Jump to content

The Argosy Stills


Recommended Posts

Guest Kerchak

From the footnote it looks like 1974. (68. Bernard Heuvelmans to GSK, September 13, 1974, folder 0340, box 7, NAA. ). The ISC was founded in 1982. Is there a source other than Bayanov on Heuvelmans' attitude on the PGF?

1974? Hmmmm interesting.

I have heard elsewhere about Heuvelmans' opinion on the PGF, not just from Bayanov (which itself came from a Cryptozoology 1988, Volume 7). I can't be precisely sure where though. I've had various books that deal with unexplained phenomena/crytozoology in general with sections devoted to sasquatch (such as Readers Digest and Time Line etc)so I don't remember exactly where I read it. In the past I also used to buy the occasional magazine such as Fortean Times when it had a sasquatch article, so I could have read about Heuvelmans' opinions anywhere really.

Anyway, on checking Grover Krantz Bigfoot Sasquatch Evidence he writes on page 93:

""Bernard Heuvelmans, the pre-eminent authority on unverified animals, is quite sure the film was faked""

Then later on in the book in the 'Addendum:An Update to late 1998' section he writes more on the subject of Heuvelmans' dismissal of the PGF.

Page 301 Grover Krantz writes:

""On page 93 it was mentioned that Bernard Heuvelmans, the founder of cryptozoology, declared unequivocally that the film was a fake........His subsequent communications with me indicate no change of opinion""

Krantz then goes on to detail exactly what Heuvelmans said in the following pages.

This is why I was most surprised with your earlier post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish Brian Regal had provided more information - like the whole document. If it was private correspondence is it possible Krantz just forgot about it? Did Heuvemans change his mind more than once? I'd like to know where this box resides.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent scans of those images, Lu... ;) Thanks for posting them! :)

The main picture in the Argosy article is Frame 353....not F352.

So, you know what that called for....putting that Frame together with Frame 352.....to see what 'moves'...

Frame352Frame353AG4.gif

Patty's left wrist bends....exactly where it should be bending.

And the contour of the lower-back/top of the butt appears to change, also.

And....last but not least....maybe a little movement of the mouth.

Probably just my imagination, but "Patty" seems to break out in a Eddie Foy smile. (Pardon the very, very obscure reference.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Frame352Frame353AG4.gif

Are these the frames where the eye(s) supposedly blink?

Looks like she's wearing a ski mask. Maybe Partterson & Gimlin caught her right after she knocked over the Bluff Creek 7/11...

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Sweaty - whould it be possible to add F351 before and F354 after these two?

I would love to see this movement over a bit more time by seeing those 4 frames looped.

Here you go, Harry.....2 more frames added...

Copy8Frame351-Frame354AG1.gif

Check out the 'bulge' on her thigh....it changes shape through those frames, and it appears to be located on the edge of her quadracep...(as seen in the last Frame).

Another interesting little detail is how, in the last frame, Patty's head tilts backwards, slightly...apparently due to her right leg extending a little further than she was expecting.

Her foot then hits the ground hard, and a ripple runs up and down her thigh.

It could be that the spot of ground her right foot landed on was just slightly lower than where she was expecting it to be.

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kerchak

I wish Brian Regal had provided more information - like the whole document. If it was private correspondence is it possible Krantz just forgot about it?

Possibly it was just over-ridden by the rest of Krantz correspondence with Heuvelmans over the following years where he showed no signs of thinking the PGF was anything other than a fake.

As I said, I always had a hunch that Patty's 'celebrity status' (in comparison to the MIM) might have been a root cause. Nobody wants something else stealing the thunder of their 'discovery'.

*Edited to fix typo.

Edited by Kerchak
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that would be something Dr. Krantz didn't see.

Who said they did?

I came across a purported eye blink video during a multitude of Google/YT searches. I recently attempted to locate it, but to no avail. Perhaps someone has a link?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go, Harry.....2 more frames added...

Copy8Frame351-Frame354AG1.gif

Check out the 'bulge' on her thigh....it changes shape through those frames, and it appears to be located on the edge of her quadracep...(as seen in the last Frame).

Another interesting little detail is how, in the last frame, Patty's head tilts backwards, slightly...apparently due to her right leg extending a little further than she was expecting.

Her foot then hits the ground hard, and a ripple runs up and down her thigh.

It could be that the spot of ground her right foot landed on was just slightly lower than where she was expecting it to be.

Sweaty - thank you very much - great job. I am going to have to examine this one for a while. Possibly the most detail revealing sequence of the PG film ever put together.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly it was just over-ridden by the rest of Krantz correspondence with Heuvelmans over the following years where he showed no signs of thinking the PGF was anything other than a fake.

As I said, I always had a hunch that Patty's 'celebrity status' (in comparison to the MIM) might have been a root cause. Nobody wants something else stealing the thunder of their 'discovery'.

*Edited to fix typo.

I'd forgotten (or else never read) that Sanderson denounced the film after his initial enthusiastic reception. The reasons the two men gave weren't unlike those given by scientists in New York. I need to read more on this.

I'll bet those ICS meetings were interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest parnassus

Looks like she's wearing a ski mask. Maybe Partterson & Gimlin caught her right after she knocked over the Bluff Creek 7/11...

An apt description, Sur, it does look like a ski mask.

Edited by parnassus
Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

Sweaty - thank you very much - great job. I am going to have to examine this one for a while. Possibly the most detail revealing sequence of the PG film ever put together.

Thanks, Harry....and, you're welcome! :) I think it shows movement on Patty's thigh that cannot be accounted for by padding....of any type.

I'll elaborate on that, later today...ot tonight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SweatyYeti

An apt description, Sur, it does look like a ski mask.

The deluxe model.....HHeadBrowMovementAG15.gif

Edited by SweatyYeti
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • gigantor unlocked this topic
×
×
  • Create New...