hiflier Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 (edited) Respectfully I must say that that's not for here but what I posted does address the question. (Hint: there's no such things as clavicle extensions) Edited July 26, 2021 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClayRock Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 I just saw this morning that Justin Chernipeski and Doug Hajicek are combining efforts for a Legend Meets Science II documentary. Supposedly there is new scientific evidence to consider. I have learned not to expect too much from these films but it's encouraging that they are making the effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted July 26, 2021 Admin Author Share Posted July 26, 2021 14 minutes ago, MonkeMan said: How would that prove it wasn't a guy in a costume? *Sigh* I think earlier you claimed I “oversimplified” what you had said. Thus far your time spent here on this subject? Is nothing but…. I highly suggest you take a step back and go read through the sub forums. You seem like a skeptic. That’s cool. Maybe some things will make you scratch your head. Maybe not. But at least you will come away a lot more informed on the subject than you are now. And just a FYI? The PGF is a subject onto itself. With geometry and measurements and ratios and archaic camera equipment numbers and on and on and on. Bill Munns does a great job of studying the film. You may find his work interesting. You may not. Good hunting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonkeMan Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 34 minutes ago, norseman said: I think earlier you claimed I “oversimplified” what you had said. Thus far your time spent here on this subject? Is nothing but…. I highly suggest you take a step back and go read through the sub forums. You seem like a skeptic. That’s cool. Maybe some things will make you scratch your head. Maybe not. But at least you will come away a lot more informed on the subject than you are now. And just a FYI? The PGF is a subject onto itself. With geometry and measurements and ratios and archaic camera equipment numbers and on and on and on. Bill Munns does a great job of studying the film. You may find his work interesting. You may not. Good hunting. Not oversimplifying anything, just asking a question. Because it very much isn't settled whether it is someone in a costume and no matter how high quality a video is (the PG film is not), you cannot extrapolate measurements without a defined reference point for which there is none in the video. I have of course read some analysis,and back and forth on the subject but I am by no means an expert on the PG film so I I will take your advice and see what some of the discussions here have to offer. 46 minutes ago, norseman said: *Sigh* LMAO did you just unironically do that? I'm so sorry I'm challenging your beliefs. It must be so difficult for you. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 24 minutes ago, MonkeMan said: LMAO did you just unironically do that? I'm so sorry I'm challenging your beliefs. It must be so difficult for you. Condescend much? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 11 minutes ago, MonkeMan said: you cannot extrapolate measurements without a defined reference point for which there is none in the video. True, but intramembral ratios CAN be determined and compared to norms. That's what they are for and are used all the time. Patty has a height to shoulder width ratio of 2.32. Average Human male is 3.87. It means IF Patty was 7' tall, her shoulder width ratio would put her shoulder span at 36 inches. Average 7' Human male? Not a body builder? 22". Ratios work as long as the same scale reference is used in all criteria whether it be inches, millimeters, feet or meters. Didn't really want to get into this but, for where the discussion is right now, it may help some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonkeMan Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 30 minutes ago, hiflier said: True, but intramembral ratios CAN be determined and compared to norms. That's what they are for and are used all the time. Patty has a height to shoulder width ratio of 2.32. Average Human male is 3.87. It means IF Patty was 7' tall, her shoulder width ratio would put her shoulder span at 36 inches. Average 7' Human male? Not a body builder? 22". Ratios work as long as the same scale reference is used in all criteria whether it be inches, millimeters, feet or meters. Didn't really want to get into this but, for where the discussion is right now, it may help some. How could you actually deduce intramembral ratios from a grainy/blurry/shaky video? Giving the benefit of the doubt though a costume would still confound those measurements. Also are you sure those figures are correct? I'm 5'9 and my shoulder width is 22". Though I was a carpenter for 2 or 3 years. 41 minutes ago, Incorrigible1 said: Condescend much? Stop. You literally called me pathetic earlier and he just "sighed" at me, was that not condescending? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiiawiwb Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, MonkeMan said: Not oversimplifying anything, just asking a question. Because it very much isn't settled whether it is someone in a costume and no matter how high quality a video is (the PG film is not), you cannot extrapolate measurements without a defined reference point for which there is none in the video. I have of course read some analysis,and back and forth on the subject but I am by no means an expert on the PG film so I I will take your advice and see what some of the discussions here have to offer. LMAO did you just unironically do that? I'm so sorry I'm challenging your beliefs. It must be so difficult for you. Since you seem to be a self-ascribed expert about extrapolating measurements, can you tell us your opinion of Gigantofootecus' photogrammetric analysis of Patty's ASH ratio? Edited July 26, 2021 by wiiawiwb 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted July 26, 2021 Share Posted July 26, 2021 12 minutes ago, MonkeMan said: Stop. You literally called me pathetic earlier and he just "sighed" at me, was that not condescending? Lol, now you're the victim here. Heh! What I referred to as pathetic was your admission of "I'm very much for ACAB, but......" 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted July 26, 2021 Admin Author Share Posted July 26, 2021 23 minutes ago, MonkeMan said: How could you actually deduce intramembral ratios from a grainy/blurry/shaky video? Giving the benefit of the doubt though a costume would still confound those measurements. Also are you sure those figures are correct? I'm 5'9 and my shoulder width is 22". Though I was a carpenter for 2 or 3 years. Stop. You literally called me pathetic earlier and he just "sighed" at me, was that not condescending? PLEASE! Go take this to the PGF thread and debate THIS! Thank you! https://bigfootforums.com/forum/27-patterson-gimlin-film/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 1 hour ago, MonkeMan said: Also are you sure those figures are correct? I'm 5'9 and my shoulder width is 22". Though I was a carpenter for 2 or 3 years. I'm 5'10" at 19.5". I said "average" 6' Human males. It means some will be more, some will be less. But think you already know what average means. As far as grainy, blurry, shaky goes, there is a stabilized version if you look around a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 6 hours ago, MonkeMan said: .......Ah, so now you're telling me to kill myself, yet no words from the Mods. Hilarious!....... My words remain posted for all to see. I asked you to asphyxiate yourself, I did not tell you to, and I even used "the magic word" in a most pleasant way. Thus you have yet again twisted words as you have done repeatedly in our exchanges. It appears obvious that I'll just have to disengage just as I've done with the mind speak group, since you are of similar mind and approach. Quote ........Counter them all you'd like, you're still wrong. Science is not this monolith of thought........ LOL.......that's pretty special right there. It's signature material. You profess that I'm wrong, then expound that science is not a monolith of thought........except, of course, for your thought that somehow black bears will "easily" scratch sasquatches to death on a consistent basis. Run along, Mr. Reddit, if that is truly where you have wandered in from......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 2 hours ago, wiiawiwb said: Since you seem to be a self-ascribed expert about extrapolating measurements, can you tell us your opinion of Gigantofootecus' photogrammetric analysis of Patty's ASH ratio? The amateur psychologist in me says that: 1) This black bear/gorilla/leopard expert has no idea what you are referring to 2) If he ever delves into Bill's and Gigantofootecus' work, he'll have already filled his mouth with his own feet and will refuse to back away from his previous words 3) And he will figure the above out rather soon, disappear, and then maybe try again under a new name some time in the future 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted July 27, 2021 Admin Share Posted July 27, 2021 Well, this thread has derailed spectacularly. I don't think it can be salvaged. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts