• 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.

Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Also over at Cryptomumble cryptofool Colman is lying about dead bears again:

Short-Sheeting by Skeptics

Next, there is this business about dead bodies. Most Bigfoot researchers point not just to the fact that a carcass of a bear (not just grizzlies) in the wild are not found, but to the fact that even by a conservative estimate, bears might outnumber Bigfoot by perhaps 1000 to one, or maybe even 10,000 to one ~ and the dead bodies of bears are still not routinely found throughout the woods, despite their numbers.
Click to expand...

Why is Loren Coleman a liar?









http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttlYodEJyzg&feature=channel_page

http://www.wildraven.net/carnivores/ursidae/grizzly/gye/mortality/report.html
 
Last edited:
Ha! Don'tcha just love facts?

the fact that a carcass of a bear (not just grizzlies) in the wild are not found, but to the fact that even by a conservative estimate, bears might outnumber Bigfoot by perhaps 1000 to one, or maybe even 10,000 to one...
Click to expand...


RayG
 
1 out of 1,000/10,000 .... As Rayg , pulled out of this air. But contrast that with reporting all over the world/all over the US, then take a population of bear of 32500 and grizzli of 60000 (45K in alaska, yukon, BC alone, so if you take the US only 1300 grizzli http://www.grizzlybear.org/grizpop.htm)

So that make it at the outside a population of 3250 to 325 bigfoot. Assuming breeding population with stable number, and life cycle similar to big ape / human, There should be 325 to 3250 corpse every 20 to 30 years, or at the outside 12 to 120 corpse a year. And none whatsoever were EVER found.

OTOH we still know that florida panther has got a population of 25 to 50 and is studied by biologist, AND was road-killed.

That still does not solve the problem of why it was never found by biologist or forest officials. Or why there is no corpse.
 
Crow, you may have misrepresented me on BFF (post 429). You said that we are in agreement about the thigh "hernia". I think you are oversimplifying what is there to see.


Crow Logic on BFF said:
I'm Borrowing Bob Zenor's gif.

The dark line across Patty's thigh is almost certainly due to the fur bing disturbed by the thumb/hand brushing across the thigh. It was pointed out by one William Parcher that the so called hernia seems most likely to be fur disturbed by the motion of the hand brushing across the area. I agree with WP on this point. But take a good look at the fur in the area where the hand can brush it and you'll notice a nice wake of fur as it brushed by the motion of the hand.
Click to expand...

post-10-1101609371.gif


Previously in the 411 PGF, I talked about this and posted a graphic. I'll include it again below. I see at least three unusual features between the knee and the hip.

1. The sudden appearance/disappearance of a roundish "hair ruffle" above the knee at the forward part of the thigh. This location coincides with the position of the hand during the arm-swinging gait.

2. The continual appearance of a "crease" which extends completely across the upper part of the thigh. This location is above the position of the hand during the arm-swinging gait.

3. A subducting of the "crease" and section above it... subducting beneath the mass of the waist/butt. The subduction is subtle, and only occurs when the foot is directly beneath the torso and just behind it. IOW, you don't see subduction when the foot is extended in front of the torso during the walk.

Crow, I'm often left to wonder which feature (1 or 2) is it that some Pattycakes are calling a "hernia". Often, they speak of one anomoly instead of two (well, three). When a person says it's the hand brushing the fur, or it's a hernia - they can only talking about one feature (1 or 2), but not both.


a2d75dc0.jpg
 
WP the " Fur ruffed " is what a segment of LMS is devoted to, and has Meldrum suggesting it is a hernia .

What some people fail to consider, is that from the angle in question, there is no way to determine how close the hand is to the thigh.

In other parts of the film , the hand is clearly seen to be held away from the thigh ..

Hand%20away.gif


I believe the shoulder pads and upper chest padding force the arms out from the body; much like you see in a football player.
 
Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but since there are lots of varied stuff here...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7913375.stm
Why there is not a single paper on bigfoot footprints at Science?

What about comparing this footprint with those from australopithecines and the alleged bigfoot footprints? Any explanation why bigfeet's quite often look like human's? Actually like a caricature of human footprints?
 
GT/CS said:
Is her diaper butt really just her left hand being viewed beyond her butt or has that theory been proven false?
Click to expand...

So, about the diaper butt and Patty's left hand. Have the bigfoot believers actually disproven one of the skeptics ideas? Shall we scratch diaper butt off our list?
 
Something funny happened to me this morning. I looked in a mirror, and I remarked that my hand, are as low as patty's (mid tigh) when I am fully errect. And if I stoop a bit like she is in many picture, I reach my knee.

Now i feel like I am a freak or any ape or something. But i will certainly laugh out loudly the next guy which tell me patty's arm have inhuman proportion. Or maybe i am trully inhuman. That would also explain a things or two.

I wish i had a web cam to post it, but cover me with hair and I could prolly pass for an acceptable bigfoot.

ETA: I am 1m75, without stooping being fully errect , I am about 15cm (6 inch?) above the knee and stooping as much as patty is (to my opinion), I am dead center on the knee. With rubber gloves I am below the knee.

I am freaking myself out. Jeez since when I looked so simian ?

ETA2 : looking at the picture above, Patty's hand while with the shoulder slumped don't even reach the height *I* do reach errect and standing still. Jeez really crow/sweaty where in the hell did you take her inhuman IM idea ?
 
Last edited:
GT/CS said:
So, about the diaper butt and Patty's left hand. Have the bigfoot believers actually disproven one of the skeptics ideas? Shall we scratch diaper butt off our list?
Click to expand...
If it is Patty's hand, wouldn't that mean that her arms are not any longer than you would normally expect from a human? If her arm were bent at the elbow wouldn't you expect to see her elbow peaking out behind her?
 
William Parcher said:
Crow, you may have misrepresented me on BFF (post 429). You said that we are in agreement about the thigh "hernia". I think you are oversimplifying what is there to see.




[qimg]http://www.bigfootforums.com/uploads//post-10-1101609371.gif[/qimg]

Previously in the 411 PGF, I talked about this and posted a graphic. I'll include it again below. I see at least three unusual features between the knee and the hip.

1. The sudden appearance/disappearance of a roundish "hair ruffle" above the knee at the forward part of the thigh. This location coincides with the position of the hand during the arm-swinging gait.

2. The continual appearance of a "crease" which extends completely across the upper part of the thigh. This location is above the position of the hand during the arm-swinging gait.

3. A subducting of the "crease" and section above it... subducting beneath the mass of the waist/butt. The subduction is subtle, and only occurs when the foot is directly beneath the torso and just behind it. IOW, you don't see subduction when the foot is extended in front of the torso during the walk.

Crow, I'm often left to wonder which feature (1 or 2) is it that some Pattycakes are calling a "hernia". Often, they speak of one anomoly instead of two (well, three). When a person says it's the hand brushing the fur, or it's a hernia - they can only talking about one feature (1 or 2), but not both.


[qimg]http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w310/william_parcher/a2d75dc0.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

The thigh lines may be in addition to the thumb rub causing the darkline also the wrist/lower forearm brushing lightly against the area above the darkline. I see more than any anything else fur being disturbed by the action of the lower arm. The problem with the subducting thigh material is trying to rationalize the motion and position of the leg to cause the reactive movement in the thigh. Got packing to do its back to the USA.
 
Crowlogic said:
The thigh lines may be in addition to the thumb rub causing the darkline also the wrist/lower forearm brushing lightly against the area above the darkline. I see more than any anything else fur being disturbed by the action of the lower arm. The problem with the subducting thigh material is trying to rationalize the motion and position of the leg to cause the reactive movement in the thigh. Got packing to do its back to the USA.
Click to expand...

Crow, how about the obvious wristband that holds the glove to the sleeve? Any thoughts on how to explain that away?
 
Diogenes said:
There was one shot where a hand made it look like a flap was hanging off the bottom, but even discounting that, I still think ' diaper butt ' is a valid description
Click to expand...

What the hell is with your avatar? Some of them are creepy

Keep on topic please. Discuss the subject of the thread, not other members.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Gaspode
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I still think my car keys theory explains the ruffle best. Keys hit by hand on the forward swing ( clumsy, but who wouldnt be in a big suit) keys jiggle a bit before settling. Its clear to see. Problem solved I say!
 
Here's a bit of provocative PGF info. There was a poster in the last year at BFF who mentioned that while doing a maintenance job at some unnamed rich fellows house he stumbled on something very interesting. This fellow had a collection room filled with unusual artifacts. One of the items was encased in a glass case and was labeled as the suit from the Patterson film. It looked a little weathered, but identical to the film. He stated he would try and sneak a camera next job he had there.
 
Diogenes said:
WP the " Fur ruffed " is what a segment of LMS is devoted to, and has Meldrum suggesting it is a hernia .

What some people fail to consider, is that from the angle in question, there is no way to determine how close the hand is to the thigh.

In other parts of the film , the hand is clearly seen to be held away from the thigh ..

[qimg]http://www.gatzstuff.com/images/Other/Hand%20away.gif[/qimg]

I believe the shoulder pads and upper chest padding force the arms out from the body; much like you see in a football player.
Click to expand...

What you're failing to take into account is that Patty's shoulder to leg posture is quite different between the posture of the "turn" sequence and the posture of her walking dead straight away from Patterson. When she turns her upper body is twisting which would draw the arm closer to the body allowing the hand/wrist/forearm to more easily brush the thigh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom