Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

[Melissa]

Yes, I do. Unless I misunderstand, it seems that the logic is not quite correct. That by your methods so far, that you have not produced dessication ridges does not show that they don't happen or did not happen in those casts.

This is exactly why I have tried very hard to seperate my current work from Tubes.

The artifacts Tube discusses were created using Volcanic Ash (Pumice), is that not correct?

Is there any Volcanic Ash or Pumice in the soil of Onion Mountain?

If there is no Volcanic Ash or Pumice present in the soil of Onion Mountain, why would you use these substrates to either prove or disprove what can or can not happen in this soil?

Yes, tube did show it is possible to create these "artifacts", that no one can deny and your right, your foolish to do so. He worked hard to prove that. But, he did not prove it can or will happen in the soil from Onion Mountain. His 1 test in this soil proves that.

I do think the Onion Mountain Cast deserves a much closer look, as I have proven dermal ridges and flexion creases are not only possible but absolutely do happen. Now, are these the dermals of an unknown primate? I have no idea. But, to say this cast should be dismissed based on work done in substrates other than the actual soil from this area is just not correct.

Being skeptical doesnt mean you throw out the ability to be objective.

My work continues

 

[desertyeti]

Yikes.
This has turned septic.


Here's the "normal person" to "Bigfooter" translation of a couple of phrases that keep popping up:

Normal: "The evidence submitted so far isn't conclusive, and much of it is either a forgery or a misidentification."
BF'er hears: "Bigfoot can't exist! IT JUST CAN'T! I'm scared of your compelling evidence! It utterly destroys all my preconcieved world-views!!!! I turn my back on you."

Normal: "I dunno, I guess I'd believe it if there was some good evidence."
BF'er hears: "IT SIMPLY CAN'T BE, IT CAN'T!! I retire now to my palace of gold on a tower of ivory and mock and deride you and your hard-won wisdom about this magestic man-ape! FOOL!"

O.k.
Back to it.

 

[J. Arthur Hastur]

Well, technically bigfoot can't exist. The habitat (Pacific Northwest) simply does not have sufficient amounts of high protein foods in the habitat to support a large mammal.

Now, I know the Bigfooters are going to say 'Not true, there are bears, deer and caribou.' Yes there are, but we have a BUT for each of them.

Bears hibernate. While summer and fall in the Pacific Northwest have an abundance of high caloric natural food stuffs about, in winter and spring there is not enough to sustain even small bears, which is why bears hibernate.

Deer and Caribou both migrate to avoid the same dearth of food that bears hibernate to escape.

We then simply have to look at a large, bipedal primate (bigfoot) and extrapolate that primates neither hibernate nor do they migrate. No primate has ever shown the ability( the exception being early and modern man) to migrate, and most primates will not stray from their home ranges, often even starving to death rather than traveling from familiar territory to forage, which is why habitat loss is so critical for chimps and great apes..

In conclusion bigfoot would need to exhibit some form of survival tactic completely unknown and unrecorded in all of primate history until the advent of early man.

 

[LAL]

So LAL, where were we? Oh yes...'it has not escaped my attention that you suggested at the BFF that Meldrum has addressed my sig which we have already established here that he has not.

Explain please? This is what I said:

"In fact, Dr. Meldrum talks about finding another cast from the trackway in his collection with similar features, only fainter, evidently because of dust settling from passing vehicles.

I've mentioned this several times, on both boards, with the page number.

Greg seems to have completely neglected to mention I'm the one who suggested the poster e-mail Dr. Meldrum about this. He's more apt to get a reply since I've bothered Jeff enough for one semester with my questions.

I'm hoping he'll send clear pictures. There isn't picture of the second cast (CA-19, I believe) in the book.

Tube has posted pictures of this cast, if it's the same one, but not of the critical ball area, which was what Jimmy Chilcutt was discussing on WCS 2003. That cast is CA-20, apparently."

In reply to this: "We only have a handful of examples of dermals and I'm doubting there are two examples from the same trackway (but don't quote me, Meldrum would know, not me)."

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2315449


This may be the only case where two casts from the same trackway have what appear to be dermatoglyphics. Remember, Jimmy Chilcutt said ridges alone aren't enough. The characteristics have to be there too. There are (or were) more casts from the event in BC. Perhaps those should be checked out.

Thanks to Greg for (indirectly) drawing my attention to that. More on that later.'

And thanks to me for suggesting it.

Let's see...LAL's post on the BFF:Edited. And the edit is interesting given LAL's #1139 post in this thread:

I edit for spelling errors, typos, spacing, and for brevity. In that case I think I just rephrased the part about bugging Jeff because it was too lengthy.

Don't make too much of an edit. There's usually a very mundane reason.

I saw no reason to bring up anything he said about the other list. I don't think he's posting on any message boards currently.

Funny that on the JREF you say you think he won't reply because in mentioning you I've reminded him of his opinion on the JREF

I said I thought mentioning me might have queered it. He may not even have read that far.

In fact, I thought he might be more apt to reply if there was an inquiry about the availability and price of casts. By saying you were inquiring for me, he might have remembered my recent inquiries and thought there was something going on. If he'd wanted to jump in on the discussion, I think he would have done it by now.

though it was centrally addressed in my e-mail yet on the BFF you state that he's more apt to reply to me than you since you've apparently bugged him enough.

Not exactly.

I thought about e-mailing him myself, however, I e-mailed him twice recently, got a reply with answers the first time, replied to him with more specific questions and a link to a page and didn't get a reply that time. From that I suspect he doesn't have time or interest in more correspondence. (He has a full teaching schedule.) I got two e-mails from him a couple of years ago after my first e-mail didn't get an answer on another matter, but that seems to be about the limit.

He must get a lot of e-mail, especially now that the book is out and he's just appeared on national television.

I thought e-mail from Tokyo might get his attention, but I'd have mentioned ordering his book, asked the questions, inquired about the casts and stopped.

 

[William Parcher]

Ah, found the clip. It's from the National Geographic special.

http://www.hmds.ws/Pics/BHinterview.wmv

Not only did he say Roger was mounted, he was supposedly holding the camera aloft.

Lu, Bob doesn't state that Patterson remained on his horse for the whole filming (which is what you are trying to imply). It is quite obvious that Roger was on the ground during what we see. As I already said, Heironimus may recall Roger filming from horseback because he did. That part could have been edited out and BH is telling us what actually happened.

BH also recalls another event not in the film... Patterson & Gimlin helped him put on the Patty suit before the filming.

 

[LAL]

Well, technically bigfoot can't exist. The habitat (Pacific Northwest) simply does not have sufficient amounts of high protein foods in the habitat to support a large mammal.

Oh, no deer, elk, rodents, fish, grouse, salamanders, newts, frogs, carpenter ants, grubs...............?

Now, I know the Bigfooters are going to say 'Not true, there are bears, deer and caribou.' Yes there are, but we have a BUT for each of them.

We only need to look at bears.

Bears hibernate. While summer and fall in the Pacific Northwest have an abundance of high caloric natural food stuffs about, in winter and spring there is not enough to sustain even small bears, which is why bears hibernate.

Where food is abundant and the weather warm, bears do not hibernate. Contrary to popular belief, bears do not remain comatose all winter even where they do hibernate.

Wolverines cache food.

In winter and spring in the PNW there are poison oak berries, seeds in cones, hibernating rodents, deer, elk, grouse, geese, fish, green club moss, inner bark of trees..................

Deer

Where I lived, some deer migrated to the state park during hunting season. They're not stupid. Other than that, they were around all year. So were the elk.

and Caribou both migrate to avoid the same dearth of food that bears hibernate to escape.

We then simply have to look at a large, bipedal primate (bigfoot) and extrapolate that primates neither hibernate nor do they migrate.

Titmus found seasonal migration with a group he was tracking in California. Scat he found in winter contained pine needles. Pines store sugar in the needles. A friend of mine who went "siwash" on cross country skiing trips relied on pine needle soup at timberline. Club moss is reportedly very nutritious and it grows on everything on the west slope of the cascades.

No primate has ever shown the ability( the exception being early and modern man) to migrate, and most primates will not stray from their home ranges, often even starving to death rather than traveling from familiar territory to forage, which is why habitat loss is so critical for chimps and great apes.

Then how did primates manage to spread all over the globe in the Eocene if none ever left their home ranges?

We're dealing with an unidentified bipedal hominid primate. They may have some unidentified hominid strategies.

That not-enough-food argument was used by a primatologist back in the late '60's or early '70's when he decided there wasn't enough food around Toba Inlet to sustain them. He based his conclusions on what tropical apes eat.

In conclusion bigfoot would need to exhibit some form of survival tactic completely unknown and unrecorded in all of primate history until the advent of early man.

Such as moving to lower elevations in winter? Utilizing seasonal food resources? Huh?

A 20-22 million year old primate tooth was found in the John Day fossil bed. There are a number of primate fossils from South America. What have we here? Piltdown monkeys?

 

[LAL]

Lu, Bob doesn't state that Patterson remained on his horse for the whole filming (which is what you are trying to imply). It is quite obvious that Roger was on the ground during what we see. As I already said, Heironimus may recall Roger filming from horseback because he did. That part could have been edited out and BH is telling us what actually happened.

BH also recalls another event not in the film... Patterson & Gimlin helped him put on the Patty suit before the filming.

This is only a clip. I don't know what else he said, but he was talking about the beginning of the film. RogerKni was trying to get a transcript. He's caught BH in so many contradictions it would seem Bob should have had a script to keep his stories straight.

He recalled a Morris suit after Morris showed up. Before that it was made by the "Planet of the Apes guy". But Roger skinned a "dead, red horse" to make the suit.

Still looking for the clip of the walk. Nothing yet, but I found this:

"Heironimus wouldn't demonstrate "the exaggerated Bigfoot walk" because talks are under way to make his story and Greg Long's book into a TV special, one in which Heironimus' walk would be scientifically compared to the "ape walk" in the film – for which he, of course, wants money."

http://www.ktvb.com/news/regional/stories/NW_050304EMbigfoot.1884c5333.html

Regarding one "witness", check this out, then see the next post in that thread:

Early on last night’s X-Zone radio show (11/30/06), Korff told host Rob McConnell that he had Trammel on film and would like to have him speak on the sequel-show that X-Zone has planned. He added, at the close of the show, 90 minutes later, “What’s going to happen [to Gimlin’s credibility] when the man who was his and Heironimus’s supervisor appears and says he knows it’s a hoax?”

Trammel was interviewed in Long’s book on pages 418-19. (He was mis-named “Mike” therein; Mike is actually the name of his son. (Also, his company’s name was misspelled as “Noel” Corp.•it’s actually Noell.))

On Feb. 28, 2006 I contacted him and learned that he’s now retired and (I calculated) in his mid-to-late-70’s. (That makes him about 10-15 years older than Heironimus.) He said that:

• Gimlin had worked under him for many years. (I took that to mean over a decade.)
• He had been Heironimus’s boss for 18 years.
• He had socialized extensively with Heironimus and his family. (Les Lenington added the additional detail that the two of them often went out into the woods hunting together.)
• He had babysat for some of the children (names unspecified) of Heironimus’s mom Opal.

I read him the paragraph above from the Fortean Times article and asked him how he knew the film was a hoax. He delightedly burst out, “Because Bob’s mama showed me the suit and told me, ‘That’s the suit Bob wore in the Bigfoot movie’!” He naively imagined that this validated Heironimus’s tale. I suspect he hadn’t read Long’s book, or had only skimmed it. According to the version there, Heironimus’s mom couldn’t have been at the grocery store or known the suit’s purpose, because she:

• Had the suit in her trunk for only the one day of Heironimus’s return (p. 351);
• Hadn’t left her house that day: “Thoroughly confused and wanting nothing to do with the suit, Opal abandoned her trip to the grocery store, leaving the keys in either the trunk or the ignition” (p. 351);
• Didn’t learn of its purpose for several weeks (p. 364-66).
• “Afterwards, the Bigfoot suit was removed from the car, and she never saw it again.” (Korff’s review.)

The wording she used implied that Patterson’s “Bigfoot movie” was something everyone was aware of. So her suit display most likely occurred at a time when Patterson’s Bigfoot movie was in the news, perhaps when it was being shown in Yakima, which was over a year later. Nobody would have known what she meant by “Bigfoot movie” the day after Heironimus’s return, because that supposedly occurred a week or two before news of Patterson’s filming appeared in the press.

I went back and forth over his story with Trammel to be sure I had it right, and the following details emerged:

• There were several others present when this showing occurred from the trunk of her car, in the parking lot of the grocery store in Wiley City. (Which was next door to the Idle Hour tavern.)
• “I don’t remember if Bob was there too.”
• He’d asked Gimlin if the film was a hoax, and he’d denied it.

I immediately called Jane Gargas, a reporter with the Yakima Herald who had covered earlier Heironimus-related stories, and urged her to contact Trammel at once (8 PM), before he realized he’d spilled the beans. Unfortunately, she was occupied on another story and said she’d have to put it off. When she called the next day, Trammel said within the first minute that he was busy and couldn’t speak. She called twice more that day, each time after a decent interval, and twice more he begged off, pleading business. (He’s retired, so it wasn’t business that was competing for his attention.) I suspect was stalling for time or was hoping she’d give up and go away, because he realized or suspected that he’d “dropped a brick.”

The day after that, Gargas wore him down. He confirmed to her what he’d told me. But he made more of a point to her than to me of the fogginess of his memory. And he couldn’t remember some details he’d told me when she asked him about them, such as that he’d been in the grocery store where Heironimus’s mom had approached him and invited him out to see the suit. I think he was trying to perform damage control by making his account less detailed and less clearly remembered. To me, this attempt to edge away from what he’d said at first, presumably because of its social awkwardness, validates it. The truth is often awkward.

However, he did add one detail: He told Gargas he never told Gimlin about seeing the costume because “Gimlin wouldn’t have responded well.”

After hearing from Gargas, I called Trammel back, at which point he again claimed not remember details perfectly (“It was so long ago”). When I asked him if he had talked to anyone about this matter since I’d called him, he said “No,” and added, “I don’t even want to talk about it.” But he’d bubbled over with enthusiasm in telling the tale repeatedly in our first talk. Again, this newfound reticence added to my sense that he’d had second thoughts and suspected he was upsetting Heironimus’s applecart. This seeming desire to take back what he’d said reminded me of Warehime’s behavior."

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=4395&st=450&p=356748&#entry356748

 

[LAL]

Back to it.

Do you play bridge?

 

[J. Arthur Hastur]

Oh, no deer, elk, rodents, fish, grouse, salamanders, newts, frogs, carpenter ants, grubs...............?



We only need to look at bears.



Where food is abundant and the weather warm, bears do not hibernate. Contrary to popular belief, bears do not remain comatose all winter even where they do hibernate.

Wolverines cache food.

In winter and spring in the PNW there are poison oak berries, seeds in cones, hibernating rodents, deer, elk, grouse, geese, fish, green club moss, inner bark of trees..................



Where I lived, some deer migrated to the state park during hunting season. They're not stupid. Other than that, they were around all year. So were the elk.



Titmus found seasonal migration with a group he was tracking in California. Scat he found in winter contained pine needles. Pines store sugar in the needles. A friend of mine who went "siwash" on cross country skiing trips relied on pine needle soup at timberline. Club moss is reportedly very nutritious and it grows on everything on the west slope of the cascades.




Then how did primates manage to spread all over the globe in the Eocene if none ever left their home ranges?

We're dealing with an unidentified bipedal hominid primate. They may have some unidentified hominid strategies.

That not-enough-food argument was used by a primatologist back in the late '60's or early '70's when he decided there wasn't enough food around Toba Inlet to sustain them. He based his conclusions on what tropical apes eat.



Such as moving to lower elevations in winter? Utilizing seasonal food resources? Huh?

A 20-22 million year old primate tooth was found in the John Day fossil bed. There are a number of primate fossils from South America. What have we here? Piltdown monkeys?

So, you're suggesting an ape that is a hunter then, eating elk, rodents and fish? Like with Bigfoot, prove it.

We need only look at bears that live in Bigfoot's supposed habitat, they all, without exception, hibernate.

Primates did not simply just spread out from Africa. For instance in South American primates there are distantly related to African primates, through lower types of mammals but evolved independently. Same thing with Orangutans.

Now, I was assuming that the primate we are talking about would be an Asian ancestor that crossed the Bering land bridge as surmised by most Bigfoot proponents, however if you are suggesting that Bigfoot evolved separately from South American primates, you need to now explain the dearth of primate fossils in North America.

Even sedentary species can be distributed worldwide, through no fault of their own as continents and land masses shift.

Last weekend on Discovery Channels 'Best Evidence' they tackled Bigfoot and the biomass argument is still the biggest argument against Bigfoot. PS they also proved that a man in an ape suit could walk exactly like the person in the ape suit in the Patterson-Gimlin film.

Your arguments are misinformed at best.There is no way a primate larger than a bear could survive on pine needle soup. If your friend had tried that diet all winter, he would have died as well.

 

[LAL]

Sorry, not going to let that one slip through. Your etymology is correct, but that's about all.

I was married to a "full-mooner". I was able to date his episodes and noticed the major ones had all occured within three days of full moon, with lesser ones around new moon. When I mentioned this at a meeting, one of the members said it's well known epileptics have more seizures around full moon, why didn't I try the Epilepsy Center? To make a very long story short, the neurologist there prescribed Tegretol and lithium concomitantly (sometimes they synergize each other) and told me, " You'll know soon. New moon is on the sixteenth."

I know the study showing the correlations was shot down on statistical grounds years ago, but while I was watching a special on the study, during full moon, my ex went on one of the worst he'd ever had. That's what got me checking the almanac.

Whether the slight extra gravitational pull could have an effect on a damaged brain or whether it was just coincidence, I'll never know, but the medication, once it took hold, kept him stable for long periods of time - until it didn't work anymore.

Some of my friends in recovery had had similar experiences with things "getting out there" when the moon was full. It wasn't just him.

I found a reference to a 17th century anti-epilepsy medicine while reading up on Korsakoff's syndrome that was to be taken "at time of full moon". I wonder if that would have worked.................

 

[William Parcher]

Not at all. I thought you all had given up on BH because the evidence is "tainted". Thus spake Diogenes.

Again, you know that I think BH was Patty. Why play these games?

I've tried. I couldn't. The story is archived, but truncated.

Oh well. Heironimus walks just like Patty.

I think that's Gimlin's opinion, more or less. Don't forget profit motive.

There isn't a whole lot of people who would pay to hear the guy in the Patty suit say that he was the guy in the Patty suit. Debunking of Bigfoot evidence is as tough to market as belief in Bigfoot. The whole thing (vocal belief & vocal skepticism) is a strange subculture. See my signature. Most people aren't going to care about Bigfoot until it is shown not to be a myth.

His word gainst Gimlin's, right? How many different suits were there again?

It seems that there was one Patty suit used in the PGF.

Gimlin had every reason to "out" Patterson. Patterson screwed him. But he never has.

Gimlin got in deep alongside Patterson. Both lied to the world. If Gimlin ever did "out" Patterson, he would also be outing himself. It's probably not cool for your life if you tell the whole world that you had been actively lying to them. Heironimus confessed to being the guy in the suit. In doing so, he had no choice other than to implicate P&G. The hoax was Patterson's idea, and Heironimus was asked to play the part of Bigfoot.

What took Heironimous so long?

I don't know. Was he sick of hearing about the PGF believers? Maybe after almost 40 years of no Bigfoot confirmation - he sought to let people know the truth about the most celebrated piece of BF evidence.

The IM index can't be confirmed unless someone finds her intact bones, but the measurements can be taken on the standing frames with a fair degree of accuracy. The digital analysis was very close to Meldrum's, and it was done independently.

What would be the IM index of a dude in a Bigfoot costume? Could it ever turn out to be "inhuman"?

Even better is the one in costume, and no, he doesn't walk like Patty.

Bullcrap. Bob Heironimus walks like Patty.

Walking on concrete and grass might be a little different than walking across a sandbar and over debris with a helmet head and one eye, don't you think?

Sure it would be different. But BH only had to maintain his "everyday Bigfoot walking style" through the filming. As it is, Patty doesn't use the exact same striding throughout the footage.

Have you read Long? Check the "Eureka!" moment on the glass eye.

I'll probably end up buying Long's book. The reviews (from PGF believers & skeptics) have been poor. I guess Greg Long is a pretty crummy writer. I've read tons of excerpts, interviews with Long, reviews, etc. Lots of that stuff is on BFF.

The glass eye thing is weird. We know that BH does have a glass eye. Because it is such a specific claim (and one that should be significant to BH because he had to pull the glass eye out of his right socket), I'm inclined to entertain it as being a true claim. I can't base that on any physical evidence (other than knowing Bob did have a glass eye) that we can see in the PGF, so I can't determine if his claim on the glass eye is true or false.

Or the kid who said it stank?

Was it Bob's nephew who said the Patty suit stunk?

He allegedly was going around in a suit scaring people in the Yakima area. If there was a suit at all, it could have been that suit. But why doesn't he know where it is?

The nephew was scaring people with the suit? It is logical to think that if the suit "went away somewhere else", then its whereabouts would be presently unknown. That does make sense doesn't it?

Eyewitness testimony is okay for sceptics if it supports their POV, I take it.

Nice to see that you can be skeptical of eyewitness testimonials. People said they saw the suit in the possession of Heironimus. They could be lying or mistaken (I suppose). If we are only left with the film itself to evaluate; I see folds and revealing bulges in the costume - you see a real Bigfoot. Oh well.

Long has a story about Roger renting a suit for three days from LA. He was making a documentary, had been collecting accounts for years, and a suit would be necessary for a reenactment. Nothing too unusual there.

There is nothing unusual about Roger Patterson renting a "Bigfoot costume" while making his documentary?

But Long has Heironimus saying Roger skinned out a dead red horse to make a suit and Morris selling him one, so that's about four suits so far, isn't it?

Maybe Roger lied to BH about making it from a red horse skin. He may have used some hide(s) in the creation of the suit. When you suggest that four suits were used to make the PGF, you are posing a sarcasm. I see that.

The missing footage was shots of scenery and horseback riding.

You cannot have any idea what footage may be missing besides that.

 

[SweatyYeti]

William Parcher wrote:

If we are only left with the film itself to evaluate; I see folds and revealing bulges in the costume - you see a real Bigfoot. Oh well.

I see a subject with a seriously compromised forehead....part of it is missing.

If you have a minute, William....can you explain to me how Bob H. managed to make Patty's fingers wiggle...when his arms are clearly too short for his fingers to be Patty's fingers??

 

[SweatyYeti]

William Parcher wrote:

...he (Bob H.) sought to let people know the truth about the most celebrated piece of BF evidence.

All 3 versions of it, too! Good ol' Bob...he's SO generous!

 

[LAL]

So, you're suggesting an ape that is a hunter then, eating elk, rodents and fish? Like with Bigfoot, prove it.

Chimpanzees hunt.

We need only look at bears that live in Bigfoot's supposed habitat, they all, without exception, hibernate.

You're leaving out Georgia and Alabama, I take it.

Primates did not simply just spread out from Africa.

Right. Eosimias lived in Asia. Primates may have evolved in Asia and spread to Africa.

For instance in South American primates there are distantly related to African primates, through lower types of mammals but evolved independently. Same thing with Orangutans.

Try Thailand for them:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/01/0128_040128_orangutanjaw_2.html

Now, I was assuming that the primate we are talking about would be an Asian ancestor that crossed the Bering land bridge as surmised by most Bigfoot proponents, however if you are suggesting that Bigfoot evolved separately from South American primates, you need to now explain the dearth of primate fossils in North America.

I'm in the Gigantopithecus camp.

Earilier primates were worldwide. The Eocene was the Planet of The Apes.

The dearth of primate fossils anywhere has to do with the environment in which they live. (See endless arguments with Correa on this point.)

Even sedentary species can be distributed worldwide, through no fault of their own as continents and land masses shift.

And groups can exploit new territory when populations grow.

Last weekend on Discovery Channels 'Best Evidence' they tackled Bigfoot and the biomass argument is still the biggest argument against Bigfoot. PS they also proved that a man in an ape suit could walk exactly like the person in the ape suit in the Patterson-Gimlin film.

Exactly? I doubt it. Did they analyse it? I'm told the suit was a bust.

I've been following the discussion on BFF. From one of the sceptical academics :

"I concur that it's boulderdash (sp?) to suggest that there's no bigfoot because there is not ample food for such a creature. Musk oxen, moose, bison, caribou: All of these species within the reported size range of sasquatches get by on meager forage, and in habitats with more severe winter conditions and lower quality foods. Certainly an animal in this size range, occurring at low densities, most likely including a significant proportion of animal protein in its diet, and possessing unusual intelligence and manual dexterity could obtain sufficient calories from its environment.

More interesting, to me at least, are the implications of food availability for reported sasquatch behaviors. I am especially fascinated by accounts of sasquatch foraging and feeding behavior. Whether hunting for marmots at high elevations, digging mussels from riverbeds, or chowing down on osage oranges, these accounts offer insights into the life history of an alleged creature that open the door for its plausibility.

That's why I think a more informed skeptic's position of "It could be, but I don't think so" is much more valuable than the dismissive "It can't be". The latter just shows the supposed expert's ignorance. It wouldn't have taken much preparation on their expert's part to a) consider some cases of bigfoot feeding accounts and b) the known of existence of big mammals in more nutrient poor environments than the PNW."

http://www.ktvb.com/news/regional/stories/NW_050304EMbigfoot.1884c5333.html

See also what Hairy Man (the archeologist) had to say.

Your arguments are misinformed at best.There is no way a primate larger than a bear could survive on pine needle soup.

I didn't say they did. No use of fire noted so far; how would they even make it? But pine needles, with their high sugar content could be an important, easily obtainable winter food source, along with other dietary items such as balsam berries and winterkill.

If your friend had tried that diet all winter, he would have died as well.

Did I say that's all he ate? That was just at timberline when there wasn't anything else.

There's plenty of meat in winter.

How did all those known hominid primates survive from Beringia to Tierra Del Fuego before the coming of McDonalds? Homo georgicusshowed very early bipedal primates didn't need a sophisticated toolkit for "Out of Africa".

The Indians of Tierra Del Fuego, BTW, reportedly slept naked on the frozen ground. They evidently didn't even need hairy breasts to survive.

 

[LAL]

Again, you know that I think BH was Patty. Why play these games?

No, I didn't. How long had it been since we debated this? Why didn't you correct Diogenes and tell him you still believe the "tainted" evidence and that he didn't speak for you?

Oh well. Heironimus walks just like Patty.

Except for the rotating knees. That's Australopithecine.

There isn't a whole lot of people who would pay to hear the guy in the Patty suit say that he was the guy in the Patty suit.

He didn't get paid for appearing on National Geographic?

Debunking of Bigfoot evidence is as tough to market as belief in Bigfoot. The whole thing (vocal belief & vocal skepticism) is a strange subculture. See my signature. Most people aren't going to care about Bigfoot until it is shown not to be a myth.

In my experience, most people don't know anything about it and could care less.

It seems that there was one Patty suit used in the PGF.

Would that be the one Morris made, the one Chambers made, the one Patterson made, or the one Patterson rented?

Gimlin got in deep alongside Patterson. Both lied to the world. If Gimlin ever did "out" Patterson, he would also be outing himself. It's probably not cool for your life if you tell the whole world that you had been actively lying to them. Heironimus confessed to being the guy in the suit. In doing so, he had no choice other than to implicate P&G. The hoax was Patterson's idea, and Heironimus was asked to play the part of Bigfoot.

You have evidence for this or are you being as creative as Dfoot was?

I don't know. Was he sick of hearing about the PGF believers? Maybe after almost 40 years of no Bigfoot confirmation - he sought to let people know the truth about the most celebrated piece of BF evidence.

You might want to read what he said about it.

What would be the IM index of a dude in a Bigfoot costume? Could it ever turn out to be "inhuman"?

"Species Intermembral Index Humerofemoral Index Brachial Index Crural Index
Human (male) 69.7 71.4 77.9 82.4
Human (female) 68.5 69.8 77.0 81.3
Chimpanzee (male) 108.0 101.1 91.9 79.8
Chimpanzee (female) 109.4 102 92.4 80.4
Pygmy chimpanzee (male & female) 102.2 98.0 91.9 82.6"

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=5239

Good discussion there, BTW.

Bullcrap. Bob Heironimus walks like Patty.

So did Groucho Marx. Must've been him.

Sure it would be different. But BH only had to maintain his "everyday Bigfoot walking style" through the filming. As it is, Patty doesn't use the exact same striding throughout the footage.

She used a compliant gait. Later she ran.

I'll probably end up buying Long's book. The reviews (from PGF believers & skeptics) have been poor. I guess Greg Long is a pretty crummy writer. I've read tons of excerpts, interviews with Long, reviews, etc. Lots of that stuff is on BFF.

It's rather well written. Seems his book on UFOs is good. I haven't read it.

The glass eye thing is weird. We know that BH does have a glass eye. Because it is such a specific claim (and one that should be significant to BH because he had to pull the glass eye out of his right socket), I'm inclined to entertain it as being a true claim. I can't base that on any physical evidence (other than knowing Bob did have a glass eye) that we can see in the PGF, so I can't determine if his claim on the glass eye is true or false.

Maybe we should go to a PGF thread on this before kitakaze has a fit. Your choice.

Was it Bob's nephew who said the Patty suit stunk?

Not sure. I'll look it up.

The nephew was scaring people with the suit?

He was? Bob was. This was while it was in the trunk.

It is logical to think that if the suit "went away somewhere else", then its whereabouts would be presently unknown. That does make sense doesn't it?

Unless there wasn't one. Morris didn't have records, either.

Nice to see that you can be skeptical of eyewitness testimonials. People said they saw the suit in the possession of Heironimus. They could be lying or mistaken (I suppose). If we are only left with the film itself to evaluate; I see folds and revealing bulges in the costume - you see a real Bigfoot. Oh well.

RogerKni took the trouble to follow up. Witnesses tended to waver.

There is nothing unusual about Roger Patterson renting a "Bigfoot costume" while making his documentary?

Nope. Cheaper than buying. No reason he wouldn't have reenactments. That's how it was done in those days. The Mysterious Monsters was full of reenactments in suits.

Maybe Roger lied to BH about making it from a red horse skin. He may have used some hide(s) in the creation of the suit. When you suggest that four suits were used to make the PGF, you are posing a sarcasm. I see that.

I've read there've been six descriptions. For sure, there are two in the book:

"And Long has fitted blinders on himself so closely that he can see nothing wrong with his two key witnesses describing, with many specific details, two totally different suits--a three-piece suit made of raw horsehide and a six-piece suit made of cloth. Philip Morris' story was apparently a
last-minute addition after the book was finished. It would have been to Long's credit that he chose to add material so damaging to the case he was trying to make, except that he apparently thought he was making the case stronger."

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/reviews/long.htm

You cannot have any idea what footage may be missing besides that.

Well, here's an outake we usually don't get to see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr4dTXGSsSs

It doesn't seem to be very missing.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Whether the slight extra gravitational pull ( during a full moon ) could have an effect on a damaged brain or whether it was just coincidence, I'll never know, but the medication, once it took hold, kept him stable for long periods of time - until it didn't work anymore.

 

[LTC8K6]

When BH is inconsistent, it's a big problem for his story....

When RP/BG/etc. are inconsistent, it's normal that they wouldn't remember everything that well for their story.....

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/davis_animation.htm

Same video that M.K. Davis tried to B.S. us about a long time ago.

 

[LTC8K6]

The shadows in the footpront don't seem to correspond to Patty's shadow, although I admit it's hard to make heads or tails out of much in that video.

 

[desertyeti]

So...for those that missed the first go-round, and for those who want to try it again:

1 through 5.
Which is (are) real?
Which is (are) forgeries?







PM is you want the answer, or else, I'll post results in a couple of days as per last time.
Good luck to all who care to weigh in.