• 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.
Correa Neto said:
Religion (actually creationism x evolution) is a forbidden topic at a number of bigfoot and cryptozoology-related sites. It seems some try to hide it under the carpet. But it pops out every now and then. An attempt to keep the proponents undivided?
Click to expand...

It was tried on MABRC back when we were trying to be unlike other boards. After some thoughtful, informative and feisty posts it turned into something of a brawl between a 6-day creationist and a British atheist. One of the Admins misunderstood something that was said, the director stepped in and put it to a vote of the mods. The Debate Room was closed with one dissenting vote (mine) and a warning issued to the YECer.

Recently the same director reposted my collection of evolution vids from YouTube. There were views but no comments.

Discussion of religion is regarded as divisive, but I don't think anyone's using the ban to try to keep us together. That would be like herding cats.

I don't see a correlation, really. Members range from computer experts to biologists to construction workers. About the only thing active members seem to have in common is an interest in the subject and a willingness to get out with the ticks and rattlesnakes looking for answers.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Yeah, it appears Lu has missed a few walk demos. You'd think she'd at least mention them, if only to scoff...
Click to expand...

Meaning Grover Krantz? How about John Cleese in the Ministry of Silly Walks?

I missed a lot of Bill Munns' posts. I'd much rather read them.

Getting caught up on this thread is on my to-do list, right after listening to Steve Kulls, getting my stack washer delivered and installed, brushing my cat and climbing Mount Everest.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Bill has seen no evidence of any 7 mile bounds...despite several discussions of same...
Click to expand...

I've put a couple of people on to trying to find out if the film is still in the vaults of the Vancouver (Washington) Columbian. Why don't you give it a try? Maybe you'll have better luck.
 
Did someone say stride imitation videos? Sadly, the "World's Greatest Hoaxes" Jerry Romney clip seems to be down. Also, if you do enough dedicated people-watching, you'll see people doing "the stride."

LAL said:
I'll be ordering Chris' new book (in hardcover and color) tonight. Hopefully he's included Roger Knight's excellent dissection of every point Greg Long made along with the interviews with recanting BH supporters. Should be a good read.
Click to expand...

I wonder if it includes Knights' determination that the film timeline as described by Patterson and Gimlin didn't work. I'm guessing "no."

Check out the segment with the late Dr. Swindler on the digital microscope photography on John Green's copy of the PGF as well. (It was not the original and Owen had some pretty choice words about the scriptwriters for saying it was the original.)
Click to expand...

Ah yes, the moving mouth and eyelids claim. Although I think that these are the result of what's known around here as "peyote vision" and background details(in the case of the "mouth." These links should go into more detail on it), there certainly are ways to give the appearance of a moving mouth and eyelids on a mask.

Also, in that "Let's Talk Bigfoot" episode I linked you to a few posts ago, Dr. Meldrum described Dr. Swindler as a fence-sitter about twenty-someodd minutes into the show, far from the "skeptic turned believer" bit that people have foisted on the JREF before.

Bill didn't think bounding 7 miles in snow would be a problem either.
Click to expand...

There's a cross-country skiing joke in there somewhere...
 
LTC8K6 said:
The walk will be demonstrated again on 8/28 on DSC. Anyone who has been following the discussion can see one of the best of the very recent examples of the walk and Meldrum's approval of it.
Click to expand...

Name of show, please? I'm still new at this here satellite TV speak. Is DSC the Discovery Channel?

I've been told about the look a number of times. It will be interesting to se it.

I'm hoping to meet Dr. Meldrum this fall. He's the keynote speaker at Honobia. I've had my list of questions ready since last year.
 
LAL said:
Name of show, please? I'm still new at this here satellite TV speak. Is DSC the Discovery Channel?

I've been told about the look a number of times. It will be interesting to se it.

I'm hoping to meet Dr. Meldrum this fall. He's the keynote speaker at Honobia. I've had my list of questions ready since last year.
Click to expand...
Greg mentioned it to you on the last page if you missed it, Lu:

Diogenes said:
The athlete couldn't do the walk ?
So what ?

Why wouldn't it be a piece of cake for Bob to just walk like he always does ?

Have you emailed Dr. M and told him you disagree with his opinion that the actor in the " Best Evidence " episode did a pretty good job of doing the ' walk ' ?
Click to expand...

We really need to drop the inhuman gait for Patty myth. It's not helping you guys with any type of credibility. It doesn't mean anything if some athlete didn't reproduce the positioning in the PGF. I can do an excellent Bill Cosby impression. Can you? The walk is human, can be done by humans. Doesn't matter if the human selected by MonsterQuest (yeah, they're impartial) couldn't do it.

BTW, concerning what you think is Sarmiento's support of Bigfoot, he makes his skepticism very clear in the 'Legend of the Hairy Beast' episode of MonsterQuest. What is nice to see is that since he's become a regular commentator on MQ he's done something to reign in the unfortunate Sideshow Bob hair a bit. Just look at Sasquatch: LMS to jog your memory. Yikes.
 
SweatyYeti said:
Hi Lu...:) .....thanks for stoppin' in!

Bored, eh?....I have a remedy for that. Stick around and watch the "skeptics" dance around Patty's bulging leg muscles.
Kitakaze just did a little 'soft-shoe shuffle' around it earlier today.
Click to expand...
As usual, Sweaty needs review:

kitakaze said:
SweatyYeti said:
William Parcher said:
You are comparing Patty with the HorrorDome costume (and possibly also with a 1967 Morris gorilla costume). If these costumes are used off-the-shelf for a filmed hoax, there will be problems. They are made as a one-size-fits-all product. The body sections are oversized and baggy. Folds and creases are obvious to the viewer as the furcloth material behaves like drapery or huge pajamas.

But a person could take these costumes and modify them so that the material is not excessive and baggy (like tailoring clothing to fit a person), and/or use internal padding to reduce the baggy appearance and give the illusion of anatomical mass and musculature. If Patty really did start out as a Morris costume, then these kinds of modifications were used to give the final result. The cost to do these modifications are minimal for materials, and is mostly time spent tailoring and constructing.
Click to expand...
But, how did Roger create the illusion ( ;) ) of bulging muscle...and also the illusion ( ;) ) of skin-tight skin directly beside that bulging, moving 'muscle'???...


[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Patty%20and%20Bob/PattyLLEGgif33.gif[/qimg]


That's the question that needs to be answered....and which no "skeptic" here wants to take a stab at.


In sharp contrast....notice the complete lack of body contour on the back of the leg, in this suit...

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Gorilla%20Suits/Sasquatch1a.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...
Sweaty,

1) Please do a favour for the impartial reader of your posts and do not invent false perspectives of those you are trying to debate.

Example:

What is Bob Heironimus, the sole claimant of being in the suit, and his horse doing in Patterson's film?

That's the question that needs to be answered.... and which no "Bigfoot enthusiast" wants to take a stab at.

2) Please clearly define what you believe 'body contour' to mean.

3) Please show that the strange bulges on the back of Patty's left leg are consistent with real leg musculature and that they are also evident in the right leg.

4) Please show that the resolution of the film supports beyond a reasonable doubt your claim.
Click to expand...
So...

1) William Parcher is postulating on the hypothetical possibility of Patty originating as a Philip Morris suit then modified in response to Lu's contention that a $499 suit such as the one we see from Horrordome could not account for what is seen in the PGF.

2) Taking WP's hypothetical and responding to it as though it were a given fact Sweaty then demands how that scenario can account for illusions he believes can be seen. He specifies what he perceives to be bulging moving muscle next to skin tight skin on the back of the left leg. He states that this invented scenario is a pressing issue which needs to be addressed and yet skeptics are unwilling to do so.


3) Sweaty then takes a large sized close up high quality commercial image of the Horrordome suit and compares it to a small low quality blown up image from the PGF taken from a distance saying that back of the leg suffers from a complete lack of an ambiguous quality he refers to as 'body contour'.


4) Sweaty is asked to demonstrate that the illusions he perceives are consistent with reality and that the film resolution supports his claim of "bulging, moving muscle next to skin-tight skin. He is also asked to define 'body contour'.

5) Sweaty responds that accountability for the scenario he has invented is being side-stepped by others.

So, Sweaty, let's reiterate that neither have you provided comparable images with which make accurate comparisons or demonstrated that the scenario you have invented is anything other than hypothetical.

Also, regarding this 'body contour' you speak of and the realism you confer to it please keep in mind that...

A) A shaggy orangutan limb or furry bear leg can suffer a complete lack of 'body contour'. They are not any less real for it.

B) A man made suit can very easily mimic musculature.

Is there something that causes you to be mentally defunct in coming to terms with this very basic concept?

BTW, please don't forget that you have a post concerning unicorns awaiting you and another on proof vs reliable evidence when you are able to afford them the time.
 
kitakaze said:
What is Bob Heironimus, the sole claimant of being in the suit, and his horse doing in Patterson's film?
Click to expand...

You're talking about the documentary? Bob was a neighbor. Roger shot film of his neighbors on horseback for the documentary. Is there some mystery about this?
 
LAL said:
You're talking about the documentary? Bob was a neighbor. Roger shot film of his neighbors on horseback for the documentary. Is there some mystery about this?
Click to expand...
Not only was Heironimus shown with Jerry Merritt but on Green's 1st generation copy of the PGF just before we see Patty we see Gimlin riding Heironimus' horse, Chico.

Heironimus is not some random wacko of many without connection to Patterson and Gimlin claiming to be in the suit as footers would look around and try and tell eachother. He is Gimlin's longtime neighbour and good friend. He is the only claimant. It took Green forever to acknowledge Chico was there. Heironimus continues to try and appear with Gimlin to clear the air but Gimlin won't have any of it.

No offense, but I can only classify the positions as yours and Green's as apologist.
 
Astrophotographer said:
Hmmm...more myth building. Maybe you should read Bigfoot exposed, where the myth about the walk is thoroughly debunked. I am not sure why you are bothering to repeat it here. BTW, this clip can not be a fair comparison since it is only a few still frames put together. How can you tell he did not walk like aunt Bunny in the PGF?
Click to expand...


I read it years ago. Maybe you should read Meldrum's debunking of Daegling.

The .gif on Kal Korff's site was much better. Unfortunately, I didn't know how to save .gifs at the time and it went down with the site. The reenactment was on some show (NatGeo?) and was good enough to convince an anthropologist out there in cyberland the PGF is the real deal.
 
"Best Evidence" not only showed a guy doing the "Patty Walk" in front of Meldrum (much to his surprise); it also exposed the inconsistencies of the mid-tarsal break idea (pretty much what's been previously debated here).

We discussed the show ages ago.
 
You also get the hand/arm extenders, the feet, and the muscle padding for your 500 duckets. You can modify from there.

Costume comes complete with a Deluxe Over Sized Mask with helmet that allows the user to gain an extra 12 inches in height by looking out of the neck. The costume also comes with Hand/Arm Extenders, Sasquatch Feet, Muscle suit padding and Sasquatch Costume with attached latex chest piece.
Click to expand...
 
AtomicMysteryMonster said:
Sadly, the "World's Greatest Hoaxes" Jerry Romney clip seems to be down. Also, if you do enough dedicated people-watching, you'll see people doing "the stride."
Click to expand...

Does it matter that Romney denied any involvement with the PGF? That was a Kal Korff claim. KK just as enthusiastically embraced Bob Heironimus.

I don't think you understand the concept of the "swimming gait".

Dr. Swindler co-authored a paper with Dr. Meldrum (on the Skookum cast) and would have attended the Willow Creek symposium in 2003 if his health had permitted. His comments on MQ were quite a change from dismissing the PGF as a "guy in a costume" in 1996.

If it's the same interview, I heard it when it was first done. I usually pass on blog radio, but that, and some of the Bipcasts, were worth listening to. I managed to make it through two hours of Kulls and company last night (the GG is beyond hoax - it's fraud).

On the fence isn't a bad place for a scientist to be, especially when you face ridicule from colleagues for even taking an interest in a 'fringe" subject.
 
Last edited:
There is nothing in the poor quality PGF that should convince anyone that it's a real creature. Least of all a scientist. Any scientist who looks at the PGF and declares Patty to be a real creature should have his expertise questioned.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom