• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

Status
Not open for further replies.
tube said:
Deathbed!?

I'm afraid that this reminds me of UFO skeptic Phil Klass' infamous "UFO deathbed curse":

The Last Will and Testament of Philip J. Klass

To UFOlogists who publicly criticize me…or who even think unkind thoughts about me in private, I do hereby leave and bequeath THE UFO CURSE: No matter how long you live, you will never know any more about UFOs than you know today. You will never know any more about what UFOs really are, or where they come from. You will never know any more about what the U.S. Government really knows about UFOs that you know today. As you lie on your own death-bed you will be as mystified about UFOs as you are today. And you will remember this curse.
Click to expand...

William Parcher said:
Wait a cotton-pickin' moment. This is bullcrap coming from a woo. Does he think that government employees are aliens too? Is this The Invasion of the Body Snatchers all over again? We should have learned by now that government people sing like canaries. Some extreme Bigfooters are so desperate to justify its existence that they will propose internal conspiracies that involve Feds knowing about (or possessing) Bigfoot while steadfastly remaining hush about it all. Ridiculous conspiracy theorists remind us all that any old belief in Bigfoot is not necessarily a typical train of thought. There has not yet been any study of the psychometrics of those who strongly believe in Bigfoot. It might turn out that a strong belief in Bigfoot is associated with other psychological indicators.
Click to expand...

I blew it yesterday with this response. Klass is no woo, and his curse is sarcasm directed at UFO-wackos. But my point remains and is applicable to some Bigfooters. They do contend that the US Government already knows that Bigfoot exists. Huntster frequently claims that the Feds would enact cover-ups and conspiracies if a specimen were ever found.

My deathbed prediction for Lummi and myself is open-ended. It applies whether Bigfoot is confirmed by then or not. If BF is confirmed within our lifetimes, then we will both know it did, and does, exist. If it is not confirmed by the time we are fixin' to croak, then things would get more interesting. Lummi might still think that BF exists, but is simply evading (by skill or luck) confirmation for centuries/decades on end. Or, with no confirmation in his lifetime, he may then arrive at a different belief which sounds like "It seems that Bigfoot really doesn't exist after all." For me, if BF is not confirmed by my death, it would only reinforce what I had believed all along. If I were then asked to imagine that BF still does exist (but without confirmation), I would reaffirm something I have said recently... this is an animal like no other known animal, because it is thoroughly resistant to motivated confirmation as compared to animals such as the okapi, mountain gorilla, platypus, etc.
 
SweatyYeti said:
Yeah, there is a simpler explanation.....they bend. :D

Pardon me while I go laugh at you fools.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you're really a nice troll.

LTC8K6 said:
Okay, they bend. It's not an illusion. Those fingers are bending.

Now what?

(He said again...)
Click to expand...
I think it's been well established that Sweaty hasn't let the grey matter go that far. It wasn't part of his agenda.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Okay, they bend. It's not an illusion. Those fingers are bending.

Now what?

(He said again...)
Click to expand...


I think that a bigfoot proponent would argue that somehow the bending fingers mean that Patty is real (or more likely to be real than if the hand did not bend) and not a hoax, but since Sweaty refuses to let us know why he's putting so much emphasis on this that I'm beginning to wonder about the source of this obsessive finger fixation.
 
Because this provides him a way to insult people instead of contributing to any sort of productive dialogue?
 
William Parcher said:
Correa, I saw your bets, and now bet you that nobody will ever take your bets.

Belief in the existence of Bigfoot is a kind of religion. I'm compelled to think that many Bigfooters don't believe in a truly literal sense that would lend itself to material parameters or limits. They find happiness and daily affirmation by arguing that Bigfoot exists. Ironically, the proposed creature itself is only an abstract pretense for expressing their globalized personal emotions and personality. This is hardly any different than a belief in God. There is a constant attempt to reverse the burden of proof about Bigfoot. They want skeptics to prove that Patty is not a Bigfoot, or that Bigfoot does not exist at all. Make the disbelievers do all the work, while you stand on the proclamations or analysis of some officially-credentialled believer. How dare anyone say that Michael Behe doesn't know what he is talking about concerning the failure of evolutionary theory when he is a Biochemistry Professor at Lehigh University! Do you think that he holds a PhD and maintains that university position because he doesn't know what he is talking about?

Do Bigfoot skeptics really understand what is going on in the minds and motivations of Bigfoot believers?
Click to expand...
I think WP is hitting very close to home here. I think one can see the evidence of this when we look at discussions in footer communities pertaining to things such as BFRO expeditions. The near scofticism they assume in those discussions is fascinating. It's like there is that little glimmer of reality that takes root if only for a moment. It's like they deep down know that whatever the youtube clip shows or the latest BFRO field report says, it's all pretend. Then the light winks out and it's back to suspension-of-disbelief mode while perusing the latest reports, bemoaning science, the daily blissful PGF stare, and discussing the implications of BF burial practices.
 
Correa Neto said:
Because this provides him a way to insult people instead of contributing to any sort of productive dialogue?
Click to expand...
YAHTZEE!!









('he enthusiastically agrees' explains odd cultural reference interpreter.)

ETA: BTW Sweaty, you know since you refuse to discuss evidence, dodge questions directed at you, and offer the above type posts, you truly are a textbook definition troll here.
 
Last edited:
kitakaze said:
I think WP is hitting very close to home here. I think one can see the evidence of this when we look at discussions in footer communities pertaining to things such as BFRO expeditions. The near scofticism they assume in those discussions is fascinating. It's like there is that little glimmer of reality that takes root if only for a moment. It's like they deep down know that whatever the youtube clip shows or the latest BFRO field report says, it's all pretend. Then the light winks out and it's back to suspension-of-disbelief mode while perusing the latest reports, bemoaning science, the daily blissful PGF stare, and discussing the implications of BF burial practices.
Click to expand...
Have you seen the cell phone bigfoot movie?
 
kitakaze said:
Thank you for addressing the question and my apologies for not responding earlier, I had only time to make one post. My reason for wanting to know is basically as William assessed it.

I appreciate your apology, it's often hard for many to do. I treat/respect people here according to their conduct regardless of their whether they are a skeptic, proponent, believer, etc. If you come rumbling in saying people who give credence to the existence of bigfoot are idiots then I will take issue with that person, as I have done many times in the past.

Conversely, someone who bangs the 'scoftic' drum here and says many of the things you have said here will receive similar treatment from me. The simple fact is that it's been quite a while since we've had some true 'scoftics' here. Most of the people you see regularily in this thread have been discussing in great depth the minutia of the bigfoot phenomenom over hundreds of pages and have seen every angle.

Someone coming in and matter-of-factly telling people here they are being intellectually dishonest for not sharing their opinions/perceptions is nothing new. The fact is that so far you're following the same wayward path that many others have here in vain. You'll be surprised how much 'slack' people will cut you and how much they'll listen to what you have to say if you just be mindful of some very simple conduct principles. If you do continue to assert that most here are 'wannabe skeptics' then I'm sure you could understand the less than friendly tone I will take. Of course, everything I just said may seem completely arrogant to you in which case I'm sure you'll tell me about it.
Click to expand...

That post caught me a bit off guard. Thank you for accepting my apology. I guess what I'm referring to is the immature way so many seemed to behave when I first logged on a week or so ago. Though I stand beside my observations of the various behaviors I witnessed, I must admit I wasn't the wiser in some of my own provocative ways. Let's start fresh, shall we?

Hello all, Luminous here. What's on the bigfoot menu tonight?

(I gotta run to a doctor's appointment. I'll check back in later)

P.S. I don't recall ever using the term 'scoftic.' Just FYI
 
kitakaze said:
I think WP is hitting very close to home here. I think one can see the evidence of this when we look at discussions in footer communities pertaining to things such as BFRO expeditions. The near scofticism they assume in those discussions is fascinating. It's like there is that little glimmer of reality that takes root if only for a moment. It's like they deep down know that whatever the youtube clip shows or the latest BFRO field report says, it's all pretend. Then the light winks out and it's back to suspension-of-disbelief mode while perusing the latest reports, bemoaning science, the daily blissful PGF stare, and discussing the implications of BF burial practices.
Click to expand...

Much more could be said about this. When BF skeptics begin to examine the BF belief phenomenon as a larger picture, it may show strong resemblances to established religions... namely those that are based on a God. It is interesting to see the strong skepticism/scofticism applied by believers when modern video or physical evidence is being presented. Some say it looks good, while others say it looks like hoaxed crap. Many of them are likely to watch what their adopted token BF experts (Meldrum, Noll, Woolheater, etc) have to say about any new YouTube footage. Those experts seem suspiciously silent about any new video footage or found evidence (footprints, tree breaks, etc). Those "experts" may even be looking for proclamations made by other experts about this stuff before deciding upon how to express their own ideas. To me, it looks like Bigfoot is a myth, with promotion as reality, but the myth-promotion leaders can't quite all agree upon how to debunk or promote anything with broad unanimity. It reminds me of the Pope producing a statement about the lastest image of Mary in a piece of toast. Maybe God really is trying to show his presence by making pictures of the Virgin Mother in our breakfast foods. Who really knows... but the Pope is going to tell his followers how to think about all of this. Some of them are going to reject his decision, and think that cooked bread really might be a vehicle for God's communications.

But back to Bigfoot. It is interesting to me to see all of these Bigfooters who bitch and moan about skepticism and closed-mindedness, turn around and apply the same principles of skepticism to almost any new Bigfoot evidence. It's as if they forgot about this skepticism thing that they disdain. All of a sudden they start to sound like a JREF skeptic as they analyze things like morphology, behavior, incompleteness or selective filming of video footage, testmony given by filmers, indications that hoaxery is involved, etc. These are many of the same people who say that skepticism of the PGF is stupid or blind. Go figure!

Yes, I have a growing suspicion that Bigfooters don't really care if this is a real creature. Nobody can ever prove that BF does not exist and they just love to talk about proposed evidence and eyewitnesses as if they are legitimate. Do you really think that thousands of witnesses are all mistaken or lying? No way, Jose! If only one of them is accurate, then Bigfoot does exist. Run the numbers against probability theory. That animal must be real after you do your calculator crunching.

But what do numbers of witnesses have to do with the reality of an unconfirmed animal? They tell you that lots of credible people say that they have seen it. But what if many of these people are fond of Bigfoot as a modern myth, and decided to contribute their (false) story to that myth? In general, humans are too honest to ever think to do that kind of thing. But you say "in general"; what if only some of them are making up a story (lie)? You only have to look at the musculature and bulk of Patty to know that this thing is out there!
 
Luminous said:
...snip...Hello all, Luminous here. What's on the bigfoot menu tonight?

...snip...
Click to expand...

Deer, wild hogs, small rodents, clamshell, salmon, berries, leaves and roots.

Back in the 70s it seems they were not very fond of meat.

But its all based on conjectures and anedoctal data.

A specimen would be of great help to know for sure. Stomach content as well as teeth shape and wear patterns could settle down the issue. Analysis of bigfoot poop would also be helpfull. Some nice footage of their everyday activities or observations of their behavior by zoologists would also do the trick.
 
Correa Neto said:
Here you go...
http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/eastervillebf/

*must resist commenting to avoid inducing bias*
Click to expand...

Correa Neto: Thanks :)

LAL: Is this the video you are talking about? Assuming it is, what is it I am looking for? All I see is a black "blob" in a rather blocky video clip; though at the 25 sec mark there appears to be a visable seam on the right arm at the shoulder.

Also, before the 1 sec mark, "Bigfoot" is shown in 1 frame just below the waist; "it" becomes two tone. This happens again around the 29 sec mark.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Cell phone squatches' phone cameraman slips right at the beginning and right at the end and clearly reveals the blue jeans the person is wearing, imo.
Click to expand...


A common mistake that people make when taking video or still photos is placing the subject's head in the middle of the picture. Would that this photographer had made this mistake. The cameraman seems more interested in the trees about 5 ft. above the subject than in the subject itself.
 
Correa Neto said:
Deer, wild hogs, small rodents, clamshell, salmon, berries, leaves and roots.

Back in the 70s it seems they were not very fond of meat.

But its all based on conjectures and anedoctal data.

A specimen would be of great help to know for sure. Stomach content as well as teeth shape and wear patterns could settle down the issue. Analysis of bigfoot poop would also be helpfull. Some nice footage of their everyday activities or observations of their behavior by zoologists would also do the trick.
Click to expand...

Can't argue with you there! :D
 
If Patty’s bending fingers were the result of an electromechanical device, we would call it a case of Badmotorfinger…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom