Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 5

So the gist of his argument is that a costume can't alter proportions (such as shoulder width) of the person inside?


picture.php


picture.php


picture.php


picture.php
 
He's saying that Patty's shoulders measure 30" across and that a costume couldn't result in that. I'd say first that a costume can result in that measurement and secondly that his measurement may not be accurate. How would he make that measurement?

Here is Janos Prohaska in an ape costume.
 

Attachments

  • prohaska.jpg
    prohaska.jpg
    79.5 KB · Views: 3
Most bigfooters seem to use the PFA formula for their measurements.

That's Pulled From Ass for the laypersons.
 
HarryHenderson said:
International Bigfoot Conference Films™? There's more than a bit of understated stupidity in thinking a film about Bob Gimlin would be interesting to anyone. Between the day of filming and now, what has he done that deserves a film? Worked as a ditch digger for DeAtley? Sounds more like this Acord guy just has a thick head. The actual interesting guy died a long time ago. :eye-poppi
Click to expand...


You know, a movie based on Roger Patterson would be something. It could be informative, entertaining and freakin' hilarious. You could even keep the whole PGF thing ambiguous as to the truth and it could still be done well. I'm thinking similar to "Alien Autopsy", but with Roger and Bigfoot.
 
Last edited:
captain koolaid said:
You know, a movie based on Roger Patterson would be something. It could be informative, entertaining and freakin' hilarious. You could even keep the whole PGF thing ambiguous as to the truth and it could still be done well. I'm thinking similar to "Alien Autopsy", but with Roger and Bigfoot.
Click to expand...
Now if only we knew of a powerful out of work Hollywood producer who really needed some fresh...umm, know of one? Me neither. :p
 
William Parcher said:
He's saying that Patty's shoulders measure 30" across and that a costume couldn't result in that. I'd say first that a costume can result in that measurement and secondly that his measurement may not be accurate. How would he make that measurement?
Click to expand...

That's one of the biggest problems with all bigfoot believer analysis; they rarely if ever show how they arrive at their conclusions. They don't "show their work". Hiflier doesn't show his work either, and yet tosses out numbers as if people are supposed to accept them at face value. He also just tosses out an arbitrary height which he believes is about right. Based on what? It's fantasy, and the analyses are also fantasy. Other believers cheer him on and welcome him into the elite club of full believers. He's passed his initiation, while it may be a bit different test that he's passed, he's still welcomed in as one of the fully indoctrinated. How sweet.
 
Just thought I'd toss this out since not a lot is really going on. Just a simple test of big feet to see whether there was any truth to the claim that people just can't possibly walk in big costume feet without falling down, and that even if they could walk a bit, they'd never be able to turn their head without falling down. I don't know if bigfoot believers are freaking drunks or what, but walking without falling down has never been a problem for me or anyone I know, even with giant feet on.
 

Attachments

  • Snapseed.jpg
    Snapseed.jpg
    91.3 KB · Views: 9
Oh yeah? Well try doing that in sand with a cowboy pointing a loaded rifle at you.

And I bet you are scared to do it with a full furry suit because you can't make one that looks like a Bigfoot which is what Patty is.
 
Tontar said:
That's one of the biggest problems with all bigfoot believer analysis; they rarely if ever show how they arrive at their conclusions. They don't "show their work". Hiflier doesn't show his work either, and yet tosses out numbers as if people are supposed to accept them at face value. He also just tosses out an arbitrary height which he believes is about right. Based on what? It's fantasy, and the analyses are also fantasy. Other believers cheer him on and welcome him into the elite club of full believers. He's passed his initiation, while it may be a bit different test that he's passed, he's still welcomed in as one of the fully indoctrinated. How sweet.
Click to expand...

That hiflier thread cracks me up. A great example of proponents "researching" based on eye balling blurry pictures and making up numbers to fit their predetermined conclusions. And then they call it fancy names like science and research.

What I find the most entertaining is that he is kind of peeing in Munns corn flakes. He strides into the pgf section of the bff and proclaims he has proven Patty real based on his cursory and clumsy amateur nonsense. At least Bill has spent countless hours trying to make his "research" appear like some great work. Not hiflier, he just puts his thumb to his computer screen and says, "yep, I have proven Patty real". I wonder how that goes over with Bill?
 
William Parcher said:
He's saying that Patty's shoulders measure 30" across and that a costume couldn't result in that. I'd say first that a costume can result in that measurement and secondly that his measurement may not be accurate. How would he make that measurement?

Here is Janos Prohaska in an ape costume.
Click to expand...


Basically he is going with "ratios" of shoulder width to height. Without any actual numbers, this just means "those are wide shoulders, man!". Impressive work. Bombshell stuff. To get an "actual" number (30 inches), he starts with a height as made up by Krantz and/or Munns etc... 74 inches or something. Voila... a 74 inch tall Patty must have a 30 inch shoulder width. As Tontar pointed out, the made up shoulder number is (vaguely) derived from another made up number, height. Or, as it will be known in scientific circles... "Pattyheight". Which is a term I made up, because I'm a scientific Bigfoot guy and stuff. "Pattyheight" refers to any random height estimate, derived from guessing. It's my gift to science from the wonderful world of Bigfootery. You're welcome.
 
Last edited:
I haven't had the spare time to delve too deeply into the endless PGF threads, but surely someone has taken the reported size of the tracks at the PGF site, scaled that to the foot seen clearly in the video, and approximated height based on that, right?

Because even if the tracks at the site weren't actually made by the man in the suit, at least if you were a bigfooter pretending they were, it would be a reasonable way to estimate height. Instead of just making something up, I mean.
 
Pterodactyl said:
I haven't had the spare time to delve too deeply into the endless PGF threads, but surely someone has taken the reported size of the tracks at the PGF site, scaled that to the foot seen clearly in the video, and approximated height based on that, right?

Because even if the tracks at the site weren't actually made by the man in the suit, at least if you were a bigfooter pretending they were, it would be a reasonable way to estimate height. Instead of just making something up, I mean.
Click to expand...

Yes, that sort of thing has been attempted.


480774d80047c4629f.jpg
 
Presumably footers don’t like the outcome then? Too close to Heironomous height for comfort?
 
Pterodactyl said:
Presumably footers don’t like the outcome then? Too close to Heironomous height for comfort?
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. There's a range of opinions about the height and some Bigfooters think the height is right near Heironimus size.

I think in general more emphasis is placed on other features besides the height. The walk isn't human. The calf lift isn't human. The physique isn't human. The limb ratio isn't human. No suit could look like that. Etc.
 
So, basically any time it comes down to quantifying something, it's best to avoid it and focus on the gestalt.
 
dmaker said:
That hiflier thread cracks me up. A great example of proponents "researching" based on eye balling blurry pictures and making up numbers to fit their predetermined conclusions. And then they call it fancy names like science and research.

What I find the most entertaining is that he is kind of peeing in Munns corn flakes. He strides into the pgf section of the bff and proclaims he has proven Patty real based on his cursory and clumsy amateur nonsense. At least Bill has spent countless hours trying to make his "research" appear like some great work. Not hiflier, he just puts his thumb to his computer screen and says, "yep, I have proven Patty real". I wonder how that goes over with Bill?
Click to expand...

He's also a big Ketchum (DVM) defender, steadfastly believing she actually uncovered footie DNA. So I guess he'll believe just about anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom