The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

[xblade]

kitakaze wrote:



Is it possible that the "Roe-ster" saw a real, live Bigfoot???

Sure....if bigfoot were real. Even if he did, it wouldn't make Patty a real bigfoot.

 

[SweatyYeti]

And of course no comment about what you asked for.

Sweaty, you must make a terrible dinner guest. You have this habit of asking for and demanding things with hilarious arrogance and being a total clam when you get them.

My apologies for the 'hilarious arrogance', my dear bub....but sometimes it just occurs....spontane-a-ously like...without warning.

As for being a 'terrible dinner guest'....you're right, I can be all of that, too....I suffer from a very rare (and controversial) disease, known as 'spontaneous hurling'....
I've lost more friends than I care to count, due to this affliction.


Now....as for the Gorn....where in that first video (time-wise) do the Gorn's molded leg 'muscles' appear to move, or bulge???

Here are Patty's left leg lumps, or muscles, bulging...

I'd like to download that Gorn video...and put together an animated-gif of something comparable on the Gorn's leg, to compare side-by-side with Patty's left leg.

Where in the video is there something comparable?

 

[kitakaze]

Now....as for the Gorn....where in that first video (time-wise) do the Gorn's molded leg 'muscles' appear to move, or bulge???

Here are Patty's left leg lumps, or muscles, bulging...

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Patty/PattyLeftlegAG11.gif[/qimg]

Two frame goofiness. I see a couple of softballs on the back of Patty McLumpy's leg. I see shadows on Patty's goofy legs. So what. You haven't shown compelling muscle movement at all. FAIL. Next.

I'd like to download that Gorn video...and put together an animated-gif of something comparable on the Gorn's leg, to compare side-by-side with Patty's left leg.

Where in the video is there something comparable?

Do it. Here's some more Gorn for you:



The whole time you see Gorn, it looks better than Patty. The legs look way better. I don't need to worry about something just because you say it's there. The gobbledy-gook you make up in your head is not my problem.

Bob Heironimus escapades with Roger Patterson, PGF/Roe matches, PGF 3 post#711. Run, run, run.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Nice try, prancer. I was very ready for you to try that. The matches go waaay beyond just the description of the creature itself. The encounter, the various sketches, the setting, everything. Try to muster up some kind of interest in the truth and compare for yourself:

You couldn't answer the question, directly, with a 'Yes' or a 'No'.

xblade could, though....

xblade wrote:

Sure....if bigfoot were real

I haven't read-up much on the Roe sighting report, but from the little bit I have read, it sounded like his sighting report has 'held-up' to investigation pretty well.

Being from the same general area....if Roe and Patterson both crossed paths with real Bigfoot creatures, there could very well be a lot of similarities in their descriptions.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

I see shadows on Patty's goofy legs. So what. You haven't shown compelling muscle movement at all. FAIL. Next.

Does the 'lump', or 'calf muscle', on Patty's left leg appear bigger, or more pronounced, in the 2nd frame....or doesn't it?

 

[kitakaze]

How to spook Sweaty...

William Roe:

I could just see the top of the animal's head and the top of one shoulder. A moment later it raised up and stepped out into the opening. Then I saw that it was not a bear.

This, to the best of my recollection, is what the creature looked like and how it acted as it came across the clearing directly towards me. My first impression was of a huge man, about six feet tall, almost three feet wide and probably weighing somewhere near 300 pounds. It was covered from head to foot with dark brown, silver-tipped hair. But as it came closer I saw by its breasts that it was a female.

And yet, its torso was not curved like a female's. Its broad frame was straight from shoulder to hip. Its arms were much thicker than a man's arms, and longer, reaching almost to its knees. Its feet were broader proportionately than a man's, about five inches wide at the front and tapering to much thinner heels. When it walked it placed the heel of its foot down first, and I could see the grey-brown skin or hide on the soles of its feet.

The shape of this creature's head some-what resembled a Negro's. The head was higher at the back than at the front. The nose was broad and flat. The lips and chin protruded farther than its nose. But the hair that covered it, leaving bare only the parts of the face around the mouth, nose and ears, made it resemble an animal as much as a human. None of its hair, even on the back of its head, was longer than an inch, and that on its face was much shorter. Its ears were shaped like a human's ears. But its eyes were small and black like a bear's. And its neck was unhuman. Thicker and shorter than any man as I had ever seen.

Finally, the wild thing must have got my scent, for it looked directly at me through on opening in the brush. A look of amazement crossed its face. It looked so comical at the moment I had to grin. Still in a crouched position, it backed up three or four steps, then straightened up to its full height and started to walk rapidly back the way it had come. For a moment it watched me over its shoulder as it went, not exactly afraid, but as though it wanted no contact with anything strange.

http://www.bigfoot-lives.com/html/william_roe.html

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4443732&postcount=824

Roger Patterson:

Patterson said the creature stood upright the entire time, reaching a height of about six and a half to seven feet and an estimated weight of between 350 and 400 pounds.

"I moved to take the pictures and told Bob to cover me. My gun was still in the scabbard. I'd grabbed the camera instead. Besides, we'd made a pact not to kill one if we saw one unless we had to."
Patterson said the creatures'(sic) head was much like a human's though considerably more slanted and with a large forehead and broad, wide nostrils.

"It's arms hung almost to its knees and when it walked, the arms swung at its sides."
- o -
PATTERSON said he is very much certain the creature was female "because when it turned towards us for a moment, I could see its breasts hanging down and they flopped when it moved." The creature had what he described as silvery brown hair all over its body except on its face around the nose and cheeks. The hair was two to four inches long and of a light tint on top with a deeper color underneath.

"She never made a sound. She wasn't hostile to us, but we don't think she was afraid of us either. She acted like she didn't want anything to do with us if she could avoid it." Patterson said the creature had an ambling gait as it made off over the some 200 yards he had it in sight. He said he lost sight of the creature, but Gimlin caught a brief glimpse of it afterward.

"But she stunk, like did you ever let in a dog out of the rain and he smelled like he'd been rolling in something dead. Her odor didn't last long where she'd been."

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/firstpgf.htm

 

[kitakaze]

Does the 'lump', or 'calf muscle', on Patty's left leg appear bigger, or more pronounced, in the 2nd frame....or doesn't it?

I am not a hopeless fool so I don't think any significant muscle movement can be shown in those 2 frames. The shadow angle moves. Slightly more light seems appear on the top softball-like lump and slightly less on the bottom in the second frame. It's consistent with the movement of shadow on a couple lumps as the leg moves. This doesn't make any sense for a real leg muscle in that type of movement. It doesn't look like any natural muscle at all. FAIL. Next.

Nice try at baiting though.

 

[SweatyYeti]

I asked you a couple of questions, in posts 778 and 782, and you failed to answer either one of them....in your posts responding to them, kitty.

In response to this question...

Now....as for the Gorn....where in that first video (time-wise) do the Gorn's molded leg 'muscles' appear to move, or bulge???

...you wrote...

I don't need to worry about something just because you say it's there.

I didn't ask you what you need to "worry about", kitty.....I asked you to support your ridiculous claim, that the Gorn suit shows "apparent muscle movement" comparable to what's seen on Patty.

It appears that you cannot support your claim.


You made this accusation, of me...

This is fine evidence of Sweaty's blatant intellectual dishonesty.

He is truly one of the finest examples of intellectually bankrupt cultish footers.

But it's you who are "bankrupt", when it comes to intellectual honesty.

You can't answer my questions directly....and neither can you support your lame claims.


Again....where exactly in the Gorn video does the stiff Gorn suit show any apparent muscle movement, which can be shown (in a side-by-side comparison)to compare closely with Patty's movements??

Again....Does the 'lump', or 'calf muscle', on Patty's left leg appear bigger, or more pronounced, in the 2nd frame....or doesn't it?



kitty's predicted response.....as he lies on the floor, twitching...

"Ahhhhh.......ahhhhhh.....you're an awful dinner guest.......gaaaaaa.....gaaaaaaaaaa........you failed miserably......you're a coward........aaaaaaahhhhhh.......keep prancing, sweaty.....gaaaaa......gaaaaaaa......I'll get you, my pretty, and your little dog, too!!"......etc.....ad infinitum.

 

[kitakaze]

kitakaze wrote:



You couldn't answer the question, directly, with a 'Yes' or a 'No'.

xblade could, though....

Why, yes, Sweaty. Roe may have really seen a Bigfoot in an encounter nearly exactly like that of the PGF. As xblade pointed out, that doesn't make Patty real. You'll see though that I anticipated your type of intellectual slimeyness in that original post demonstrating some of the matches:

Desperado footer's will employ a perversion of Occam's Razor on you and tell you that the simililarities are simply because of the natural appearance and behaviour of a female sasquatch. As Huntster would say - Bullspit! The only female Bigfoot encounter that Patterson ever knew of (or at least spoke and wrote about) he was so impressed by that he wrote about the encounter in detail in his book the year prior to the PGF and was inspired to make his own drawings based on the encounter.

Anyone who can not see the obvious and screaming similarities between the William Roe account and the PGF is either is deep denial or deep stupidity.

Once again I'm way ahead of you.

I haven't read-up much on the Roe sighting report, but from the little bit I have read, it sounded like his sighting report has 'held-up' to investigation pretty well.

Being from the same general area....if Roe and Patterson both crossed paths with real Bigfoot creatures, there could very well be a lot of similarities in their descriptions.

I've laid it all out for you, Sweaty, and given you links. Let the excuses begin.

 

[kitakaze]

I asked you a couple of questions, in posts 778 and 782, and you failed to answer either one of them....in your posts responding to them, kitty.

In response to this question...




...you wrote...




I didn't ask you what you need to "worry about", kitty.....I asked you to support your ridiculous claim, that the Gorn suit shows "apparent muscle movement" comparable to what's seen on Patty.

It appears that you cannot support your claim.

You see what you're missing here, Sweaty? Not to hard to comprehend, is it? Shall I get someone who speaks fool to explain it for you? You need to establish the one before you go to the two. Gorn has simulated musculature shown in bright sunlight with shadows moving all over it. You haven't established true muscle movement versus light on lumps.

Bring it.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

The shadow angle moves. Slightly more light seems appear on the top softball-like lump and slightly less (light) on the bottom in the second frame.

Amazing....you do see a difference in the 'lump' or 'calf muscle' in those two frames! Wow.......there's a slim ray of hope for you, kitty.

You know....sometimes those 'more light here, less light there' effects are actually because something moves.

But I understand your hesitancy to say the bulging mass "moved". It gets way too close to "real muscle", doesn't it?


kitakaze wrote:

You need to establish the one before you go to the two. Gorn has simulated musculature shown in bright sunlight with shadows moving all over it.

You stated that the Gorn suit provides what I asked for...so you need to support your claim, with something specific.

First, to re-cap a little...


SweatyYeti wrote (to Greg):

Also.....do you know of an example of a video which shows 'apparent calf-muscle movement' in a suit, which is comparable to what is seen in the animated-gif above?

You responded to my request with this...

You have this habit of asking for and demanding things with hilarious arrogance and being a total clam when you get them.

You are Gorn with the wind:

(Stiff Gorn Video)

You stated that the Gorn video supplies exactly 'what I asked for".

So...again I ask you..... specifically where in that first video (time-wise) do the Gorn's molded leg 'muscles' appear to move, or bulge???

You haven't established true muscle movement versus light on lumps.

Kitty, my dear......this isn't a shouting match over whether something is 'truly muscle', or 'light on lumps'.

Those descriptions are simply 2 different possible interpretations of 'apparent muscle movement' on Patty's legs. (If you want to say that any visible movement is a trick of "light on lumps", that's fine. I don't care how you interpret the movement.)

So, first, BEFORE we get to the 'interpretation' phase of the "apparent movements".....we need to SEE, and compare, the 'apparent movements'.

Again.....I ask you...

Now....as for the Gorn....where in that first video (time-wise) do the Gorn's molded leg 'muscles' appear to move, or bulge???

 

[SweatyYeti]

Just a passing thought.....Roger sure were a lucky fella'......

I am not a hopeless fool so I don't think any significant muscle movement can be shown in those 2 frames.

The shadow angle moves.

Roger's suit got the 'luck of the light' for both left and right calf muscles....and, his luck didn't stop there!

In every comparison of Bob Heirony's and Patty's arm lengths.....Patty's arms appear longer. But the skeptics here counter it by saying that we don't know what camera lenses were used in the pictures, so the comparisons are invalid.....suggesting that Roger got the 'luck of the lens', also.

But wait.....there's more!

Patty's toes appear to move upwards by quite a bit....yet....the skeptics here will explain that away as just "blurring" of the front of the foot.

Roger got the 'luck of the blur', too....right where he needed it.

Lucky Roger.

What a joke.

 

[kitakaze]

Just a passing thought.....Roger sure were a lucky fella'......

Yes, very lucky! I was just thinking the same thing. In fact lucky doesn't even begin to describe. He was yearning for money and dreaming of Bigfoot. Just the year before he ripped off Morgan Kunstler's illustration of the William Roe story. He put the copied drawing in his book and slapped his initials on it. Then he recounts in detail that breath-taking encounter. It seems to be the only encounter of a female Bigfoot he's ever heard about. He's clearly fascinated with the account. He even draws another female Bigfoot. But here's where the mind-bending luck comes in. The very next year when he's out hunting for Bigfoot evidence and hanging out with his "trusty native tracker," Bob Gimlin, who just happens to be riding Bob Heironimus' horse, he apparently stumles across a female Bigfoot with the same description as in his book and has nearly the same exact type of encounter!

Holy crap! What crazy-ass luck! Astronomical odds!

Roger's suit got the 'luck of the light' for both left and right calf muscles....and, his luck didn't stop there!

Oh please, do explain got the luck of the light? The light wasn't showing any kind of leg muscles I've ever seen, Desperado.

In every comparison of Bob Heirony's and Patty's arm lengths.....Patty's arms appear longer. But the skeptics here counter it by saying that we don't know what camera lenses were used in the pictures, so the comparisons are invalid.....suggesting that Roger got the 'luck of the lens', also.

One magic skeleton, coming up!

Patty's toes appear to move upwards by quite a bit....yet....the skeptics here will explain that away as just "blurring" of the front of the foot.

Roger got the 'luck of the blur', too....right where he needed it.

Yes, Sweaty! Isn't it loopy!? It's not just the toes. We can see Patty's toes on the bottom of her feet. They're not very long. Not as long as that blur. That blur if it is her foot moving would mean she has insane clown feet that crack in the middle and have some crazy joint that bends upward for no explicable reason. What is that crazy beast?

Lucky Roger.

What a joke.

What a footer.

 

[Crowlogic]

Gorn ba ha ha ha ha! Rubber boy!

 

[kitakaze]

Gorn ba ha ha ha ha! Rubber boy!

When you're done laughing please explain what makes Patty better, log.

Feel free to make some excuses about Roe/PGF connections and BH involvement with Patterson as well.

 

[kitakaze]

kitakaze wrote:



Amazing....you do see a difference in the 'lump' or 'calf muscle' in those two frames! Wow.......there's a slim ray of hope for you, kitty.

You know....sometimes those 'more light here, less light there' effects are actually because something moves.

But I understand your hesitancy to say the bulging mass "moved". It gets way too close to "real muscle", doesn't it?

No, I'm just not physics retarded like you. Confusion why Patty's head doesn't bob comes to mind.

You see, I know I can hold up a softball or anything at all and move it in the light. The shadows will change but that doesn't mean the object itself is internally moving or expanding or contracting. Nice one, genius.

So, first, BEFORE we get to the 'interpretation' phase of the "apparent movements".....we need to SEE, and compare, the 'apparent movements'.

Again.....I ask you...

You let me know when you've demonstrated clear muscle movements on Patty and we'll see what we can do for you.

 

[xblade]

I haven't read-up much on the Roe sighting report, but from the little bit I have read, it sounded like his sighting report has 'held-up' to investigation pretty well.

He has a story with nothing to back it up. People either believe it or they don't. Not sure how it has "held up" to anything, especially since no one has ever found a bigfoot, before or since. If anything, the lack of any decent evidence makes it more likely he didn't see what he said he saw.

 

[kitakaze]

Massive cornerhuddler - Bob Heironimus on second reel of Patterson film:

 

[LTC8K6]

do you know of an example of a video which shows 'apparent calf-muscle movement' in a suit

Sweaty, what are folks who don't see any "apparent calf-muscle movement" supposed to say to that?

If they reply to you at all, are they agreeing with you that it's "apparent calf-muscle movement"?

How would you reply if you did not think it was "apparent calf-muscle movement"?

Is it your intent to make it seem like those who reply to you see "apparent calf-muscle movement" where you see it?

 

[Hitch]

Yes, very lucky! I was just thinking the same thing. In fact lucky doesn't even begin to describe. He was yearning for money and dreaming of Bigfoot. Just the year before he ripped off Morgan Kunstler's illustration of the William Roe story. He put the copied drawing in his book and slapped his initials on it. Then he recounts in detail that breath-taking encounter. It seems to be the only encounter of a female Bigfoot he's ever heard about. He's clearly fascinated with the account. He even draws another female Bigfoot. But here's where the mind-bending luck comes in. The very next year when he's out hunting for Bigfoot evidence and hanging out with his "trusty native tracker," Bob Gimlin, who just happens to be riding Bob Heironimus' horse, he apparently stumles across a female Bigfoot with the same description as in his book and has nearly the same exact type of encounter!

Roger is proof of how well The System works.