• 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.

The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

Status
Not open for further replies.
JcR said:
Speaking of Bob Heironimus. Has he dropped off the face of the planet ?
Any recent news from him. I keep finding the same old info.
Click to expand...

I suspect it's because he confirmed to many what most people already believed(Patty fake), so not much point in bringing him out. Believers would just as soon have him go away for the same reason, so they don't bring him out either.
 
xblade said:
I suspect it's because he confirmed to many what most people already believed(Patty fake),
Click to expand...


Just to add a little more info to what you said, xblade....Bob Heironimus has "confirmed" his claim without one single piece of evidence, which carries any weight....let alone a piece of evidence which rises to the level of proof.

But that little detail doesn't get in the way of a good skeptic's beliefs. ;)


...so not much point in bringing him out.
Believers would just as soon have him go away for the same reason, so they don't bring him out either.
Click to expand...


I'm happy to 'bring him out', as far as making direct comparisons with Patty.
I'm also taking the comparisons a step further. I'm in the process of creating a padded upper-body suit, to make a more complete, 3D comparison.
 
kitakaze said:
I often think the same about Gimlin.
Click to expand...


I'd love to see an in-depth interview with both of them together.

Having them talking directly to each other would probably be very revealing...since we know, with 100% certainty, that at least one of them is being dishonest.


I would like to know what questions you would ask Heironimus that you think would bust him.
Click to expand...


I don't want to reveal specifically what I'd ask him, on a public forum....since he could see, or find out about, the questions ahead of time....and then be able to prepare for them.
The questions concern certain details within the film, and details about the alleged suit.
 
Here is a radio interview with Bob Heironimus, Greg Long, Philip Morris and MK Davis. Scroll down to "Listen to Past show Archives", then scroll to #103 March 14, 2007.

It's a 3 hour program and you will hear BH tell his story and answer questions including ones from people who think his confession is a hoax.
 
makaya325 said:
Will, no matter how many friends support him, wheres the suit?
Click to expand...

According to BH: Roger had him take the suit with him when he left Bluff Creek and returned to Yakima. P&G stayed at BC for a few more days. When they returned to Yakima, Roger took the suit from BH and that was the last he saw of it. He says he doesn't know what Roger ultimately did with the suit.
 
What a "prize" this suit would be. Patty has been embedded
in our popular culture. I can imagine it being displayed at the Smithsonian.
Along with Archie Bunker's chair.
 
SweatyYeti said:
I'd love to see an in-depth interview with both of them together.

Having them talking directly to each other would probably be very revealing...since we know, with 100% certainty, that at least one of them is being dishonest.
Click to expand...

I've always been one to say that this should be arranged somehow. There are reasons to think that BH would do it, but BG would not. BH has shown a willingness to do live recorded interviews in which he is cross-examined and knows he will be. BG has not put himself in that position.
 
"BH" may not have all the fine details some may want him to have.
Especially if they have a mindset that he is just a liar.
Don't we all forget certain details?
Every little detail regarding this moment is important to us now.
But was it such a big deal for "BH" at the time? Or did he just want to get
out of that suit as soon as possible and go home.
 
makaya325 said:
Will, as a skeptic, you must admit testimony is unreliable.
Click to expand...

Actually, you accept testimony by witnesses in direct relation to the claim being made. If somebody says they have a pot of lead, you believe them without asking. However, if they say they have a pot of gold, you begin to question them. If they say they got a pot of gold from leprechauns, then you seriously doubt them.

BH's testimony, does not require anything that is out of the ordinary. It does not make it truthful but it has nothing in it that makes one question it outright. However, in the case of PG, we have a large unknown creature that has only been filmed once and just happened to be filmed by two individuals who were out hunting the creature. That in itself is a red flag to question the testimony.

Can both be lying? Yes.
Can both be telling the truth? No. They directly contradict each other.
Can one be lying and the other one forgetful about details that happened over forty years ago? Yes.

Again, the key point about the testimony is that one requires something truly extraordinary and the other does not.

In order for the PG testimony to stand, we need something a bit more than just a film. How about a body or some other physical evidence that stands up to scrutiny?
 
A claim is a claim. Bobs claim is to some out of the ordinary. Why cant you consider an alternative?
 
A claim is a claim. Bobs claim is to some out of the ordinary. Why cant you consider an alternative?
Click to expand...

I don't believe BH wore the suit, so what do I care about whatever story he tells? Did you think all skeptics believed BH?

I feel no need to show who may have worn the "Patty suit". There's no burden there for skeptics at all.

Now, if someone flat out claims that BH was Patty in the PGF, then it's fair to ask them for evidence.

But that's another discussion, imo.

A thread specifically addressing whether BH was Patty might be in order...
 
LTC8K6 said:
I don't believe BH wore the suit, so what do I care about whatever story he tells? Did you think all skeptics believed BH?

I feel no need to show who may have worn the "Patty suit". There's no burden there for skeptics at all.

Now, if someone flat out claims that BH was Patty in the PGF, then it's fair to ask them for evidence.

But that's another discussion, imo.

A thread specifically addressing whether BH was Patty might be in order...
Click to expand...

Exactly. I dont accept his testimony because of the contradictions. However, my gut feeling is that Janos Prohaska had something to do with the film.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom