 hours ago, norseman said:

 

Its NOT CGI. It’s animatronics..... 

 

https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/17/disney-showed-us-the-inner-workings-of-its-avatar-robot-and-its-just-incredible/

 

Science does not deal in probability in biology. They deal in bones, teeth, flesh, hair, scat, body parts or corpses.

 

Besides, to get that close to a Bigfoot? Your never gonna recover your drone. This isn’t a Chimp as a zoo. It’s gonna be in a 1000 pieces on the forest floor.

 

 

Physicists deal in probability every day. Why should biology be different? Everything is a probability. A sufficiently detailed and close up video could be convincing. No one looks at a snow leapord video and says it must be CGI. Or when a new bird is discovered in the amazon on film, no one says it must be CGI. If Patterson and Patty had been a little closer to capture the facial detail, moving changing expressions, the debate would have been over 50 years ago and sasquatch would be a protected species. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
47 minutes ago, rockstar said:

Physicists deal in probability every day. Why should biology be different? Everything is a probability. A sufficiently detailed and close up video could be convincing. No one looks at a snow leapord video and says it must be CGI. Or when a new bird is discovered in the amazon on film, no one says it must be CGI. If Patterson and Patty had been a little closer to capture the facial detail, moving changing expressions, the debate would have been over 50 years ago and sasquatch would be a protected species. 

 

Because it is different? We can dissect a new species of bird found in the Amazon rain forest. We cannot dissect a black hole or a god particle. Yes?

 

It amazes me that the Bigfoot community is very hazy on how biology works. At no point was the PGF going to convince science! Why? Because science deals in tangible physical proof.

 

Lets say Roger and Bob never filmed the PGF..... instead they found a finger bone in a cave. And science was able to extract DNA from it?

 

http://discovermagazine.com/2016/dec/meet-the-denisovans

 

For the sake of argument let’s leave out conspiracy theories. Biologists may enter new untouched areas of the earth looking to discover new species. But they still want to collect that type specimen to take back to the lab. And while a new species of bird or beetle is expected in some exotic rain forest. They DO NOT believe there is a new species of ape man to be discovered in California or Ohio.... the idea is preposterous to them. Add to that the fakery and hoaxing that has gone on in the Bigfoot community? The idea that a new video is gonna pop this baby wide open is ridiculous. The ability to fake a Bigfoot today is light years ahead of where is was 50 years ago. And science didn’t believe it then..... so what gives?

 

Why hasn’t Todd Standing or Melba Ketchum cracked this wide open?!! Isn’t Matilda or Standings eye blink Bigfoot “close enough” to show science how authentic it is!? What is “close enough”? Where is this elusive lynchpin? What’s next? Lifting a Buick while juggling zagnut bars?

 

Science told us along time ago....through a letter from the Smithsonian what they need to consider Sasquatch a real creature. They need a body or a physical piece of it. Bone, hair, flesh, etc. 

 

They did NOT ask for really really really close drone footage of its face. Sorry.

2 hours ago, SweatyYeti said:

 

The question is real animal vs. fake, Norse....not CGI vs. Animatronics. 

 

 

 

"Scientifically named" is irrelevant, to whether or not one can be certain they are seeing a real, live creature in a video.  And, most people can distinguish the difference. Those who know how to use their brains, that is. ;) 

 

Others...they just know how to fire guns....and kill things. 

 

Not for me pixel expert..... You can call me dumb all you like. But the fact you cannot tell the difference between animatronics and cgi tells me all I need to know!

 

Back to absurdity......

 

This is like light years ahead of the PGF!!! Wow! Close ups! Woot!🙄

 

 

Edited by norseman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman

And here is more! Look at this close up!

 

 

Here is another close up!

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hiflier
20 minutes ago, norseman said:

Lifting a Buick while juggling zagnut bars?

 

Had to smile at that one.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Huntster
51 minutes ago, norseman said:

............It amazes me that the Bigfoot community is very hazy on how biology works. At no point was the PGF going to convince science! Why? Because science deals in tangible physical proof...........

 

The biology isn't the problem. It's the ideology. 

 

If science treated Kennedy's moon project like they treated sasquatchery, we never would have made it off the ground. Nobody had ever stepped onto the moon before. There was no proof it could be done. To this day, only 11 men have walked on the moon, and all of them were Americans. 

 

But Kennedy and Congress provided money. And behold! It happened! And in under a decade, just as the POTUS ordered.

 

Sorry, but Mr. Science (whoever that guy is) is just another whore. There has been more than enough "compelling evidence" out there to have motivated serious scientific inquiry. A hazy video of a woodpecker ended up producing over $25 million in government/university funding over just a few years to look for an extinct bird in a single swamp.

 

In a perverse attempt to duplicate JFK's moon race and Reagan's Star Wars science jump-starts, we ended up with Al Gore and global warming. Imagine the trillions spent and lost trying to prove what isn't true!  Instead of uniting and funding the science industry to produce something beneficial to mankind, all that money produced was division, lies, and struggle! For the love of God, I can think of millions of places where that money could have been spent! 

 

And the Science Guys played along like whores on a dingy street corner. Some of them are still there, hooking in fishnet, hateful that they were so gullible to fall for that stupid line and that it resulted in their credibility being destroyed.

 

The biologists and anthropologists are no different than the climate guys with regard to relict hominid reports, both Old World and New. They simply aren't with a program.........any program at all. It's poison. Ever hear of any of these guys knocking on doors and asking why there's no funding to look into this? There is BIG money being spent on such garbage as the mating habits of echidnas, and all the while a complete aversion to the sexual disorders of humans; men claiming to be women and vice versa. 

 

Cowards. Completely useless. Even their record on wildlife management is spotty, especially oceanic fish stocks. 

 

I'd invite them to kiss my back pocket if I didn't have to wonder that they might like it. Maybe that's why they prefer to study the sexual lives of echidnas?

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
20 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

The biology isn't the problem. It's the ideology. 

 

If science treated Kennedy's moon project like they treated sasquatchery, we never would have made it off the ground. Nobody had ever stepped onto the moon before. There was no proof it could be done. To this day, only 11 men have walked on the moon, and all of them were Americans. 

 

But Kennedy and Congress provided money. And behold! It happened! And in under a decade, just as the POTUS ordered.

 

Sorry, but Mr. Science (whoever that guy is) is just another whore. There has been more than enough "compelling evidence" out there to have motivated serious scientific inquiry. A hazy video of a woodpecker ended up producing over $25 million in government/university funding over just a few years to look for an extinct bird in a single swamp.

 

In a perverse attempt to duplicate JFK's moon race and Reagan's Star Wars science jump-starts, we ended up with Al Gore and global warming. Imagine the trillions spent and lost trying to prove what isn't true!  Instead of uniting and funding the science industry to produce something beneficial to mankind, all that money produced was division, lies, and struggle! For the love of God, I can think of millions of places where that money could have been spent! 

 

And the Science Guys played along like whores on a dingy street corner. Some of them are still there, hooking in fishnet, hateful that they were so gullible to fall for that stupid line and that it resulted in their credibility being destroyed.

 

The biologists and anthropologists are no different than the climate guys with regard to relict hominid reports, both Old World and New. They simply aren't with a program.........any program at all. It's poison. Ever hear of any of these guys knocking on doors and asking why there's no funding to look into this? There is BIG money being spent on such garbage as the mating habits of echidnas, and all the while a complete aversion to the sexual disorders of humans; men claiming to be women and vice versa. 

 

Cowards. Completely useless. Even their record on wildlife management is spotty, especially oceanic fish stocks. 

 

I'd invite them to kiss my back pocket if I didn't have to wonder that they might like it. Maybe that's why they prefer to study the sexual lives of echidnas?

 

 

 

Believe it or not? We have a growing number of nay sayers saying we never made it to the moon. For a myriad of reasons..... Buzz Aldrin punched a guy in the face over it. So the government can spend money to go to the moon. And citizens chose to not believe it. It was filmed in a Hollywood back lot supposedly....

 

I hear you. I understand that science is bias and doesn’t want to touch cryptid hominids with a 10 ft pole.

 

But it also proves my point. Only a bloody corpse dropped onto a table of some politician or news anchors desk is going to make a difference. You say that’s unfair and it dang sure is. But that’s the reality of the situation. People thinking that some new video is the answer are simply lying to themselves.

 

If Sweaty Yeti wants to buy a drone and fly it around and capture Bigfoot on film? All the more power to him. It’s a free country and a man outta do what he thinks is right. But it’s not going to budge any biologists that’s fer sure.

Share this post


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

 

This is like light years ahead of the PGF!!! Wow! Close ups! Woot!🙄

 

 

And it is clearly not a real, live animal.  Again, it is not difficult to distinguish a living being, from non-living....under close-up conditions. 

 

One potential aspect of a drone video, that Todd's Muppet videos don't have...is a lengthy duration of time. If a drone caught one of those muppets on camera for an extended period of time, it would make it just that much more certain that it was not a real, live animal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...