Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[historian]

Patty is too tall to be a man.
A man in a suit could look too tall.

Patty's arms are too long to be a man's.
A suit could make the arms appear that way.

Patty is too bulky to be a man.
A suit could make a man look that bulky.

Patty's head is too big to be a man's.
A suit's head could appear to be too big.

Patty's arm proportions are wrong for a man.
A suit can cause that appearance.

Patty walks strangely for a man.
The walk has been successfully demonstrated in a bulky suit.

Patty's legs are too massive to be a man's.
A suit often includes leg padding.

Patty's fingers bend.
This is no problem for a man in a suit.

Patty's feet are too big.
Big suit feet are old hat.

Patty's feet sink too far into the soil to be a man.
I haven't seen any evidence of this, but such prints are easily made by men.

Patty has no neck.
A suit can cause this appearance.

Patty's foot prints were 14.5" long.
Were they?

LTC8K6 is living in denial of inter-dimensional people that are native to this planet.
The excuse of a suit, if it had ever been produced or accurately described by any of the claimed hoaxers, would do that to him. Except it has never been produced nor accurately described by any of the claimed hoaxers. Just look at Greg Long's book and Dfoot's critique as described above. Dfoot blows the whistle on all claimed hoaxers. So the NSA/skeptic/denial crowd has to start all over at square one and hire a new claimed hoaxer. One that is a real good liar. Of which there are many practiced liars in this world so they shouldn't have a problem in finding one. Except they haven't come up with one yet.

 

[historian]

Patty is, by default, a man in a suit, until someone shows otherwise.

Your Attention Please,
LTC8K6, has designated himself as supreme being, head honcho, he who is charge of the truth and grand exalted ruler. When he speaks, we shall all drop to our knees and kiss the ground until he has ceased endowing us with his wit and wisdom. Then we shall obey his every command. His every utterance. His every delusion.

LTC8K6 for all we know, is a teenager posting from the basement of his parents house, with no job, no car, no GED, and no future whatsoever except with the agencies who sew seeds of doubt on the internet in regard to Bigfoot. Yet he thinks that in spite of all that, he gets to decide the law, and decide the truth.

nuff said

 

[SweatyYeti]

Historian wrote:

nuff said

And said.....OH SO WELL!!

Nice piece of writing, Historian.

 

[SweatyYeti]

devnull wrote:

Show us extraordinary evidence to back your claim,

...and then....strangely....wrote...

So again Sweaty, what is your claim....?

I take it that this is you, devnull...

So....what claim of mine are you refering to??

 

[devnull]

nice bit of weaving there sweaty.

You obviously have a problem with the notion that the footage is of a man in a suit. It is the most obvious conclusion, in as much as a man in a suit does not require proof of the supernatural. It is the most reasonable, logical explanation. It is an explanation that requires nothing beyond our everyday faculties.

Given that you appear to have a problem with this position, what is your claim, and where is your evidence?

 

[devnull]

LTC8K6 for all we know, is a teenager posting from the basement of his parents house, with no job, no car, no GED, and no future whatsoever

And yet he still obviously has a higher level of rationality that yourself?

I think there's something in that for you, if you look hard enough.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Right, except for the bolded part.

What difference does putting the word "IS" in capital letters make, as far as it's meaning goes? Does it change the meaning?

And everyone but you knows that I meant that is the default position.

It's not "THE" default position, LTC.....it's your default position.
It's nothing more than a claim that you have made.

Here is YOUR claim again...

Patty IS a man in a suit, until shown otherwise.

Do you know that Patty is a man in a suit?


LTC8K6 wrote:

And everyone but you knows that I meant that is the default position. Well, you know it, but you like to play.

Again, LTC....you knew you misrepresented my previous statements TWICE.
I asked you a while ago, and I ask you again....

Why have you TWICE misrepresented what I've said?

Answer the question, LTC...if you have the backbone to do it.

LTC wrote:

I said this too but you didn't quote it:

Patty is, by default, a man in a suit, until someone shows otherwise.

My response to that was....and still IS....

Until you, or someone else, proves that Patty IS a human....it's not known that Patty is a human...by anyone....because to know something like that, you need proof of it.

If that statement is false.....then explain how you know that Patty is indeed a human....and how you arrived at that conclusion....without proof.

Do you know that Patty is a man in a suit, LTC?
If so...how do you know that, without having PROOF, which can be demonstrated to the general public?

 

[SweatyYeti]

devnull wrote:

It is the most obvious conclusion, in as much as a man in a suit does not require proof of the supernatural.

Why does "Bigfoot", as an explanation, require anything "supernatural"?


Also, I asked you earlier....

So....what claim of mine are you refering to??

Can you answer that simple question...or are you as much of a coward as LTC is?

 

[devnull]

duck, weave, duck, weave

You appear to be claiming that Patty is not a hoax, that is, is not a man in a bad suit.

Correct me if Im wrong.

 

[SweatyYeti]

duck, weave, duck, weave

You appear to be claiming that Patty is not a hoax, that is, is not a man in a bad suit.

Correct me if Im wrong.

Stupid....dumb....Stupid....dumb...


Why don't you go back and figure out exactly what I have claimed, devnull....BEFORE you make statements like this...

Show us extraordinary evidence to back your claim,

Gee, it's like shooting "skeptics in a barrel". It's just too easy!

 

[drapier]

The only claims Sweaty will stand behind are "If the fingers bend, you must pretend" and, maybe, his undying faith in Joyce.

He just likes to rile up the skeptics.

 

[GT/CS]

I should have guessed that the 10000th post would have been another request by GT to get an answer on the wrist line.

Sad, isn't it.

And he continues to ignore the question. I understand why he does though. It must be devastating to face the reality that his beloved Patty is a fake.

I'll probably get the 20,000th post with the same question.

 

[LibraryLady]

Please remember to be civil and attack the argument. This applies to all posters, which is why I'm posting this in a separate reply.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LibraryLady

 

[Correa Neto]

On cheese, the Moon and Patty...

Ever heard about a guy interested in the cheese Moon that bought and modified a cheesy moon suit to play a prank on someone? A guy who decided to make a documentary about the cheese Moon and then came out with a film showing a Moon made of cheese? A film that was never replicated but seemed to show a guy in a modified cheese Moon costume?

No? Neither do I.

Ever heard about a guy interested in bigfeet that bought and modified a gorilla suit to play a prank on someone? A guy who decided to make a documentary about bigfoot and then came out with a film showing a bigfoot? A film that was never replicated but seemed to show a guy in a modified gorilla costume?

Yes? Do did I.

Now, all features pointed by PGF defenders either can be replicated by suits that existed back in the 60's, are most likely film artifacts coupled with pareidolia or are just subjective statements/evaluations/claims. Add to this the fact that there's not a singe piece of reliable evidence backing the claim "bigfeet are real".

As a result, rational persons are left with little if any options other than considering PGF a fraud. Unless, of course, the individuals bounded by emotional or finantial ties with it. And they need that small piece of hope that lie at the "you can't prove its a hoax" line. Sadly, its all they have.

 

[manofthesea]

Yes? Do did I.

Now, all features pointed by PGF defenders either can be replicated by suits that existed back in the 60's, are most likely film artifacts coupled with pareidolia or are just subjective statements/evaluations/claims. Add to this the fact that there's not a singe piece of reliable evidence backing the claim "bigfeet are real".

As a result, rational persons are left with little if any options other than considering PGF a fraud. Unless, of course, the individuals bounded by emotional or finantial ties with it. And they need that small piece of hope that lie at the "you can't prove its a hoax" line. Sadly, its all they have.

Does no one else tire of a skipping record, with cheesy costumes?

By the way, there's a costume expert now at BFF. Bill Munn or something.
I'm sure his points will be well taken there. He's even offered himself for questions, so unless you're ashamed, I'll be in the peanut gallery to observe all the informative questions and answers presented.

 

[devnull]

Stupid....dumb....Stupid....dumb...


Why don't you go back and figure out exactly what I have claimed, devnull....BEFORE you make statements like this...




Gee, it's like shooting "skeptics in a barrel". It's just too easy!

Well, for a start, I dont really feel like combing through pages of nonsense.

But Ill take your reply as 'I agree Patty is a hoax, nothing more than a guy in a suit' and leave it at that.

 

[GT/CS]

He's even offered himself for questions, so unless you're ashamed, I'll be in the peanut gallery to observe all the informative questions and answers presented.

What does that mean? Unless who's ashamed? Of what?

Want to give that another try?

 

[manofthesea]

Certainly

What does that mean? Unless who's ashamed? Of what?

Want to give that another try?

The JREF bigfooters, of course. In particular, Correa Neto, Kitakaze, LtC8k6, William Parcher, Diogenes. And Dfoot, too. Basically the guys who have some knowledge on bigfootery.

The shame would be to present ridiculous arguments to this guy.
I'm sure that you must have some questions for him. What is your screen name at BFF? You can ignore this request if you feel ashamed.

 

[erikbeckjord]

I'm coming from a search for the truth....pure and simple. I'm not into the "inter-dimensional Bigfoot" BS.

As for Correa's images of Barney and other costumes....I'm asking him to demonstrate his point.
Demonstrating a point goes beyond simply stating a point.

He took a step towards that, in his reply to me.....but he still hasn't shown exactly why what he's proposing should be believed to be correct.

In his reply, (post#9383) he wrote:




He STATES what the outcome will be, if done properly. But since this is his proposal, or analysis, it's up to him to do the measurements, and up to him to show the results of his measurements....to demonstrate his point.

Is there something wrong with that??

On my part, I know that there are people inside those suits, so as far as I'm concerned, I'm quite sure that a properly-sized, and proportioned, human outline could be drawn inside those suits. It's simply logical.

reply:

How can you say that the interdimensional bigfoot is not the truth?

How can you know?

You cannot limit the truth to what you would like.

Monstro

 

[erikbeckjord]

Also, drop all this suit nonsense.

No MAN can duplicate the DEPTH of the trax and the weight required.

This thread may now end.