Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[Crowlogic]

Patterson needed a large man to play the part of a female sasquatch which due to sexual dimorphism was much smaller than the males and came into human size range. They probably could not throw a Volkswagen as a male could. Given that Patterson was choosing from his associates in Yakima he undoubtedly had limited options.

QUOTE]

The assumption that an actor with a rotund shape is responsible for the shape we see in the PGF creature just may be erronious. If one subscribes to the notion that Bob Heronimous wore the suit it requires putting the Bob Heronimous of 1967 into the suit. The Bob then is not the beer gutted fellow of today. The photos of young Bob are fairly lean. He coud have filled the less rotund renderings of Patterson's Bigfoot much better than Patty.

 

[Crowlogic]

Patterson had to work with whatever actor he had. Barrel shaped is hard to hide.

Assuming it's a suit, of course.

Bob Heronimous in 1967 was fairly lean and would have needed padding to bulk up even the thinner Patterson drawings. Or they got a fat actor which rules out Bob H.

 

[kitakaze]

Patterson needed a large man to play the part of a female sasquatch which due to sexual dimorphism was much smaller than the males and came into human size range. They probably could not throw a Volkswagen as a male could. Given that Patterson was choosing from his associates in Yakima he undoubtedly had limited options.

The assumption that an actor with a rotund shape is responsible for the shape we see in the PGF creature just may be erronious. If one subscribes to the notion that Bob Heronimous wore the suit it requires putting the Bob Heronimous of 1967 into the suit. The Bob then is not the beer gutted fellow of today. The photos of young Bob are fairly lean. He coud have filled the less rotund renderings of Patterson's Bigfoot much better than Patty.

We are told that the suit had padding in the shoulders and head area. Obviously there is the addition of the poorly fabricated breasts. Bob Heironimus in 1967 was a large man though not overweight as we can see. I have no problem with the size of the torso given those features, the thickness of the suit fabric, and whatever he wore underneath.

Log, since you claim to be of the position that the PGF is a hoax yet argue against Heironimus then maybe you have some thoughts to account for all the considerable circumstantial evidence that indicates him?

 

[kitakaze]

Sweet Zombie Jesus! I love the MABRC!

For those who don't know the MABRC (Mid-America Bigfoot Research Center) is the Bigfoot enthusiast club where LAL is a forum moderator and the former home of our beloved Christian Fundamentalist Bigfoot fan and BF photo owner, Creekfreak. The MABRC are responsible for what are in my mind some of the most priceless BF research videos on the net. Whenever I see that MABRC logo coming at me and the music gets going... well, I just get revved right up. Right now the MABRC is featuring some of their fine video productions at the main forum page and are spotlighting the experiences of member Bullet Maker.

Some of you who followed Creekfreak's thread here may remember myself or some others mentioning Bullet Maker. You may recall how eerily close comparisons were to him and Creekfreak (they are not the same individual). Bullet Maker is a Young Earth Creationist Bigfoot enthusiast who claims to have around 22 years of experiences and interactions with Bigfoots coming in and around his property. In addition to featuring his videos the MABRC is also selling audio cd's of his stories called "In the Shadows with Bullet Maker Vol. 1" ($9.99 plus shipping and handling) and have an entire section of the forum devoted to him. Members may also view a Bullet Maker live video feed.

MABRC have some fun:

BFGTV - MABRC Bacon Grease video.

Grab a lawn chair, a pack of American Spirit, and some sausage rolls and gather round the barrel fire for some Bullet Maker Bigfoot time:

BFGTV-Featured Sighting Report-Bullet Maker

Here is Bullet Maker sharing some Biblical knowledge regarding bigfoot:

http://www.mid-americabigfoot.com/ph...hp?f=15&t=6517

Check out their website for more BFGTV fun.

 

[LAL]

You're a riot. You're missing the point. William Roe's encounter made an impression on Patterson. Roe's daughter's drawing made an impression on him. The Kunstler illustration of the alleged encounter made an impression on him. He ripped it off. The PGF plays like a Roe re-enactment.

And what was Roe's daughter's drawing from if not a description?

I was reading an article on Cryptomondo last night about the drawing maybe not being Kunstler's, so maybe there's another shadowy figure behind the man behind the man (and so on) behind the scenes.

Much of Roger's book was a rehash (with permission) of reports John Green collected.

Have you read it?

 

[Astrophotographer]

Did I say that?

However, you present an error an somebody else's work in order to invalidate everything that he wrote. Must be another one of those bigfoot double standards.

I don't know of anyone else doing the measurements. If you want to know his margin of error ask him.

So you don't know how he did it, you just parrot the information. What is the point of this discussion if you can not explain the work involved?

What do you get measuring on frame 72? It's the best frame for it because the extremities are practically (but not quite) vertical.

Wrong. The right arm is vertical and the foot is vertical. However, the rest of the figure is bent and stooped. The left leg is bent at an angle towards the camera and the right leg is bent in a way that makes any measurement practically worthless. However, if you measure the foot and compare it to the arm, you will discover the arm is about 30-32 inches long (assuming the foot is 14.5" long). That is within normal human proportions.

The digital skeleton can be disarticulated and the arm and leg placed next to each other. Counting part of the hand, they're the same. The IM index comes out to a precise 88 doing it that way.

And how was this skeleton created? Oh, that's right. Bigfoot proponents created it. The skeleton is a farce and has been shown several times in this forum that it is just a guess. Therefore, the 88 value is just a guess and not a precise value. Garbage in = Garbage out. Then we have Meldrum coming up with 80-90 but we don't know where the errors are and what errors he made based on your inability to explain any potential for error. A few inches is all that prevents an 80-90 value to drop into the low 70s. Again, where is the independent measurements from qualified individuals? Additionally, wouldn't a suit cause limbs to look longer or appear shorter?

This point deserves further examination and may well rule out the probability of hoaxing."

So, it's ruled out except for skeptics.

Boy you have some reading comprehension issues don't you? Read that one again. "MAY well rule out the probability" does not mean "ruled out". Again, where are the independent measurements? If one person can get these numbers, why can't everyone arrive at the same values? If independent analysts can not arrive at the same values, it proves nothing just a desire to believe for bigfoot proponents.

 

[kitakaze]

And what was Roe's daughter's drawing from if not a description?

His imagination.

I was reading an article on Cryptomondo last night about the drawing maybe not being Kunstler's, so maybe there's another shadowy figure behind the man behind the man (and so on) behind the scenes.

You were reading "What does a female sasquatch look like?" in which cryptotwit Coleman couldn't figure out that the 'RP' in the corner of Roger's burn of Kunstler's drawing stood for 'Roger Patterson'. He couldn't even figure out his sources.

Much of Roger's book was a rehash (with permission) of reports John Green collected.

Roger was minimizing his effort in trying to get a book out and sold, I get it.

Have you read it?

Green's original books, yes. Patterson's book, no. Your point?

I'm still waiting for you to give me the name of a Patty claimant other than Heironimus or withdraw your claim.

 

[LAL]

Sweet Zombie Jesus! I love the MABRC!

Glad to hear it. I was wondering how long it would take you to get around to a full scale mock job.

There's an independent sighting from one who loathes Bullet, which gives me hope there may be really be (or have been) something going on around there. There was a much better choice for a live feed (no controversy around the people and a similar long term history of possible activity), but for technical reasons it couldn't be set up (yet).

I was asked to be a moderator over a year ago. I'm also on the advisory council, and that has brought me into serious conflict on more than one occasion. I've found there are problems in a "skeptic free zone" as well as in one where skepticism goes over the line to cynicism.

The public can't see what goes on behind the scenes and the bacon grease video didn't exactly portrary the new spirit of professionalism and credibility we've been aiming for since those early days, but I admire the persistance of the guy in the bacon grease for climbing 16' A ladders to hide trail cams in trees. He's out there with the rattlesnakes while I'm sitting at my computer wondering at the humor.

Creekfreak and others banned from other forums were allowed to join the MABRC in the beginning because Darkwing wanted to give them a chance. Two have since been banned and Creek's resignation was gratefully accepted after we saw his photo. The problem with out and out banning people is that they sometimes sneak back in under another SN (Creek wasn't very good at it - he used the same avatar) and that can take up way too much of an administrator's time. There's plenty to deal with just from the spammers.

It's a shame you can't see the old board with the CvE debate in the Debate Room. I had a great time. Creek started the thread with his Nephalim hypothesis and it grew into it's own subforum. I've already given a synopsis of what went on. Bullet's a YECer but he has nothing to do with the running of MABRC. He's a member and has land with possible activity on it. If there really is activity there, it wouldn't be sensible to alienate the guy and lose a chance to document it if there's anything going on. His views do not represent any official position of the MABRC.

We've been getting more applications for membership than we can process. Three recent ones were biologists. Darkwing (he's the director) invited our "unofficial skeptic" to become a full researcher.

I told you we're a mixed bag.

 

[Crowlogic]

We are told that the suit had padding in the shoulders and head area. Obviously there is the addition of the poorly fabricated breasts. Bob Heironimus in 1967 was a large man though not overweight as we can see. I have no problem with the size of the torso given those features, the thickness of the suit fabric, and whatever he wore underneath.

Log, since you claim to be of the position that the PGF is a hoax yet argue against Heironimus then maybe you have some thoughts to account for all the considerable circumstantial evidence that indicates him?

Shoulders and head are one thing. Bob is round shouldered. It is the mid section girth that needs explaining. Bob claims padding in the shoulders but what about the gut? Even his current extended gut would not have fit the form we see. Bob's circumstantial evidence is only as good as his word and his memory. Sorry I won't give him a free pass on his shoddy memory. Colin Powell presented "evidence" of Iraq WMD's that was light years better than Bob's tale. We know how that turned out now don't we.

 

[LAL]

The Walas suit issue is addressed here:

http://www.podango.com/podcast_epis...Bigfoot/Bill_Munns_Interview_by_Melissa_Hovey

 

[LAL]

You were reading "What does a female sasquatch look like?" in which cryptotwit Coleman couldn't figure out that the 'RP' in the corner of Roger's burn of Kunstler's drawing stood for 'Roger Patterson'. He couldn't even figure out his sources.

Your sense of humor seems to stop with your own jokes.

Roger was minimizing his effort in trying to get a book out and sold, I get it.

It was self published. I once owned a copy ( I have the reprint in Murphy's book). It wasn't very impressive and probably didn't sell well.

Green's original books, yes. Patterson's book, no. Your point?

It gives a sense of the man in "his own write". Go to the source. Why settle for what others had to say about him? He was doing research for six years and John, who didn't have anything good to say about another (also not named), thought he was pretty good at it (LTB interview).

I'm still waiting for you to give me the name of a Patty claimant other than Heironimus or withdraw your claim.

I would if I could. Maybe you can get names out of John Green.

 

[kitakaze]

Shoulders and head are one thing. Bob is round shouldered. It is the mid section girth that needs explaining. Bob claims padding in the shoulders but what about the gut? Even his current extended gut would not have fit the form we see.

That is your opinion based on...? Tell me, what are the measurements of BH's current midsection and Patty's midsection?

Bob's circumstantial evidence is only as good as his word and his memory. Sorry I won't give him a free pass on his shoddy memory.

I'm not particularly troubled by that. You seem to fail to understand that the strength of the circumstantial has little to do with his word or memory. Three points of contact in '67 to Patterson and Gimlin and the PGF. Four people on record stating they saw a suit in his car. Ongoing friendship with Gimlin. Gimlin took legal action against Patricia Patterson but not Heironimus. Heironimus' walk matches Patty. Heironimus passed a polygraph test (yes, I know what little that means). All of this circumstantial and none of it based on BH's word or memory.

Would you like to try again?

 

[LAL]

However, you present an error an somebody else's work in order to invalidate everything that he wrote. Must be another one of those bigfoot double standards.

No, I could point out others. Rick Noll refuted his 18" height difference using trig (no, I don't know trig) and got a difference of a few inches either way if the camera position was off by a meter. Daegling went along with Cliff Crook's opinion on the Skookum Cast though neither had seen it, he had a scenario in which hoaxers instructed each other in dermal ridge manufacture by long distance telephone and wrapped the whole thing up with an unsubstantiated psychobabble explanation of how we have a primordial need to see monsters.

Read the book.

So you don't know how he did it, you just parrot the information. What is the point of this discussion if you can not explain the work involved?

I am not one of his students and all I could find on it was what I posted. He teaches anatomy. He knows how to do an IM index.

Boy you have some reading comprehension issues don't you? Read that one again. "MAY well rule out the probability" does not mean "ruled out". Again, where are the independent measurements? If one person can get these numbers, why can't everyone arrive at the same values? If independent analysts can not arrive at the same values, it proves nothing just a desire to believe for bigfoot proponents.

Are you being so literal just to be annoying? As a non-scientist I'm not obligated to be so cautious in my wording, but for those who think the skeptical suit arguments are stupid to begin with, yep, it's ruled out.

Seems you just posted some independent measurements.

Steindorf was not a Bigfoot proponent. He was hired for the job because he put in a lower bid.

I'm sure we all remember this fine thread:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?act=Print&client=printer&f=35&t=14316

Colubus is a scientific illustrator, already laughed at here, so don't bother.

 

[LAL]

Three points of contact in '67 to Patterson and Gimlin and the PGF. Four people on record stating they saw a suit in his car.

And nothing to connect the suit to Roger Patterson. Have you read the description?

Bob was a suspect in "sightings" around Yakima.

Ongoing friendship with Gimlin.

Your source? Gimlin said outside a conference he doesn't answer back because he's a Christian. I have a neighbor who's a liar. I try to get along with her because we're neighbors and we share a well. We may seem friendly, but that doesn't make us friends.

Gimlin took legal action against Patricia Patterson but not Heironimus.

Why would he? Did Bob have rights to the film? What possible grounds would he have for legal action?

Why didn't Bob join the parade of people suing Roger? Why, if he's so honest, didn't he out Roger during the film tour to save all those people from being flim-flammed. Why didn't he notify the BC museum, Yerkes, the Museum of Natural History in New York? National Wildlife Magazine? Argosy?

Why did it take him over three decades to "remember" he was the man in the suit when he saw it on TV?

 

[kitakaze]

Glad to hear it. I was wondering how long it would take you to get around to a full scale mock job.

1) Some might construe it as problem at the source if my so-called mocking contains zero criticism and consists wholly of relaying what is there to be seen.

2) I don't agree with your use of the word 'mock'. It implies a disdain for the MABRC on my part that isn't there. I might chide, or rib, or even tease a bit but I find I have a rather absurd affection for and fascination with the MABRC and the way they present themselves. I know Darkwing represented himself and his Bigfoot group very well when he came here to intervene with Creekfreak's activity here. I refuse to believe that whoever is responsible for the MABRC video production isn't fully aware of how wildly camp they are. I've always wanted to write a 'Best in Show' style film on Bigfootery and I think no matter how hard I tried I couldn't make video pieces look as outrageous as MABRC does. I think MABRC shows unabashedly just how fun it can be to be a Bigfoot enthusiast.

There's an independent sighting from one who loathes Bullet, which gives me hope there may be really be (or have been) something going on around there.

I wonder if it was the one with the beer gut and the smoker's cough, the one on all fours, or one of the really skinny ones.

The public can't see what goes on behind the scenes and the bacon grease video didn't exactly portrary the new spirit of professionalism and credibility we've been aiming for since those early days, but I admire the persistance of the guy in the bacon grease for climbing 16' A ladders to hide trail cams in trees. He's out there with the rattlesnakes while I'm sitting at my computer wondering at the humor.

Bacon grease guy can run. He can really, really run.

Bullet's a YECer but he has nothing to do with the running of MABRC. He's a member and has land with possible activity on it. If there really is activity there, it wouldn't be sensible to alienate the guy and lose a chance to document it if there's anything going on. His views dob not represent any official position of the MABRC.

Do you guys privately admit amongst yourselves you know it's obviously ludicrous but Bullet's stories are fun or do you actually believe that?

I told you we're a mixed bag.

I know, I can't help it. I'm both fascinated with and repulsed by Bigfootery at the same time. I tempted to admire or at least be sympathetic with Bigfoot enthusiast preservation and over-development of their inner child type behaviour yet I often find myself wanting to shake some of them bodily for being so frightfully stupid. I'm sorry if that sounds bad but I'm sure you have similar feelings regarding our perceived cynicism and closed-mindedness.

 

[LAL]

Here is Bullet Maker sharing some Biblical knowledge regarding bigfoot:

http://www.mid-americabigfoot.com/ph...hp?f=15&t=6517

Link doesn't work.

 

[LAL]

1)
I wonder if it was the one with the beer gut and the smoker's cough, the one on all fours, or one of the really skinny ones.

Or the one with amber eyes with slits.

Do you guys privately admit amongst yourselves you know it's obviously ludicrous but Bullet's stories are fun or do you actually believe that?

I can't answer for anyone but me.

The goal, I'm told, is to get the stories down because the man's health is bad and he doesn't have long to live.

If Uncle Remus were still around we might have DVDs of him too.

I know, I can't help it. I'm both fascinated with and repulsed by Bigfootery at the same time. I tempted to admire or at least be sympathetic with Bigfoot enthusiast preservation and over-development of their inner child type behaviour yet I often find myself wanting to shake some of them bodily for being so frightfully stupid. I'm sorry if that sounds bad but I'm sure you have similar feelings regarding our perceived cynicism and closed-mindedness.

I don't shake babies.

I'm supposed to be the manager of documents (have you seen how many reports are being posted?) and I haven't even finished moving the library off the old board. Some 5000 articles were posted by DW. His name doesn't appear on all of them because he needed help to get them moved by Xmas when we upgraded. I was up all night.

I'm glad someone's having fun. It ain't me.

If there've been any barbeques, I wasn't told.

 

[Astrophotographer]

Rick Noll refuted his 18" height difference using trig (no, I don't know trig) and got a difference of a few inches either way if the camera position was off by a meter.

Then I am not sure how you can verify if Noll was correct. Again, this is a matter of you blindly parroting what others state. Is that all you do?

As for being off a meter....what if it is off two meters or three? The values change as the differences vary.

I am not one of his students and all I could find on it was what I posted. He teaches anatomy. He knows how to do an IM index.

Again, you are blindly parroting the storyline. Exactly what do you check? There is a difference between measuring bones and measuring a distant subject where the actual bone locations are vague and can not be determined accurately. Therefore, when you say it is a precise measurement of 88, it is not a valid claim. The vague 80-90 at least admits that there is room for error. That error can swing in a direction that makes it more human-like.

Are you being so literal just to be annoying? As a non-scientist I'm not obligated to be so cautious in my wording, but for those who think the skeptical suit arguments are stupid to begin with, yep, it's ruled out.

It is obvious that you are not being scientific. Using words like "stupid" demonstrates you are not even interested in opposing arguments or other possibilities. So much for bigfoot proponents being "open-minded". Meanwhile, I will try and keep an open mind and reserve the minute possibility that bigfoot might actually turn up.

 

[kitakaze]

The goal, I'm told, is to get the stories down because the man's health is bad and he doesn't have long to live.

You said Bullet has nothing to do with the running of the MABRC and is just a member but wasn't he listed as not only a senior researcher but also co-founder? One gets the impression that the MABRC represents him and vice versa. By your response you sound as though you also don't believe his tales. I can't help but wonder if you've been privy to information that contributes to your apparent skepticism of Bullet tales.

 

[Drewbot]

He's a member and has land with possible activity on it. If there really is activity there, it wouldn't be sensible to alienate the guy and lose a chance to document it if there's anything going on. His views do not represent any official position of the MABRC.
[\QUOTE]

How is this meant to be taken? Because if I were just reading this, I would take that to mean, that he is tolerated because he has land that he lets the MABRC use.