Spektator
Is that right?
Liquid latex has a strong ammoniac smell, a lot like a neglected cat litter box. It can linger even after the latex dries. I don't know if that's what was referred to, but it's one possibility.
Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film
- Thread starter Skeptical Greg
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bigfoot film patterson gimlin
- Status
Liquid latex has a strong ammoniac smell, a lot like a neglected cat litter box. It can linger even after the latex dries. I don't know if that's what was referred to, but it's one possibility.
Correa Neto
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2003
- Messages
- 8,548
Look, historian thinks evasion is a successful debate tactic!
You just can't, Neal, you just can't show us the math required to back your claim. You don't even know what's a dimension is, exactly like the vast majority of the woos. And if you think LMS is a scientific study, its because you have no idea what a scientific work actually is.
You can't play "my game", Neal. You can't play it because reliable evidence and/or sound reasonings are required to play it. So far, you produced nothing but empty absurd claims.
Get a real job? That was funny, coming from someone whose grasp on reality is so weak... You mean, "real" like the position Hawkins had at Berkeley? Or Carter's speech on bigfoot? Or the circuits at DVDs? Or like four-legged interdimensional little people, wood gnomes, orbs and interdimensional invisible aquatic bigfeet? Or the voices inside your head? Or the jobs we have at NSA?
SweatyYeti
Master Poster
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,919
Diogenes wrote:
Of course, you knew I meant "intelligent adults...some skeptics...".
You're just playing another one of your childish games, Greg.
Another example.....
You wrote:
Of course, you don't really think Barney is as realistic looking as Patty. You iz just playing your stoopid games. It's what you do best, Greg!
Again, folks......it's very easy to say that Patty looks unrealistic....but the fact remains that there are many intelligent people who simply cannot decide whether Patty is a human...or a real Bigfoot. And, not only that...there are people who've said, on Bigfoot forums, that the more they watch the film, the more they think it's the real deal. Myself included.
As I said...
As for "Gorillas In The Mist"...I remember when the movie came out, and they talked, on tv, about how some of the gorillas were guys-in-suits, and how hard it was to tell them from the real gorillas....but when I saw the movie, I could tell when I was seeing the fakes. It wasn't hard to see a distinct difference.
Of course, you knew I meant "intelligent adults...some skeptics...".
You're just playing another one of your childish games, Greg.
Another example.....
You wrote:
Of course, you don't really think Barney is as realistic looking as Patty. You iz just playing your stoopid games. It's what you do best, Greg!
Again, folks......it's very easy to say that Patty looks unrealistic....but the fact remains that there are many intelligent people who simply cannot decide whether Patty is a human...or a real Bigfoot. And, not only that...there are people who've said, on Bigfoot forums, that the more they watch the film, the more they think it's the real deal. Myself included.
As I said...
As for "Gorillas In The Mist"...I remember when the movie came out, and they talked, on tv, about how some of the gorillas were guys-in-suits, and how hard it was to tell them from the real gorillas....but when I saw the movie, I could tell when I was seeing the fakes. It wasn't hard to see a distinct difference.
Last edited:
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
More people who don't find bigfoot:
Operation Noble Mustang
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/22/AR2007122200235.html?tid=informbox
Operation Noble Mustang
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/22/AR2007122200235.html?tid=informbox
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 27,472
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Wrong again..
I think Patty is as realistic looking as Barney..
There really is a difference, but I doubt you understand it ..
I don't understand why you or anyone thinks Patty looks ' good ' or real ..
She looks like she is the victim of a bad haircut and about to come apart, at those seams that are so obvious ..
I understand why you have to call me stupid; it makes you feel superior while you have that nagging feeling in the back of your mind that you have been had by Patterson ..
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
So intelligent people can't be duped? I wonder if the fact that many intelligent people think the PGF subject looks ridiculous (many bigfoot believers included) will allow him to admit that the realism he speaks of is subjective. I highly doubt it. Sweaty's pride and desire to play adversarial games with skeptics would make him loathe to do that.
Will Sweaty ever stop running from requests to define what makes the PGF subject realistic? Will Sweaty ever stop running from an explanation of why my 'no' answer regarding the legs of PGF subject and the BBC image (which we now know thanks to DFOOT that it was not a recreation attempt) is so wrong?
No, I don't believe he will. I think Sweaty is well aware he screwed himself and if he answers those questions he will only screw himself more. Meanwhile the rest of us are clearly aware of this and simply chuckle and shake our heads at the desperate footer who is clutching onto the PGF and dares not admit any weakness in the proposal of the film being a genuine sasquatch.
LAL should be a sport and come back and give her friend a hand. Since Sweaty's too reluctant to provide an explanation let's ask LAL what makes the PGF so realistic.
SweatyYeti
Master Poster
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,919
Not only do I understand the difference, Greg.....I knew exactly that that was what you meant.
That was the reason for my following statement (in bold letters).
To recap.....I wrote:
The fact remains, Greg.......no comparable films, videos, or photos anywhere near as convincing, or as ambiguous as what's on the PG film.
All the others are instantly recognizable as a man-in-a-(shaggy) suit.
I didn't call you stupid, Greg....I called the games that you play stupid.
I think you're plenty smart enough to see the difference in the realism between Patty and Barney...And I also think that you are...far and away...the best at playing games in your postings.
Your comment about 7-year olds is a perfect example of your game-playing. You knew that I was refering to adults. Your comment was completely irrelevant to the MEANING of my statements....but that didn't matter to you. You just play your little "technicality" word games, anyway.
You are plenty smart, Greg.....smart enough to know how to play word games, and evasive games. It's a shame you don't have more of an interest in searching for the truth.
Have a WONDERFUL Christmas, my screwed-up-in-the-head friend!!
Last edited:
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Those are awesome. 'Migration'... beautiful title.
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Convincing to who? Hey buddy, forty years and that's the best you got!?Oops. Sweaty scrambles for the edit button. Mirror, mirror...RayG
Master Poster
That's the biggest reason I find this mystery so frustrating. But then I've only been following it for a little more than three decades, I'm sure something worthwhile will show up eventually. I hear Pine Ridge is showing some promise....
RayG
Dfoot
Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2006
- Messages
- 164
Doesn't seem to matter that the group making these monster suits in 1966 made them exactly the way we see Patty is made. The same patterns are followed - especially those worn by one JANOS PROHASKA.
Doesn't matter that you can clearly see the line opening in the neck area. Doesn't matter that the thigh pad outline is brutally obvious to all who look at the film. Instead, we get detailed insights into a "thigh injury" that looks incredibly like the typical bubble one sees occurring in creature suits of the day when the skin wrinkles during motion.
Nope... all it takes is the belief that it's real and the willingness to make excuses to fit the bill. You can even see the knee cap structure that Janos used on every gorilla, monster or bear suit he had. It's the same technique.
By NOT looking for creature suit evidence and instead already accepting the attempt to form a scapula out of pads as "muscle masses moving" we fall for it hook, line and sinker. All the hoaxer has to say is, "Gosh, I could never make anything that realistic looking" and the con is complete. All cons need are some smart and willing participants to make it undeniably real. Unfortunately, it's only undeniable IF you refuse to research the evidence with an open mind.
Then again... as Rene Dahinden said in the early 50's, "We expect to have a body or contact of some kind within weeks or possibly a year."
Or as he said shortly before he died, "I looked for the thing for over 40 years and never saw a sign of it. Maybe that should tell us something."
But it won't.... hoaxers exist INSIDE the Bigfoot research community itself. They keep it going. Who knows what lies around the bend in the coming year?
I plan on meeting up with a guy who obtained some of the 1960's suits from the guys who built Patty at some point. I'll let you know next year if I find out anything.
Merry Xmas
manofthesea
2wu4u
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2007
- Messages
- 1,668
Are those mapinguaries?
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
The fact remains Sweaty, for most people, Patty is instantly recognizable as a man-in-a-(shaggy) suit.....All the others are instantly recognizable as a man-in-a-(shaggy) suit.
It's the logical conclusion.
Merry Christmas ... I hope Santa brings your dearest wishes ... ( .... really .. )
Last edited:
SweatyYeti
Master Poster
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,919
Diogenes wrote:
But not ALL people.
That's the key word. You've finally written a meaningful post, Greg!
Even if thousands of people look at it, and think that it's a M-I-A-Suit....the fact still remains.....as stated before......
"NO other comparable video, or even photo, of a supposed Bigfoot, or a man in a Gorilla suit has been able to cause people to wonder whether or not it's a real creature, or a man-in-a-suit......for years on end."
Is this a false statement??
Note:
This includes Dfoot's suit....which, if it's ever seen in motion, will in all probability fail to equal the realism of Patty.
(Feel free to prove me wrong, Dfoot!)
But not ALL people.
That's the key word. You've finally written a meaningful post, Greg!
Even if thousands of people look at it, and think that it's a M-I-A-Suit....the fact still remains.....as stated before......
"NO other comparable video, or even photo, of a supposed Bigfoot, or a man in a Gorilla suit has been able to cause people to wonder whether or not it's a real creature, or a man-in-a-suit......for years on end."
Is this a false statement??
Note:
This includes Dfoot's suit....which, if it's ever seen in motion, will in all probability fail to equal the realism of Patty.
(Feel free to prove me wrong, Dfoot!)
Dfoot
Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2006
- Messages
- 164
In truth, that is A FALSE STATEMENT you made there Sweaty.
I can show you many suits that are far more realistic when it comes to showing "muscle masses moving" - and they don't have hair or blur to hide anything.
The walk you see me doing in the pics is just me IN MOTION wearing a tee-shirt with foam padding glued to it. The legs are spandex with foam pads glued to them and a plastic knee pad. The feet I molded to imitate the PG flick photos out of latex.
So... that's just an experiment and I am in motion walking much like Bob H. walks in the Patty suit. It works. Paint on latex and hair and you have a decent Bigfoot suit.
Here's me while I was putting it together. No arms or feet or even a Butt Pad yet; I'm just checking to see how easy it will be to move in. This is also IN MOTION (unless you think I can levitate).
You are right in that any attempt to recreate Patty is bound to fail IN MOTION. I think I proved that when I showed how people reacted TO PATTY HERSELF when they thought she was a recreation.
Remember that Patty is fairly stiff in the chest area (as described by Heironimus and confirmed by checking the suits of the day). If anyone thinks Bob H. looks like he's carrying a back pack in the PG film they'd be close to imagining what it's like.
Also remember that it's just that kind of comment that caused some guys in Washington to hoax a ton of Bigfoot prints back in the 70's. Anyone can do it. Mid-tarsal break... dermal ridges... out in the middle of nowhere for long distances... you name it and someone will do it.
Keep watching the ground!
Last edited:
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Well, what you truly experienced (and I must add the conditional of 'if anything') I can't really say. But you're a bright individual and I think you can understand given this being a skeptic's forum that the story you tell leaves us with more questions than answers.
Let me ask you this, bf2006 - if there are giant, dirty-white bigfoots* running around in front of houses in un-wooded, populated areas in Mississippi, can you really think it plausible that such an incredible species could have escaped classification? I mean think about. Ma and Pa are sitting at the table. "Honey-bun, would you listen to this? Says here in the paper scientists have found a giant rat five times the normal size in Indonesia." "Yes, fascinating, dear. Oh, for Pete's sake! Get the cowbell, would you? That blasted giant, white zoobie is on the lawn again. Do you see? Do you see what that hairy pecker is doing to my geraniums!?"
*I'm getting the feeling that you think white bigfoots are probably not so common.
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Oh, c'mon already. It's called a hoax. What are you going to do, keep the incriminating evidence? Use it again and tell people lightning struck twice?
Is being such a creduloid really that fun? What am I thinking? Of course it is. You get to go to work with the wonders of Martian civilizations, Joyce, the MDF, and Patty on your mind.
Heironimus is in the film, Patterson made fake tracks, dressed up Gimlin like Running Bear, drew a hairy-canned bigfoot in his book the year before, Gimlin's never taken a lie detector test and refuses to do so...
Really, how much do you need? You go ahead and wonder if the ridiculous diaper butt and rock-hard, too low, hairy cans are real. The rest of us need not burden ourselves with such affronts to common sense.
BTW, lots of very bright people wonder whether or not astrology is real. That doesn't make it any more credible.
Citing Meldrum as a proponent of the PGF doesn't lend to it's credibility. He's got confirmation bias all over.
Swindler? "My god, it's gigantopithecus!" ROTFLMAO
Last edited:
- Status