The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

Status
Not open for further replies.
makaya325 said:
I AM HE, the proportions are larger than 6ft
Click to expand...

:train

Doh! Sideswiped! C'mon, mayaka... critical thinking. To question what you think you know. Think think think. How do you know the proportions are larger than 6ft? What allows you that certainty? We've been looking at this thing for years and we don't have that certainty. The best work I've seen shows just 6ft.
 
kitakaze said:
:train

Doh! Sideswiped! C'mon, mayaka... critical thinking. To question what you think you know. Think think think. How do you know the proportions are larger than 6ft? What allows you that certainty? We've been looking at this thing for years and we don't have that certainty. The best work I've seen shows just 6ft.
Click to expand...

Not bringing up the "relative estimate" again but being one of the ones on the first CAD thread to take a crack at it ( and some of the CAD operators on the project site)- I'm comfortable with the range of 5'8"-6'2" for the film subject as being the most probable size.

My personal opinion is that the costume feet from the suit are larger than the mimes feet but less than the 14.5" print estimate. I think probably closer to about 12" and as such make it appear to have a large gait on the film when the 14.5" number is plugged in.
 
kitakaze said:
:train

Doh! Sideswiped! C'mon, mayaka... critical thinking. To question what you think you know. Think think think. How do you know the proportions are larger than 6ft? What allows you that certainty? We've been looking at this thing for years and we don't have that certainty. The best work I've seen shows just 6ft.
Click to expand...

Well, kitz, did you ever see this?

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/mclarin_comparison.jpg

You say its just 6ft? Mclarin is 6ft 5, and is dwarfed by the alleged bigfoot. my best bet: prohaskas henchman in a suit
 
makaya325 said:
Well, kitz, did you ever see this?

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/mclarin_comparison.jpg

You say its just 6ft? Mclarin is 6ft 5, and is dwarfed by the alleged bigfoot. my best bet: prohaskas henchman in a suit
Click to expand...

Did Janos have henchmen? The suits Janos Prohaskas wore and constructed were as I understand it made by him for him. Furhermore Janos was not exactly a towering tall individual. However 6.0' is what I consider the lower limit of the PGF subject. McClarin shows to excelent effect a tall lanky perfectly human gait and posture. Dress him in a suit and have him walk as Bruce McClarin across Bluff Creek and it would be a case of oh hell yeah look at that tall lanky human in a monkey suit what a joke. Like I said before Short Patty is the current flavor of the week. But if she is short lets see we get to toss another PGF character into the waste basket in the form of Bob Heronimous (sorry for the spelling Bob I'll buy a beer next time I'm in town K). So now Phil Morris has a little company.
 
makaya325 said:
Well, kitz, did you ever see this?

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/mclarin_comparison.jpg

You say its just 6ft? Mclarin is 6ft 5, and is dwarfed by the alleged bigfoot. my best bet: prohaskas henchman in a suit
Click to expand...

Everyone has seen that. Its been done to death and nothing has changed and there have been hundreds ( if not thousands) of posts dedicated to it.

Theres no way to get an accurate estimate of the PGF film subject ( much less compare it to another picture). You dont have the necessary information

You dont know for certain whether the images are distorted and scaled properly, the scene measurements, the camera internals and locations of where things exactly were.

Those are absolutely necessary for any meaningful measurement or comparison.

All the Kings horses and call blasting from atop Mt Volcanic Ash and wishful thinking and otherwise useless extrapolations passed off as legitimate wont change it.
 
LONGTABBER PE said:
Everyone has seen that. Its been done to death and nothing has changed and there have been hundreds ( if not thousands) of posts dedicated to it.

Theres no way to get an accurate estimate of the PGF film subject ( much less compare it to another picture). You dont have the necessary information

You dont know for certain whether the images are distorted and scaled properly, the scene measurements, the camera internals and locations of where things exactly were.

Those are absolutely necessary for any meaningful measurement or comparison.

All the Kings horses and call blasting from atop Mt Volcanic Ash and wishful thinking and otherwise useless extrapolations passed off as legitimate wont change it.
Click to expand...


But long, werent these taken very shortly after the pgf?
 
Crowlogic said:
However 6.0' is what I consider the lower limit of the PGF subject. McClarin shows to excelent effect a tall lanky perfectly human gait and posture. Dress him in a suit and have him walk as Bruce McClarin across Bluff Creek and it would be a case of oh hell yeah look at that tall lanky human in a monkey suit what a joke. Like I said before Short Patty is the current flavor of the week. But if she is short lets see we get to toss another PGF character into the waste basket in the form of Bob Heronimous
Click to expand...

Well being simply literal ( and I'm not sold as BH was in the suit by a long shot- I just also dont discount the possibility) we really dont know who was in it.

It could have been RP or BG in it. ( we only have their words as to what they said they were doing and we all know those contradict themselves so I dont give either one of them an automatic pass on anything)

It could have been a guy they knew who may have been shipped off to Nam and really didnt know what was going on and is now dead or just some "bloke" who is also dead now.

There are any number of possibilities. The fact its a suit and not a real animal is the paramount issue. Who played the part is just nice to know stuff to me anyway. ( because as with BH, unless they could somehow "prove" they were in the suit- their claim would be equally suspect as his is)

Hell, if i were old enough, I could "claim" I was in it and come up with a stinky smell and description of the pieces and make it make sense. Still couldnt prove it tho.
 
makaya325 said:
But long, werent these taken very shortly after the pgf?
Click to expand...

Seriously, it wouldnt matter if they were taken 90 years after the fact or 90 seconds after the fact. The bottom ( and only) line regarding measuring/comparing the PGF film subject in itself or against another comparison is that the NECESSARY information to do it accurately DOES NOT EXIST.

I'm not trying to be obnoxious and sorry for being so blunt but thats simply the "bottom line". You cant just plug in anecdotal unconfirmed guesses in a measuring scenario when accuracy is critical and call it anything but garbage.

You dont have the data and the window to have gotten it is forever closed.

Without that all you have is the woo-istic "relative measurement" crap and thats just a guess.

Its like how "long" is long and where does short end and long begin. Its meaningless.

The only person on Earth who cannot comprehend this is sweety and I think he does actually but is just in denial.
 
Is it your Birthday LONGTABBER PE...
Well happy getting older day to you. :)
 
Cavemonster wrote:
Different kinds of foam, batting, polyfil, cotton, would all bunch differently, all glide past each other differently, all allow for different sorts of freedom of movement.
Click to expand...


I'm sure that's true. I'm using foam padding.

The best way to determine if the combination of 'size, bulk and movement' that we see with Patty could possibly be a padded suit, is to try replicating it with a padded suit. If there are a few different materials which could have been used....then it's simply a matter of making multiple versions of suits, and seeing if any of them very closely replicate Patty.
 
Last edited:
I Am He said:
Prey tell Yeti Old Boy, what are Patty's dimensions?


I Am He
Click to expand...




Here is one estimate of Patty's upper-body dimensions...made by John Green...I believe...


PattysMM2.jpg




I'm not at my home computer, so I can't post comparison images right now...but, here is a view of Patty from directly behind, and her extreme chest and shoulder width is easy to see...

FrameWA4N.jpg
 
Last edited:
Crowlogic wrote:
Sweaty is investagating shoulder padding and arm angles. The centerpoint of his argument is how does an over stuffed and padded human look and move in stuffed and padded conditions.
Click to expand...


That's exactly right, Crow.


He may even be better off not using a fur covering at all since it will allow visuals of the padding.
Click to expand...


I certainly can take pictures, and video, of the padded suit at that stage....and then at the finished stage, also.
 
LT brought up an interesting possibility. maybe it was Pattersonin the suit with Gimlin behind the camer. A little proportoning comparison could be in order.
 
Crowlogic said:
LT brought up an interesting possibility. maybe it was Pattersonin the suit with Gimlin behind the camer. A little proportoning comparison could be in order.
Click to expand...

Just understand I'm not saying it is or isnt him but the reality is that I see no reason why it "couldnt" be him.

The only "fact" is that both RP and BG accounts differ so who is to say that the account of what RP did with his horse and filming etc isnt made up?

I'm just basing that thought on simple logic.

If you believe the storyline and some of the claims.

They were there to film shorts for a documentary and hunt for footprints.

They had "test cast" prints earlier in the trip.

Obviously they had "some" idea of how to catalog evidence and had casting materials with them. I cant understand why they didnt also have tapes, string and other stuff to make decent field exams of a trackway of a "real" BF ( I say "real" because if you believe them- they saw a "real" bigfoot making the tracks when [ according to the storyline] they were originally hunting for prints that were old and may or may not have been hoaxed)

None of this happened and none of this equipment was with them?

Also, I never heard mention of binoculars or other optics to see distance ( I carry my Steiners with me in the field) so they were looking for prints but not scanning the area?

Nothing else follows general logic so why couldnt one of them have been in the suit?
 
I think its reasonable that, since patterson made a documentary for tracks he found, he also photographed the real thing
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom