Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[kitakaze]

Anybody want to take a guess as to where these ruins of a building were found....

Anybody want to take a guess why...

a) a guy who's says he's only trying to get Luminous etc, to leave puts on a new hat and makes a post that among others can't be attributed to his given reasons for coming back.

b) Sweaty just doesn't say, "I'm back but I don't do direct questions."

c) Sweaty posts a sattelite photo not of Earth, lies calling it ruins of a building, and again tries to engage in the same deflection that is so typical of him.

d) Sweaty doesn't just stop dodging.

Here's some more rudeness for you, Sweaty. You are an artless dodger, a troll, and a blight on proponents. I will continue to frustrate every hack manuever you try and every game you play. I'll continue to make a point of displaying your evasion, double standards, and trickery as long as you continue doing so. I hope one day I can come to some kind of understanding with you but I have no such expectation at present.

Here are some points I agree with you (or I think you'd agree) on:

1) That gorilla armpit outline looked like Patty's. So does the sleeve of many of my jackets.

2) Many people demand proof of sasquatches before unfurling their eyebrows at you.

3) Joyce sounded really sincere.

4) The bigfoot phenomenom is intriguing.

That said, SweatyYeti... Really, Sweaty... why can't you just stop the games and face up to the consequences of your actions?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Anybody want to take a guess as to where these ruins of a building were found....

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/ruins1a.jpg[/qimg]

Were they actually found or just photographed ?

Where are you claiming they were found ?
Then we could discuss the merits of your claim ..

It could be the butt of a mosquito, magnified a zillion times ...


We are not tossing out pictures and playing ' Guess what this is ? '

We are considering evidence based on the claims of those presenting it ..


Of course, we understand that you have an impairment when it comes to actually interpreting the significance of evidence, so we will continue to take that into consideration ...

 

[Luminous]

Luminous, at what frames of the film is the thumb movement seen? Could you post a gif or some stills that show this? If you can't at least tell me what part. I have the LMS DVD so I can check myself.

It's on an MK Davis vid a few pages back. I'll see if I cand find it. I hope it's still there...

 

[kitakaze]

Anybody want to take a guess as to where these ruins of a building were found....

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/ruins1a.jpg[/qimg]

Sweaty, I've read too much Graham Hancock to not catch your crap.

You are a liar and a pathetic troll desperately trying to score points against evil scoftics. I have rarely, if ever used the phrase 'shame on you'.

Shame on you, troll. Again, I've busted you in your silly games:

 

[kitakaze]

It's on an MK Davis vid a few pages back. I'll see if I cand find it. I hope it's still there...

Thanks. Quick question- Do you have a copy of LMS?

 

[RayG]

This is an uncatalogued creature. To use humans as the comparison source of what BFfeet should look like is misleading. Patty is not human, therefore your argument is baseless.

.
Yet Dr. Krantz was able to determine the bone structure of a squatch foot by only looking at a cast of a footprint, and Reuben Steindorf was somehow able to reverse engineer a digital skeleton from a non-skeletal source.

If it's only in one or two frames, it's an anomaly.

.
Does that work for the finger bend as well?

You need evidence to make claims like these... Where's the substance of your arguments? It's more like wishful thinking at this point.

.
That's why I've become increasingly skeptical of claims of bigfoot as the years have progressed.

30 years from now? If they don't have a body by then, or at least some footage that is clearer than the PGF, I'll become a skeptic myself.

.
That's another reason I've become increasingly skeptical. I have been following the bigfoot mystery for the past 30 years. More than 30 years. I don't see the evidence being any better right now, than it was in the mid-70's.

I see many of the same tired 40-year-old arguments why bigfoot should exist, but no substantial progression. Where is all the recent evidence? Is there some conspiracy to supress recent evidence?

I was trying to say that sarcasm won't stop a confirmation and subsequent classification of Bigfoot...I sometimes think that Bigfooters think that if they can create a convincing argument, it's just as good as the animal itself.

.
I agree on both points.

The BF threads here on JREF would be a lot more dry and boring if it weren't for the proponents acting like they do, and vice-versa.

.
Hey, carcharodon's meltdowns alone are worth the price of admission.

If you look at the history of Bigfootery you see almost nothing but large and colorful personalities.

.
As they say in the Monty Python Cheese Shop sketch, it's certainly uncontaminated by evidence.

RayG

 

[Skeptical Greg]

It's on an MK Davis vid a few pages back. I'll see if I cand find it. I hope it's still there...

Is this where you are seeing a clear thumb ? ( not necessarily this frame ) ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6Khbis2GPw

I think we need to establish a baseline for clear..

What you are calling a thumb, could be a carrot sewed onto a glove ..

 

[Luminous]

Mine's better:

[qimg]http://media1.guzer.com/pictures/funny_muscle_lady.jpg[/qimg]

Hey guys, I used the example of a female body builder with large breasts, not small breasts or implants. I watched a competition a few years back, I assure you, when these girls swung sideways, it was like their breasts were as solid as a rock.

Anyway, I'm unwise for using that example in the first place. As I already stated, we are dealing with an uncatalogued species here. The truth is, no one really knows how Patty's breasts are supposed to behave. So comparing Patty to a human is really an exercise in futility. I wish I hadn't brought up lady body builder in the first place. It only distracts from my main point.

 

[Luminous]

Is this where you are seeing a clear thumb ? ( not necessarily this frame ) ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6Khbis2GPw

I think we need to establish a baseline for clear..

What you are calling a thumb, could be a carrot sewed onto a glove ..

Yes that's the one I was looking for. Could have been a frozen hot dog too! It was a bit more blurry than I remember it. But I could see the thumb moving for sure. That's a bit tough to do if you believe that BH was wearing a glove that hung down 6 inches from his fingers.

I'm not trying to dis' you D. I have more respect for you than you know, and I understand what you believe and what you're trying to show here. I'm just not convinced that BH in a suit is the correct answer to the question of what is on the P/G film.

 

[Luminous]

Thanks. Quick question- Do you have a copy of LMS?

I shouldn't say so kit but yes, someone burned me a copy. Why?

 

[SweatyYeti]

Sweaty, I've read too much Graham Hancock to not catch your crap.

You are a liar and a pathetic troll desperately trying to score points against evil scoftics. I have rarely, if ever used the phrase 'shame on you'.

Shame on you, troll. Again, I've busted you in your silly games:

Thank you kitakaze for once again showing your disturbed side....your rudeness, disrespect, and false accusations.

You are a troubled individual.

In actual fact, troubled boy....I simply responded to your question to Lyndon, concerning the validity of using "evidence for alien civilizations" as a comparison to "evidence for Bigfoot".

Here is the exchange between you and Lyndon........

kitakaze wrote:

Originally Posted by carcharodon
There is enough evidence going back centuries to indicate there is a "degree of probability" or at the very least possibility that the creatures exist.

Like alien visitors? Can you argue that the comparison isn't apt?

I supplied a picture of what appears to be....and looks amazingly like....ruins of a square building on Mars.

I called it ruins of a building .....because it looks, in every respect, exactly like the ruins of a building.
I don't know that it actually is, but you don't know that it isn't.
Therefore, you have no legitimate reason to accuse me of lying. It looks much more like a structure than it does natural geology....so I refer to it as just that.....a structure.

I had every intention of letting people know that it's located on Mars....so, again, you have no legitimate reason to accuse me of "playing games".
I posted the picture to show that there is indeed evidence of alien civilization beyond the Earth. In addition to that square, straight-sided formation, there are plenty more formations on Mars which are similar, in that they have a very high degree of both regularity and geometric shape...which is very rare for natural formations.

The square formation in that picture is evidence of alien civilization.....just as Bigfoot sighting reports from many thousands of people are evidence of an unproven creature living in the wild.

Similarly, your continued rudeness, insults, and false accusations are evidence that you have a problem.

I said I wasn't going to hang around and discuss the evidence...but I changed my mind, and decided to post a little bit.
That, I'm sure, is some kind of a crime according to kitakaze.....but I will leave here very soon....I promise.


Edited to add:

Here's a little closer look at Mars....from one of the Rovers...

Can anyone spot the item that "doesn't belong" there?


Edited once again....to zooooooom in a bit.....because....some skeptics here have trouble seeing things... ....

 

[drapier]

I called it ruins of a building .....because it looks, in every respect, exactly like the ruins of a building.
I don't know that it actually is, but you don't know that it isn't.
Therefore, you have no legitimate reason to accuse me of lying. It looks much more like a structure than it does natural geology....so I refer to it as just that.....a structure.

The square formation in that picture is evidence of alien civilization.....just as Bigfoot sighting reports from many thousands of people are evidence of an unproven creature living in the wild.

Ah... now I understand Sweaty a whole lot more than I did before.

 

[Luminous]

Did you actually do any further research before you decided my points were without merit ?

You accuse the skeptics of dismissing things out of hand .. Pot meet kettle ..

What about how weight affects footprint depth ?

Here is something for you to look at..

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=17981&hl=weight

There are no ' clear ' pictures of fingers or thumbs in the PGF . The media simply does not support that level of detail . The detail you see is, what you choose to see. ..

The bending fingers shots are from when the camera was closest to the subject .. If we could see finger detail, it would be there..

[qimg]http://www.intergate.com/~gregorygatz/images/FingerBend.gif[/qimg]

What difference does it make what the pads ( if they are pads ) were made of ?

Why would you think there was no padding material that would jiggle in 1967 ?

It is absurd for you to continue with the assertion that what we see in this film is beyond the easily available technology of 1967 .. That is a Footer straw man that was burned long before you showed up.. We have been discussing this for almost two years ..

You would have done better to come in here a' la Beckjord and claim Patty is a shape-shifter .. For that, we have no counter argument...

I answered your every point respectfully, but I simply responded from a proponent's viewpoint because that's what I am. I honestly considered your input before I answered. No need to make it personal. Just because I reject your arguments doesn't mean I'm rejecting you. Attack the information if you want, but don't attack me. That's where I draw a line. If you're going to get upset about my answers, maybe we shouldn't dialog at all. I'm sure that neither of us has time for dramatics. So let's just agree to disagree. Okay?

 

[Luminous]

Thank you kitakaze for once again showing your disturbed side....your rudeness, disrespect, and false accusations.

You are a troubled individual.

In actual fact, troubled boy....I simply responded to your question to Lyndon, concerning the validity of using "evidence for alien civilizations" as a comparison to "evidence for Bigfoot".

Here is the exchange between you and Lyndon........

kitakaze wrote:


I supplied a picture of what appears to be....and looks amazingly like....ruins of a square building on Mars.

I called it ruins of a building .....because it looks, in every respect, exactly like the ruins of a building.
I don't know that it actually is, but you don't know that it isn't.
Therefore, you have no legitimate reason to accuse me of lying. It looks much more like a structure than it does natural geology....so I refer to it as just that.....a structure.

I had every intention of letting people know that it's located on Mars....so, again, you have no legitimate reason to accuse me of "playing games".
I posted the picture to show that there is indeed evidence of alien civilization beyond the Earth. In addition to that square, straight-sided formation, there are plenty more formations on Mars which are similar, in that they have a very high degree of both regularity and geometric shape...which is very rare for natural formations.

The square formation in that picture is evidence of alien civilization.....just as Bigfoot sighting reports from many thousands of people are evidence of an unproven creature living in the wild.

Similarly, your continued rudeness, insults, and false accusations are evidence that you have a problem.

I said I wasn't going to hang around and discuss the evidence...but I changed my mind, and decided to post a little bit.
That, I'm sure, is some kind of a crime according to kitakaze.....but I will leave here very soon....I promise.


Edited to add:

Here's a little closer look at Mars....from one of the Rovers...

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/mars12.jpg[/qimg]

Can anyone spot the item that "doesn't belong" there?

Oh it's on Mars

 

[SweatyYeti]

Luminous wrote:

It's a picture of the surface of Mars, taken by one of the Rovers.

I have no idea what the anomalous object is....but there's some type of long, flat object, with a slot in one end of it, which in no way resembles a rock.
There's also a nice close-up of a "rock" with a perfectly square hole in the middle of it....an extremely unusual thing to find in a rock.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Luminous wrote:


It's a picture of the surface of Mars, taken by one of the Rovers.

I have no idea what the anomalous object is....but there's some type of long, flat object, with a slot in one end of it, which in no way resembles a rock.
There's also a nice close-up of a "rock" with a perfectly square hole in the middle of it....an extremely unusual thing to find in a rock.

How soon can we expect a connection between this and the PGF ?

 

[Luminous]

Sweaty check your PMs

 

[drapier]

Can anyone spot the item that "doesn't belong" there?

I love this game!!!!!!!!



O.K. so here's what I see:
1. At the top of the picture is a petrified sea serpent.
2. Toward the middle is an alien head with a blow whole in the forehead.
3. Next to it is a baby petrified sea serpent.
4. Just to the right of that is a melted alien head.
5. Just under that is a partially buried alien head.
6. Furthest to the right is a parrot-beaked alien head.

Evidence for alien civilization? Hell, I can see the damned aliens for myself.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

In addition to that square, straight-sided formation, there are plenty more formations on Mars which are similar, in that they have a very high degree of both regularity and geometric shape...which is very rare for natural formations. .....

And you must be more stupid than we could ever imagine...

Did it occur to you at all, to bone up on a little geology, before trying to wow us with your latest area of inexpertise ?

 

[Teresa.Hall]

Hey guys, I used the example of a female body builder with large breasts, not small breasts or implants. I watched a competition a few years back, I assure you, when these girls swung sideways, it was like their breasts were as solid as a rock.

Please provide a link to female body builders with large breasts that are natural not implants. I've never seen it. ALL of the female body builders I've ever seen with large breasts had implants. The rest are flat chested like men with little breast tissue because breast tissue is adipose tissue and it diminishes with weight loss. Body builders have very low degrees of body fat. I know this is off topic, but I'd honestly like to see what you're talking about.