Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[Correa Neto]

Wrong, dear old fool.

That was basic robotics. Animatronics was first used with the dinorsaur exhibit that toured the US museums in the 80's and 90's.

Unfortunately for you, you are wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animatronics

Audio-Animatronics were originally a creation of Lee Adams, who started his career with Disney as an electrician at the Burbank studio and was one of Disney's original Imagineers. The first Disney Audio-Animatronic was the giant squid in the movie 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, which was created by Adams, based on a book of the same title by Jules Verne. It had pumps connected to the tentacles. When a pump was activated, air filled the tentacles, making them go up. When air left the tentacles, they coiled up.

The term "Audio-Animatronics" was first used commercially by Disney in 1961, was filed as a trademark in 1964, and was registered in 1967.

Perhaps the most impressive of the early Audio-Animatronics efforts was The Enchanted Tiki Room, which opened in 1963 at Disneyland, where a room full of tropical creatures synchronize eye and facial action with a musical score entirely by electromechanical means. The "cast" of the musical revue used tones recorded on tape which vibrated a metal reed that closed a circuit to trigger a relay which sent a pulse of electricity to a mechanism that causes a pneumatic valve to move a part of the figure's body.

The movements of the attraction's birds, flowers and tiki idols were triggered by sound, hence the audio prefix. Figures' movements had a neutral "natural resting position" that the limb/part would return to when there was no electric pulse. The animation was all on/off moves, such as an open/closed eye or beak. On/off movement was called a digital system.

Other early examples were the Lincoln Exhibit presented at the State of Illinois Pavilion at the 1964 New York World's Fair. Also at the fair were three other pavilions featuring Audio-Animatronics. They were Pepsi/UNICEF's "it's a small world", General Electric's Carousel of Progress, and Ford's Magic Skyway.

 

[manofthesea]

In response to Imua. PICK UP THE PACE!


m

What are YOU talking about?

(Your tricycle motto is fitting) One day you'll advance to training wheels. But then again, no.

I bet you don't even know what the UW mascot is. I bet. Not nickname, mascot.

 

[manofthesea]

Unfortunately for you, you are wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animatronics

This is a bunch of bunk. Wikipedia is for children. Show me the patent that says animatronics 1967.

 

[manofthesea]

Stick to São Paulo? Sorry, but I don't even live there.
.

Reclusive then. Too much humanity, it seems. The boonies are okay for some types of people.

 

[Correa Neto]

...snip...The main problem I have is with his sculpt of Giganto and it's association with bigfoot (not necessarily by him), how the hell could that thing turn into patty in 300,000 years?...snip...

Perhaps its a good opportunity to dig this old post about bigfoot candidates:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2216728&postcount=130

All of them have (serious) match problems. Actually the single use of Gigantopithecus, the leading candidate, is that it proves that an ape about the size of bigfeet is plausible. But come to think of it, gorillas can perform a very similar role...

 

[manofthesea]

The part that learns new things must be decrepit

All of them have (serious) match problems. Actually the single use of Gigantopithecus, the leading candidate, is that it proves that an ape about the size of bigfeet is plausible. But come to think of it, gorillas can perform a very similar role...

Forgetting the obvious gigantism displayed in North American mammals.
Just look at Europeans after only 4-500 years. Their girth has almost doubled.

 

[Correa Neto]

This is a bunch of bunk. Wikipedia is for children. Show me the patent that says animatronics 1967.

Could you perform a search, bring your own data and back that claim of yours, reproduced below?

Animatronics was first used with the dinorsaur exhibit that toured the US museums in the 80's and 90's.

I would hate to think you are starting to make things up like historian...

Aniway, you can find accounts similar to the Wiki entry at the following link:
http://members.tripod.com/labyrnth/animatronics/history/animatronics101-102/aa.html
Its part of a 100-pages article. A quick googling will also provide you with a number of sites with similar material.
So, it seems you could learn some things at Wikipedia...

Oh, and there's also this piece of information...
http://puppetbuilding.com/animatronics/1930s-animatronic-dinosaurs.html

 

[manofthesea]

You Can't Be Sly With Me

Could you perform a search, bring your own data and back that claim of yours, reproduced below?

I would hate to think you are starting to make things up like historian...

Aniway, you can find accounts similar to the Wiki entry at the following link:
http://members.tripod.com/labyrnth/animatronics/history/animatronics101-102/aa.html
Its part of a 100-pages article. A quick googling will also provide you with a number of sites with similar material.
So, it seems you could learn some things at Wikipedia...

Oh, and there's also this piece of information...
http://puppetbuilding.com/animatronics/1930s-animatronic-dinosaurs.html

The patent.

 

[Correa Neto]

Forgetting the obvious gigantism displayed in North American mammals.
Just look at Europeans after only 4-500 years. Their girth has almost doubled.

Can you point me to a single primate fossil from North America's megafauna that could support bigfeet as real animals? No?

Well, what about from Asia, nearby where the land bridge was?
No?

Unless you want to discredit yourself, I suggest you to follow Mangler's tip and inform yourself. Insults are not a good substitute for reliable evidence and sound reasonings.

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

This is a bunch of bunk. Wikipedia is for children. Show me the patent that says animatronics 1967.

I've got a magazine article from 1964. Also, searching for "animatronic" on the Trademark Electronic Search System at this site will give you a record for audio-animatronics that was registered in 1967 (After being filed in 1964). Since I can't hotlink the result, I'll provide the following information so that others can easily identify the record when they use the search function:

Serial Number: 72192128
Reg. Number: 0828370
Word Mark: AUDIO-ANIMATRONICS

But it's a moot point, seeing as how a Patty costume wouldn't need any animatronics. Bill Munns appears to be arguing from incredulity right now, whereas others have given specific details as to why they feel the film is a hoax. Bob Burns and Rick Baker analyzed a copy of the film frame-by-frame and determined it was a guy in a suit (Burns found signs of a water bag; Perhaps you could get more details if you contacted Mr. Burns through his website). Chris Walas posted at the BFF and explained what materials and methods would be nescessary to create such a suit (which means Mr. Munns' statements aren't a "slam dunk" for Patty being real). I mean no offense to the man (I love "Return of the Living Dead"), but this has to be pointed out.

However, the comments offered by Burns, Baker, and Wallas get ignored since they don't give proponents what they want: for Patty to be real. This is why they latch onto Bill Munns and Janos Prohaska (Both Dfoot and myself has pointed out the gaping holes in Mr. Prohaska's arguments).

Oh, and has anyone over at BFF pointed out that the "De Loys ape" was merely a dead, dehydrated spider monkey? Or that the costume from "Harry and the Hendersons" probably didn't use a muscle suit because the costume was made for a family film, where such details would be unnescessary?

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

I believe that this thread has links to "The Dfoot Incident" at the BFF.

 

[GT/CS]

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.

If you can't figure out my screen name at BFF you have no deductive reasoning skills at all!!!

 

[manofthesea]

It's a Push

I'll give you the animatronics. It's moot. Mr. Munns has doubts about the PGF, he stated so in his first post. But he is an expert, and he has availed his thoughts.

I like his comment on the Myakka photo, however he stated that he only briefly looked at it on google image search.

My point in bringing his appearance at BFF to your attention is because this is basically a PGF forum. My endeavor is obviously appreciated.

CN, (only) the truth hurts.

 

[manofthesea]

If you can't figure out my screen name at BFF you have no deductive reasoning skills at all!!!

I have no particular concern for you. If you've posted at BFF under gtcs, then it's obvious that you have provided nothing relevant, otherwise I'd have taken note.

 

[GT/CS]

Could you perform a search, bring your own data and back that claim of yours, reproduced below?

I would hate to think you are starting to make things up like historian...

Well, Historian did seem to convince him that invisible bigfeet exist.


Quote
"I didn't include Historian in my remarks because he is currently in discussion here. He has stood up and presented information on 'bigfoot'. I congratulate him.

You know, when you take all of the evidentiary material from my encounters they fall squarely in the invisible bigfoot realm. Twice I have encountered the big guy, the first I didn't see anything. The second time I only saw the eyes, until I hit him with the stick then we saw the vagueness of a body shift. It was a good sized stick, equal in length to a baton, but double its' width. I must have put a wallop on it! Pow! But no furry beheamoth to show for it.

Best of Luck, dude!"

 

[tube]

Michael Dennett is Dfoot

I'm fairly confident that I'm the only poster on this board that knows Mike Dennett personally. I've had coffee at Starbucks with Mike Dennett, I've talked on the phone with Mike Dennett, and I've had lots of e-mail exchanges with Mike Dennett. Heck, I've even had Mike Dennett over for dinner, delicious chicken gumbo, in fact. The great highlight of that evening was watching a number of local and national TV spots on Bigfoot that he had recorded over the years, including the famous interview where Paul Freeman admits to having hoaxed Bigfoot tracks. I was at the MonsterQuest video shoot in Seattle with Mike Dennett.
Mike Dennett wrote the article and took the accompanying photographs found here:

http://csicop.org/sb/2006-09/bigfoot.html

I e-mailed Mike and advised him of Historian's claim. Not surprisingly, Mike confirmed what I already suspected, that he's never posted under anything but his own name.

For mentally healthy, thinking people, making an error of the magnitude that Historian has would be mortifying.

 

[manofthesea]

Well, Historian did seem to convince him that invisible bigfeet exist.


Quote
"I didn't include Historian in my remarks because he is currently in discussion here. He has stood up and presented information on 'bigfoot'. I congratulate him.

You know, when you take all of the evidentiary material from my encounters they fall squarely in the invisible bigfoot realm. Twice I have encountered the big guy, the first I didn't see anything. The second time I only saw the eyes, until I hit him with the stick then we saw the vagueness of a body shift. It was a good sized stick, equal in length to a baton, but double its' width. I must have put a wallop on it! Pow! But no furry beheamoth to show for it.

Best of Luck, dude!"

Which particular part(s) do you have a problem with?

Read "Wanna Hear a Scary Story?" at BFF. It has it all.

It's obvious that you are female by the way that you presented that information, kinda like the old "look what I got". That's cool. I have high tolerance.

 

[manofthesea]

I'm fairly confident that I'm the only poster on this board that knows Mike Dennett personally. I've had coffee at Starbucks with Mike Dennett, I've talked on the phone with Mike Dennett, and I've had lots of e-mail exchanges with Mike Dennett. Heck, I've even had Mike Dennett over for dinner, delicious chicken gumbo, in fact. The great highlight of that evening was watching a number of local and national TV spots on Bigfoot that he had recorded over the years, including the famous interview where Paul Freeman admits to having hoaxed Bigfoot tracks. I was at the MonsterQuest video shoot in Seattle with Mike Dennett.
Mike Dennett wrote the article and took the accompanying photographs found here:

http://csicop.org/sb/2006-09/bigfoot.html

I e-mailed Mike and advised him of Historian's claim. Not surprisingly, Mike confirmed what I already suspected, that he's never posted under anything but his own name.

For mentally healthy, thinking people, making an error of the magnitude that Historian has would be mortifying.

So, M. Dennett is not Dfoot (like I care). M. Dennett did not create the bigfoot costume that is currently being displayed and discussed also, correct?

 

[manofthesea]

This isn't cool.

 

[GT/CS]

Which particular part(s) do you have a problem with?

Read "Wanna Hear a Scary Story?" at BFF. It has it all.

It's obvious that you are female by the way that you presented that information, kinda like the old "look what I got". That's cool. I have high tolerance.

It's the same stuff you cut & pasted onto this site, with similar results.

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=19299