Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here's an amazing feat...accomplished by Patty's amazing "fake" feet....

Her toes can flip (straight) up a few inches...

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Pattys%20Toes/PattyToesGif6Repeat.gif[/qimg]



Yet, when her foot is in a vertical position.....those "fake" toes stay nicely curled-up close to the ball of her "fake" foot...


[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Pattys%20Toes/PFoot2.jpg[/qimg]



Just one more example of Roger's amazing talent with suit construction, I reckon. ;)


I'm in the process of trying to replicate this with a fake foot, using wood dowels as toes. I'll post images and video of the result, as soon as I can.

It shouldn't be difficult to reproduce this effect..............right??! :)

Don't forget to replicate the wrist band!!!
 

Attachments

  • handmove1.gif
    handmove1.gif
    45.5 KB · Views: 169
A nice good heavy load...if he hit her multiple times, he would have had more than film footage & prints...
 
GT/CS wrote:
Don't forget to replicate the wrist band!!!


Don't worry about the "wrist bands", GT!
If what I highlighted cannot be replicated with a fake foot....then Patty is a real, live Sasquatch! It's as simple as that! :D
 
GT/CS wrote:



Don't worry about the "wrist bands", GT!
If what I highlighted cannot be replicated with a fake foot....then Patty is a real, live Sasquatch! It's as simple as that! :D

What you highlighted can be replicated with a hockey stick. I don't know what that says about Patty.
 
GT/CS wrote:



Don't worry about the "wrist bands", GT!
If what I highlighted cannot be replicated with a fake foot....then Patty is a real, live Sasquatch! It's as simple as that! :D

This again? Why didn't you show both feet? Also, if Patty's foot really is bending like that yet the toes are as short as they are, what the heck joint in the foot bones is that and whatever would be the anatomical purpose/advantage of backwards bending feet? I know it could easily happen in a bad suit but real feet?
 
This again? Why didn't you show both feet?


The view of the right foot is better than the view of the left foot, as least as far as the toes, goes.


Also, if Patty's foot really is bending like that yet the toes are as short as they are, what the heck joint in the foot bones is that and whatever would be the anatomical purpose/advantage of backwards bending feet?


Maybe it's the mid-tarsel break, in action??? Or maybe it's just the toes bending.

Again...the significant thing is that if the combination of toe movement (with the foot horizontal) and toe positioning (with the foot vertical) cannot be replicated with loosely-hinged fake toes.....then it cannot be a fake foot w/fake toes.

Like it or not. :)




I know it could easily happen in a bad suit....


Sure you do, kitty.

You "know" it....you just can't show it.
 
Once again, Sweaty seems to be under the impression that rubber doesn't bend...

If anything, seems to me his evidence is evidence for a suit, not against it. I know my toes don't flop about like a pair of clown shoes when I walk.
 
Maybe it's the mid-tarsel break, in action??? Or maybe it's just the toes bending.

I'm not so sure it's either one of those. Here is a sequence of frames from an animated gif. We see the thing that is proposed to be splaying or upwards bending toes in #3 - but then in #4 we see that the same thing is there, but it is ghostly. IMO, the foot and toes should be already planted flat on the sand in #4, and maybe already even in #3.

If you look at #2-5 frames, you see that the toe-splaying/bending thing only shows up in two frames. I guess this might be a super rapid Bigfoot reflex like a rattlesnake strike or anglerfish gulp.

I don't really know what is going on here, but it doesn't seem right that that big thing in front is actually the toes (or entire ball) bending upwards.

If you get bored looking at the feet, you might check out the fingers to see what might be going on there. I can't see anything with the feet or fingers that would properly rule out a guy in a costume.


18c138f1.jpg
71c66ab2.jpg


db6ab01b.jpg
ea604f3b.jpg


30012e9e.jpg
c388d921.jpg
 
This again? Why didn't you show both feet? Also, if Patty's foot really is bending like that yet the toes are as short as they are, what the heck joint in the foot bones is that and whatever would be the anatomical purpose/advantage of backwards bending feet? I know it could easily happen in a bad suit but real feet?

Kitakaze, don't you see that such a foot would leave perfect footprints!
 
I'm not so sure it's either one of those. Here is a sequence of frames from an animated gif. We see the thing that is proposed to be splaying or upwards bending toes in #3 - but then in #4 we see that the same thing is there, but it is ghostly. IMO, the foot and toes should be already planted flat on the sand in #4, and maybe already even in #3.

If you look at #2-5 frames, you see that the toe-splaying/bending thing only shows up in two frames. I guess this might be a super rapid Bigfoot reflex like a rattlesnake strike or anglerfish gulp.

I don't really know what is going on here, but it doesn't seem right that that big thing in front is actually the toes (or entire ball) bending upwards.

If you get bored looking at the feet, you might check out the fingers to see what might be going on there. I can't see anything with the feet or fingers that would properly rule out a guy in a costume.


[qimg]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w310/william_parcher/18c138f1.jpg[/qimg][qimg]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w310/william_parcher/71c66ab2.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w310/william_parcher/db6ab01b.jpg[/qimg][qimg]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w310/william_parcher/ea604f3b.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w310/william_parcher/30012e9e.jpg[/qimg][qimg]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w310/william_parcher/c388d921.jpg[/qimg]

Those are great shots of the diaper-butt!!!!
 
Bobbie- are you going to answer my questions? You said you would.

Sure, sorry about that...it got by me.

Bobbie Short- Thanks for you info on the bullets hitting Patty. But I have a couple questions:

1. Why didn't Patty take off running when the gunshots started popping off?

I don’t know the reason, but here is something interesting that might be applicable. Recently (Oct 2008) M.K. Davis sat down in Al Hodgson’s living room and recorded an interview with him and his wife. According to that interview, Patterson cast juvenile tracks off the sandbar at Bluff Creek. We know nothing about the tracks of a little one cast that day in Bluff Crk. In another 2008 interview with Patricia Patterson in her home, the following photograph was giving to M.K. Davis…it shows the juvenile casts. http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/JREFimage.htm (Pictures #5 & #6 on that page, scroll down) It shows her husband posing with the Laird Meadow track; another pair that I assume is the same as the Laverty track and unknown multiple Bluff Creek tracks, some of them different from Patty’s imprints. The juvenile tracks can be seen on the ground next to Patterson. In reviewing that photograph of Roger with his California tracks, what other explanation can you have than there existed other individuals on that sandbar in Oct of 1967?? Was Patty trying to lead Patterson’s party away from others? A juvenile? I simply do not know, I cannot account for all the tracks cast on the sandbar that day, the Laird Meadow Rd tracks notwithstanding… It was cast on a different date.

2. Couldn't Patty just jump dimensions and save herself? Evidently it wasn’t an option.

3. How far do you think bobG was from Patty when he shot? Like the story we were told, the figure varies … I would have to look up that video again…I’m not sure where to look, chk Murphy’s book, he has all those dimensions published and BG’s interviews are easily Googled or are on YouTube. There are discrepancies there too.

4. IF they murdered a Bigfoot, wouldn't it have behooved Rog and BobG to put Heironymous at the scene, and tell everyone it was a hoax instead of saying it was a real animal that got away? Why not either just A. Go public with the Bigfoot body, or B. Say it was a hoax with BobH in the suit?

I have no idea what must have gone through their heads. Roger (it appears) was looking for a windfall, he thought finding & photographing a BF “in those days” would mean fortune and fame. There is no money in a hoax, although I guess plenty has been made off the MDF & the asscast….

Does that answer all your questions, Drewbot??

Somebody else made a comment a few posts back about the use of the packhorse. I tell you, it wasn’t carrying gear to make “camp” with… Patterson & Gimlin had already been in that area, they had a main camp constructed less than two miles away. Again I ask, what was the need for a pack horse with double side boxes? I’ve bothered with packhorses, they’re a nuisance if all you’re going to do is photograph something and the camera is in the saddlebags. I want to know what was in those wooden boxes.
See packhorse photo at the bottom of this page: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/JREFimage.htm (last photo)
 
Again I ask, what was the need for a pack horse with double side boxes? I’ve bothered with packhorses, they’re a nuisance if all you’re going to do is photograph something and the camera is in the saddlebags.

But that isn't all they were doing. They were making a bigfoot movie. The packhorses and their gear were props, just like you'd see in most any other film. Making movies is a nuisance, but the payoff at the end makes it all worth it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom