Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

[SweatyYeti]

Crowlogic wrote:

Did Dfoot's experiment show movement and muscle definition? Or just definition?

The word "and", in that statement of yours, Crow, is a key word.

What you're saying is right in-line with what I said a couple of days ago....about certain things on Patty occuring in combination with each other....

As for my enthusiasm for the PG Film itself....the reason for that is easy to see also.....the combination of Patty's massive body size (width-wise), the well-defined body contour (the arms, the back, and calves), and movement/flexibility (the upper leg, calves, fingers and toes)...all taken together, indicate something extremely un-suitlike.

If you know of a suit that, when seen under conditions comparable to Patty, exhibits this combination of attributes, please provide a link to where the rest of us can see it.....and compare it to Patty.

This principle applies to a few specific movements that we see on Patty....like the finger movement, the toe movement, and the calf and thigh movements.

A short explanation, for now...concerning Patty's finger movement...
The combination of finger movement and the exceptionally long arms requires a more complex suit to create this feature, than would be required if only one (finger movement), or the other (extra-long arms), attribute was present on Patty.

 

[Crowlogic]

But log, aren't you in the costume camp? Wait, is that today? I can't keep track of the flippy-flop.

Did you have a brainfart and forget Wah Chang?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a0/StarTrek-Gorn.jpg



That's 1966 for the shocked and awed goofballs.

Goofball is anyone who thinks the Gorn looks real or even that it looks like a good TV monster. So its got muscles, they don't move they don't flex. That thing looks stupid even standing still. I saw it frist time around and it looked like rubber suit. Maybe you should focus on the Muguru, you know the big white furry marshmellow with the venomous bite. I try and forget Wah Chang his work doesn't hold up.

 

[kitakaze]

JcR, you are very funny and creative. I think you should make some contributions to lolbigfoots.

As if added incentive was needed:

 

[kitakaze]

Goofball is anyone who thinks the Gorn looks real or even that it looks like a good TV monster. So its got muscles, they don't move they don't flex. That thing looks stupid even standing still. I saw it frist time around and it looked like rubber suit. Maybe you should focus on the Muguru, you know the big white furry marshmellow with the venomous bite. I try and forget Wah Chang his work doesn't hold up.

ha ha log, look at you. You're a riot. Keep the material coming for my collection of JREF Bigfoot enthusiast brainfarts. You're Patty eyes are seeing piloerection and all sorts of ridiculous crap and you say you can't even see Gorn's muscles move. They look way better and way clearer than Patty McLumpy's softballs wackiness. Just try putting what you think is muscle flexing on Patty next to Gorn so we can have a good laugh.

Wah Chang had some very Patty-like stuff:

 

[kitakaze]

This principle applies to a few specific movements that we see on Patty....like the finger movement,

You're argument is beyond stupid. Not only can you not differentiate the fingers, even if you could it in no way makes a reall Bigfoot more likely.

the toe movement,

We can see Patty wiggling her toes? No, we see a blur at her feet. There is a part of the PGF where the bottom of her foot is visible and you can see the toes. If the blur you point out is Patty's real foot moving, then because the toes are much shorter than the blur it means that Patty has an insane inexplicable joint that for some useless mystifying reason seen in no other primate, move upward like clown shoes. It is so fantasically stupid that you can't get that.

and the calf and thigh movements.

You mean the softballs and horizontal subducting line on the upper thigh? That movement? Fail.

A short explanation, for now...concerning Patty's finger movement...
The combination of finger movement and the exceptionally long arms requires a more complex suit to create this feature, than would be required if only one (finger movement), or the other (extra-long arms), attribute was present on Patty.

Bigfoot enthusiasts like Sweaty often rely on intellectually dishonest tactics such as stating things as fact that they have been show many times not to be a fact. Sweaty is one of the most intellectually dishonest people here and relies on this constantly.

Patty's arms are not exceptionally long but Sweaty's lame tactic is exceptionally pathetic:

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=oKqBaPwhUPU

 

[Crowlogic]

ha ha log, look at you. You're a riot. Keep the material coming for my collection of JREF Bigfoot enthusiast brainfarts. You're Patty eyes are seeing piloerection and all sorts of ridiculous crap and you say you can't even see Gorn's muscles move. They look way better and way clearer than Patty McLumpy's softballs wackiness. Just try putting what you think is muscle flexing on Patty next to Gorn so we can have a good laugh.

Wah Chang had some very Patty-like stuff:

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_896148b51be09f63a.gif[/qimg]

Wah Chang was third rate. However if you want to compare Patty to Wah Chang's costumes skip the stupid looking gorn and find yourself some furry creatures he did. Then once you find them show us some muscle movement. I don't think you can.

 

[kitakaze]

Its time for the costume camp to demonstrate a costume buldging just like a muscle. Oh and they should try and produce one circa 1967.

Wah Chang was third rate. However if you want to compare Patty to Wah Chang's costumes skip the stupid looking gorn and find yourself some furry creatures he did. Then once you find them show us some muscle movement. I don't think you can.

What is it with Bigfoot enthusiasts and this?:



Do I look like some circus bear to you? Why can't you guys ever handle an honest debate? You wanted a costume with muscles from around the time of the PGF? I gave you one that does well, was cheap, and came before the PGF. It would not be a major deal to glue on some hair as we see on Patty and the Hoffman subject. Show me this excellent flex and muscle movement on Patty that smokes Gorn, flip-flop.

 

[LTC8K6]

Well, the gorn suit, or any suit, doesn't need to look that good. We are talking about filming it the way Patty was filmed.

So, it's not really a fair comparison if you have good clear shots of a different suit. Obviously, the better the shot, the more discrepancies you can see.

The better the shot, the better the suit needs to be.

Patty may look really awful in a good clear shot. Patty may look great as well. We simply don't have one to use for comparison.

All we have are distant, shaky, low res shots of Patty.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Patty's arms are not exceptionally long but Sweaty's lame tactic is exceptionally pathetic:

Patty's arms are clearly longer than a human's arms, proportionally speaking.

Here is the animated gif that was posted a few days ago....with 3 key points highlighted.

The significant length that's different is not the length of their 'fingertips to their shoulders'...but the length from their 'fingertips to their feet'...

If you hold your mouse cursor over either one of the middle lines, you can see exactly how far the middle line moves, from Patty to Jim.

Patty's fingertips reach significantly closer to her feet, than Bob Heironimus' do, and Jim McClarin's, also.


Here's another way of looking at it...courtesy of Jack Davis...

 

[Crowlogic]

Sweaty can you do a comparison of Jim McClarin with Bob Heronimus? Bet Jim and Bob match up well with limb ratios.

As for Patty's long arms the effect is enhanced by her stooped posture. However I don't think Jim McClarin could have stooped enough to get his arms down to Patty's let alone walked (in a suit or out of one) naturally for the lenght of the PGF.

 

[LTC8K6]

That's a lot of work to show us something that does nothing to eliminate a suit...

 

[SweatyYeti]

Sweaty can you do a comparison of Jim McClarin with Bob Heronimus? Bet Jim and Bob match up well with limb ratios.

That's a good idea, Crow. I'll try to get to that a little later this week.

I think they'll match-up very closely, too.

As for Patty's long arms the effect is enhanced by her stooped posture. However I don't think Jim McClarin could have stooped enough to get his arms down to Patty's let alone walked (in a suit or out of one) naturally for the lenght of the PGF.

Quite right, Crow......that does introduce a little error, but, like you said...it doesn't account for all of the difference in their arm lengths.

The fact of the matter is....Patty's arms appear longer, or closer to the feet, than a human's arms, in ALL of the comparisons that are done.

There's a simple reason for this.......her arms are longer.

 

[SweatyYeti]

That's a lot of work to show us something that does nothing to eliminate a suit...

It takes a lot of work to get the 'hard of seeing' to see, sometimes.....you see?

 

[kitakaze]

Patty's arms are clearly longer than a human's arms, proportionally speaking. (snip)

I love that post. It is an absolutely perfect example of Bigfoot science. All that goofy crayon work. Here are some simple questions that clearly outline the idiocy of that piece of Bigfoot science:

1) When confidently pronouncing that "Patty's arms are clearly longer than a human's arms, proportionally speaking," what was your sample base? IOW, how many humans did you compare to?

2) Patty is hunched over, genius. What's the length from the tip of the right hand to the left foot and more importantly, what the heck does it matter?

Please note:

Post #585 kicks post #589 in the hole of no return.

 

[kitakaze]

It takes a lot of work to get the 'hard of seeing' to see, sometimes.....you see?

My thoughts exactly. Let us know when you start seeing tummy rocks, diaper butts, and freaky thigh lines.

ETA: More Sweaty dodge fodder:

Q - Are there any features of Patty that are more consistent with a hoax than a live Bigfoot?

 

[manofthesea]

Hey Mr. DJ

mathmatical

Edited by Tricky: 

Incivility removed

...you're the first self proclaimed science teacher that I've ever been aware of that can't spell mathematics.

Please continue.

Please refrain from personal attacks and address the topic.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[Correa Neto]

Correa Neto wrote:




Uhhhhhhh.......no, I have not.


Do I need to?


Uhhhhhhh.......no, I do not.


Why not?


Uhhhhhhh.......'cause most folks have brains.

Oh, anyone with a brain can see you are trying again to evade and hide the fact that your claims are based on nothing but beliefs and heavilly-biased poorly-made evaluations.

Anyone with a brain can see you are -once again- using obfuscation tactics in an attempt to evade these requests:

Please show us the methodology and criteria you used to rule out the possibility of a play of light, shadows and perspective being responsible for what you claim to be bulging muscles.

Please show us the methodology and criteria you used to rule out the possibility of motion blur being responsible for what you claim to be moving toes.

Please show us the methodology and criteria you used to choose your impressions of extreme fluidity of movements and not-yet-matched realism to my impressions of a regular man-in-a-suit filmed from far away on substandard exposure and stability settings.

As usual, its not working here Sweaty. You'll have to sweat a lot to improve your arguments...

 

[kitakaze]

I realize that overeducated people usually lack spelling skills (and personal hygiene, maintaining relationships, taking their meds), but you're the first self proclaimed science teacher that I've ever been aware of that can't spell mathematics.

Please continue.

Thanks for spotting that "e" I missed and keeping me sharp, MOTS. I don't usually have a problem with that:

I could go to the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology section here and ask someone if they've been to the BFF. They would sooner think I was talking about a gay porn site or Indian movie forum than something to do with Bigfoot.

There is something you can help with with since you're being generous. What I do have a consistent bad habit with and lamented about here in the "What do you want to do?" threa":

Stop typing "your" as "you." Just can't seem to get it down.

So if you could keep an eye out for my wayward "r"s I would really appreciate the help. Cheers.

ETA: BTW, you have me as a self-proclaimed Buddhist disciple and now as a self-proclaimed science teacher. This is an interesting character you're creating for me. What shall we name him? I know! We take Buddhist disciple/teacher Nichiren Daishonin and ol' Albert Einstein to create "Nichireinstein!" I'll wander about the lands dodging feudal lords and Neils Bohr fans while expounding on the Mystic Law of the Lotus Sutra and Special Relativity.

 

[Crowlogic]

That's a lot of work to show us something that does nothing to eliminate a suit...

Well if you're in the modality that its gotta be a suit then that's where your orbit is going to remain. You are of course welcome to what ever modality you choose. However comparing the limb ratos of a couple of tall human beings involved in the topic of this film simply having a look around the cemetary knowing that Grant is burried in Grant's Tomb.

 

[Cleon]

You know what?

I've come to the conclusion at this point that anyone who tries to determine conclusively whether or not Patty is a suit is drawing more information from the footage than is actually there. It's a remarkably poor piece of footage, really, and much of the "analysis" I've seen, from skeptics as well as Footers, involve blowing it up to the point where the image quality is, IMO, too poor to really be able to tell anything. I really and truly think that both the "zipper" that some skeptics have seen, and the "muscles" that SweatyYeti claims to see, are both akin to paredolia--people seeing what they expect to see.

It's just a piss-poor image. It could be a suit, IMO it almost certainly is, but I can't see conclusively determining that one way or the other from the footage itself.