• 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.
SweatyYeti said:
1) All of the comparisons between Bob and Patty, which show differences in their body proportions that can't be accounted for by a 'padded suit'.

(snip)

2) The fact that Bob has described the alleged suit in a way that makes absolutely no sense......saying the suit had 'shoulder pads' and a 'helmet', when it couldn't have had either one in it.
Click to expand...

And a simple yes or no question designed to establish the intellectual honesty of a person...

Yes or no - have you proven the things above that you state? I do not mean simply to your own satisfaction. I mean, have you proven those things imperically? Have you established them as fact? Have you addressed the key arguments against them such as explained in detail by neltana? Have you done this? Yes or no?

Have you made those statements factual as if I were to say that a six inch pencil could not fit a 3 inch pencil case? Yes or no? (And no, a broken pencil does not count)
 
SweatyYeti said:
LOL.....nicely told story, Crow. :)






Do you mean you're going to be traveling to different areas, around the state?

If so...hopefully you'll get up to the Lake George/Whitehall area. If the 'Big Guy' is anywhere in NY state....he's there.

It's a pretty good deal....you'd get to enjoy the beautiful scenery, with a chance of coming across a Bigfoot, too.
How can you go wrong?!
Click to expand...

Travel I wish. I won't be getting my feet wet or hands dirty this time around.
 
SweatyYeti said:
I don't know why Bob was in those pictures.


It doesn't matter to me, because:

1) All of the comparisons between Bob and Patty, which show differences in their body proportions that can't be accounted for by a 'padded suit'.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, Yeti, but I am entirely unconvinced of the above assertion. To my eye, the kind of padding seen for example on the Star Trek android character Ruk, played by Ted Cassidy in October 1966, could easily accomplish the expansion in size of the shoulders, chest and arms of the P-G figure. Patty's limb proportions, quite contrary to the measurements put forward by the NASI report, are well within human range, and conform almost perfectly to the Heironimous skeletal overlay, the "almost" proviso being accounted for the aforementioned suit padding.

I honestly cannot understand how anyone can examine the skeletal overlays with any degree of intellectual honesty and conclude that they are in any way inaccurate or unsatisfactory. What exactly is the objection to these overlays? Why don't you accept them as 100% legitimate, valid and convincing? They are a key element of my upcoming article, and if you have some objection to them that I've overlooked, I would sincerely like to understand what that objection is.

SweatyYeti said:
BTW, there's another comparison I'm working on, which shows another major difference between them, which may not be accountable for by a padded suit.
Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to reading this.


SweatyYeti said:
...and, also..


2) The fact that Bob has described the alleged suit in a way that makes absolutely no sense......saying the suit had 'shoulder pads' and a 'helmet', when it couldn't have had either one in it.

Reasons:
Shoulder pads.....the entire upper torso (if a suit) was custom-formed padding...therefore, there would not have been a reason to include a separate shoulder pad unit.

Helmet......Simply no room inside of Patty's cone-shaped head for anything that resembled an old style football helmet.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that the shoulder pads cannot be a separate unit, and that they must be "custom-formed", as you put it, to the inside of the suit. But as kitakaze has pointed out, simply because Heironimous calls them "shoulder pads" does not invalidate H's claim to having worn the suit. For one thing Heironimous does not specify that these "shoulder pads" are a separate unit, leaving the question open as to whether they were "custom-formed" to the inside of the suit; and for another, given the length of time that has passed since the film was shot, along with the well-documented fact of the fallibility of human memory, all details of H's account need not match up with 100% accuracy to the observable events in order to be accepted, at least provisionally, as true.


SweatyYeti said:
That trumps Bob simply being in a picture with Roger.

It also trumps Bob 'living on the same street' with Gimlin.

It also trumps Bob and Roger going out dancing together, on Saturday nights.....cheek to cheek. :covereyes


I'll be posting more images which will demonstrate what I just stated above.
Click to expand...

Again, I'm looking forward to it, and I promise to examine anything you have to say or show with an open mind and the same degree of skepticism I apply to all paranormal claims.
 
kitakaze wrote:
Have you made those statements factual as if I were to say that a six inch pencil could not fit a 3 inch pencil case? Yes or no? (And no, a broken pencil does not count)
Click to expand...


The answer to some points I've made is yes, and to some of the points I've made is no.

Again....I'm not playing your games, kitty....this one being "Answer to the Judge....kitakaze...."Tell me what you have proven".


I don't have the time to debate with you, or anybody else, what the strength of every little point that I've made, is.


This thread is OPEN for anybody who wants to post any counter-analysis that they want to...to point out errors in my comparisons, and in my logic.

Feel free to post any analysis that YOU like, kitty......but I'm not getting into a 'shouting match' with you as to whether or not I've proven anything.

Bye Bye! :)
 
Vortigern99 said:
I'm sorry, Yeti, but I am entirely unconvinced of the above assertion. To my eye, the kind of padding seen for example on the Star Trek android character Ruk, played by Ted Cassidy in October 1966, could easily accomplish the expansion in size of the shoulders, chest and arms of the P-G figure. Patty's limb proportions, quite contrary to the measurements put forward by the NASI report, are well within human range, and conform almost perfectly to the Heironimous skeletal overlay, the "almost" proviso being accounted for the aforementioned suit padding.

I honestly cannot understand how anyone can examine the skeletal overlays with any degree of intellectual honesty and conclude that they are in any way inaccurate or unsatisfactory.

What exactly is the objection to these overlays? Why don't you accept them as 100% legitimate, valid and convincing?

They are a key element of my upcoming article, and if you have some objection to them that I've overlooked, I would sincerely like to understand what that objection is.


I'm looking forward to reading this.


I agree with you that the shoulder pads cannot be a separate unit, and that they must be "custom-formed", as you put it, to the inside of the suit. But as kitakaze has pointed out, simply because Heironimous calls them "shoulder pads" does not invalidate H's claim to having worn the suit. For one thing Heironimous does not specify that these "shoulder pads" are a separate unit, leaving the question open as to whether they were "custom-formed" to the inside of the suit; and for another, given the length of time that has passed since the film was shot, along with the well-documented fact of the fallibility of human memory, all details of H's account need not match up with 100% accuracy to the observable events in order to be accepted, at least provisionally, as true.



Again, I'm looking forward to it, and I promise to examine anything you have to say or show with an open mind and the same degree of skepticism I apply to all paranormal claims.
Click to expand...


Thanks for your observations, and questions, Vort.


I'll respond to what I can, for now.

But first, one quick thing I want to say to kitakaze....I'm responding to Vort's questions and comments, simply because I'm quite sure that his reply, in turn, will not contain the amount of garbage, along with multiple questions leading down a hundred side-trails, that your responses ALWAYS do.
I'm pretty sure his responses will stick mainly to the analysis, itself.


So, first...

You wrote:
To my eye, the kind of padding seen for example on the Star Trek android character Ruk, played by Ted Cassidy in October 1966, could easily accomplish the expansion in size of the shoulders, chest and arms of the P-G figure.
Click to expand...


I've downloaded that video of Ted Cassidy, and I'm going to use stills from it to compare it with one of the images you posted of Ted, in plain clothes.....to see if, in fact, that suit he was wearing was actually making his CHEST appear to be wider. (The chest-width is the much more significant, and 'telling' body dimension, with regards to padding, because the more it's "padded-out", the harder it'll become for the arms to appear, and move, normally.)

It didn't look to me like his chest was padded-out....or, if it was, it was only a minor amount.



What exactly is the objection to these overlays? Why don't you accept them as 100% legitimate, valid and convincing?
Click to expand...


I've already posted images in which I've highlighted some discrepancies in the limb lengths of those 2 skeletons.

Also....the reason why I don't trust them, is that in every direct comparison of Bob and Patty, their body proportions do not match up.

The other day I asked kitty what program is it that those skeletons are generated from.....so I can see how they move, and change, within the program itself.....and try to replicate what's being shown in the images they've posted.
But I haven't seen an answer to that request, anywhere.


One more thing about the skeletons....they haven't been used to compare the full chest/body widths of Bob and Patty.....and there is a significant difference between the two, in that department.
 
Last edited:
Vortigern wrote:
Originally Posted by SweatyYeti
BTW, there's another comparison I'm working on, which shows another major difference between them, which may not be accountable for by a padded suit.
Click to expand...



I'm looking forward to reading this.
Click to expand...



What I'm comparing has to do with the depth of Patty's body, from front-to-back...and also, the degree to which her head projects forward...relative to her arm, and spine...


PattyProfileCibachrome9.jpg
 
Vortigern wrote:
I agree with you that the shoulder pads cannot be a separate unit, and that they must be "custom-formed", as you put it, to the inside of the suit.

But as kitakaze has pointed out, simply because Heironimous calls them "shoulder pads" does not invalidate H's claim to having worn the suit.

For one thing Heironimous does not specify that these "shoulder pads" are a separate unit, leaving the question open as to whether they were "custom-formed" to the inside of the suit;....
Click to expand...


But, the padding (if Patty is a 'suit') on the upper body would have to have been massive. Looking at the profile view of Patty, above, you can see that the 'suit' would have to have been padded approx. 3-4 inches thick, on the back, from the waist all the way up to the back of the head....and in the view from directly behind Patty (posted elsewhere)....you can see that her chest width is roughly about 3" wider than Bob, on each side.

So...that means that what Bob described as shoulder pads was actually continuous pre-formed padding...to the tune of 3-4 inches thick all around his sides, and back (the front would only be inch, or so, thick...judging by how far the chin is extending out from the body).....running from the back of his head, all the way down to his waist.

A massive amount of padding.

And he said "the suit had shoulder pads in it"???????? :boggled:


Here are some interesting comments, from Philip Morris....and Bob H...

Then he (Roger) said he wanted to make the shoulders more massive. I told him to go down to a local high school and get some old football pads--the coaches would probably be happy to get rid of some old, cracked ones--and put them in the shoulders."
Click to expand...


Bob Heironimus has never met nor talked to Philip Morris, yet Heironimus distinctly recalled the presence of shoulder pads in the Bigfoot suit that Patterson had modified, a fact that Philip Morris could not have known.
This revelation is yet more evidence that the Patterson film is a hoax, and that Heironimus not only wore the suit but that Morris supplied it to Patterson.
Click to expand...


Link:

http://xzonenation.blogspot.com/2006/11/exposing-roger-pattersons-1967-bigfoot.html
 
Last edited:
sweaty,

I think you need to double check the aspect ratio of that image, both horizontal as well as the vertical seem a bit off. BTW, I used Poser 7 for the skeletons.


m

 
Last edited:
SweatyYeti said:
What I'm comparing has to do with the depth of Patty's body, from front-to-back...and also, the degree to which her head projects forward...relative to her arm, and spine...
Click to expand...



As Greg points out, this isn't really a good profile shot of Patty. So you won't be able to get a very good front-to-back measure. As illustration, I have put a shot of Patty and then two of myself: one about 3/4 from the back and 1 a profile.

As you can see, while I am a walking tub of lard, I appear much thicker when viewed in 3/4.

I hope you appreciate how much I froze my feet for you, Sweaty!
 
neltana said:
[URL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_2341149ccdd7e408da.jpg[/URL]

As Greg points out, this isn't really a good profile shot of Patty. So you won't be able to get a very good front-to-back measure. As illustration, I have put a shot of Patty and then two of myself: one about 3/4 from the back and 1 a profile.

As you can see, while I am a walking tub of lard, I appear much thicker when viewed in 3/4.

I hope you appreciate how much I froze my feet for you, Sweaty!
Click to expand...



I sure do appreciate your sacrifice, neltana....it hurts just looking at you out there in the snow and cold. :(

I'll comment on your pictures, later....possibly on my lunchbreak.
 
Oh sure, prioritize work over BF!

Hmm, I might want to think about doing the same thing.
 
Even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that Yeti's pic represents the correct width of the figure, what exactly is so unbelievable about 3 inches of padding all around the suit?

Why should the simple, succinct explanation of a padded suit be less believable than that there is an uncatalogued primate of massive size requiring perhaps 9000 - 12000 calories a day, somehow hidden in the forests of the PNW, which itself raises a whole host of unanswerable questions about winter nutritive acquisition, avoidance of game-cam detection, and lack of bones, stool, hair, etc.?

Occam's Razor dictates that the padded suit is a far more likely explanation.

BTW, I don't believe Phillip Morris' story about supplying the suit. His description of the mail-order standard-issue gorilla suit he sold in the late 60s matches neither Heironimous' description or the observable features of the P-G figure.
 
neltana said:
Oh sure, prioritize work over BF!

Hmm, I might want to think about doing the same thing.
Click to expand...



I'm only doing it because I have to. My heart is elsewhere....with the "Big, Smelly Beast"....wherever he is!

Hope you're working hard, too, neltana. ;)
 
Last edited:
Vortigern99 said:
Even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that Yeti's pic represents the correct width of the figure, what exactly is so unbelievable about 3 inches of padding all around the suit?
Click to expand...


The natural, unencumbered arm movement...even at the top of the arm, which should be buried in padding...

Pattywalk60.gif




BTW, I don't believe Phillip Morris' story about supplying the suit. His description of the mail-order standard-issue gorilla suit he sold in the late 60s matches neither Heironimous' description or the observable features of the P-G figure.
Click to expand...


Me neither. :)
 
SweatyYeti said:
The natural, unencumbered arm movement...even at the top of the arm, which should be buried in padding...

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Patty/Pattywalk60.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Once you watch the Trek episode "What are Little Girls Made of?" you'll note that Ted Cassidy, even will all that padding across chest, arms and shoulders, is able to move his arms in a naturalistic fashion and with a full range of motion.

You can go to youtube at any time and watch the episode.

EDIT: Chest padding:

Trek-GirlsMadeOf23.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom