• 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.
kitakaze wrote:
I substantiate what I say and I do not misrepresent Sweaty.

He is intellectually dishonest and cowardly and the proof is right there.



kitakaze is nothing more than a troll.

I explained my thoughts concerning the bulging on Patty's legs in post #1277.
 
kitakaze is nothing more than a troll.

By any accepted definition of the word, I am not. You can not refute my arguments and fear to answer my questions. You can not even begin to step to the table with the likes of Astro or myself. You stand in the corner heckling and pretending you are a serious participant of the real discussion happening here but you are only a poseur.

I explained my thoughts concerning the bulging on Patty's legs in post #1277.

And I dismantled the flawed reasoning of those thoughts long ago in post #806.

Another cornerhuddle heckle from Sweaty. Astro asks for nonsubjective evidence and Sweaty refers to a posts consisting entirely of subjective opinion. You just can't play with the big boys, can you, Sweaty?
 
Last edited:
kitakaze wrote:
Astro asks for nonsubjective evidence and Sweaty refers to a posts consisting entirely of subjective opinion.



This is one of those very rare instances where a Mariachi Band really comes in handy...:)...


Mariachi2.jpg
 
This is one of those very rare instances where a Mariachi Band really comes in handy...:)...


[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Mariachi2.jpg[/qimg]

You, Jesus, and the rest of the Dirty Sanchez boys feel free to explain how you provided what Astro was requesting.:cool:
 
I explained my thoughts about that, in post #1277.

Your "thoughts", because of your limited/non-existant qualifications, amount to very little. Where you see an exotic creature, others, who are far more qualified, have stated they see a guy in a suit. If people can not agree then it is subjective. This leaves us with probability. It is far more probable that it is a guy (which exists and may be Bob) in a suit (which can be made to look realistic to the observer from far away even in 1967) than it is to be a creature that nobody has ever been able to produce in the forty-plus years since this film was shot. You would have better luck playing the lottery than this being a film of an actual living creature. Good luck.
 
I would 'bet money' on it, simply going by the 'odds', or 'probability' of that explanation being the correct one.

Here is a chance to put your money down then. Assuming you are willing to "bet money" that means the probability is extremely high that it exists. I suggest you spend whatever funds you have tracking down this creature. Invest it in all sorts of electronic surveillance gear to get the goods. If you don't have the time, donate a big chunk of money to one of the bigfoot hunter groups. I am sure they will spend your money wisely. You/they should be able to find a bigfoot if you/they try hard enough. There must be hundreds if not thousands in the great northwest. Imagine the payday you/they would receive. It definitely would be worth the effort. However, if you are not willing to "bet money" on it, continue as you are drawing your crayons lines and looking for whatever you think indicates "bunny" is real.
 
I'm posting this for the viewing of members of the SFB forum:

Warning!: The following images may be disturbing for some PGF proponents.



1) Bob Heironimus on Patterson's film. He also appears with Jerry Merritt.

2) Bob Heironimus far right in the "actor's photo" seated next to Bob Gimlin in "faithful Indian tracker" getup. Rofer Patterson is far left.

3) Roger Patterson seated on Bob Heironimus's horse, "Chico", next to "faithful Indian tracker" Bob Gimlin on the cover of Argosy magazine.



- Poser 7 skeletal overlay using single human skeleton proves Patty had same height and proportions as Bob Heironimus.

picture.php


Photo comparison of Patty and BH in Bigfoot suit show similar proportions.



1) Properly scaled photo overlay showing Jim MacLarin taller than Patty.

2) Scan of actual contract between George and Vilma Radford and Roger Patterson. Patterson swindled $700 dollars from them close to the time of the PGF and never returned the money.



- Depiction of the William Roe female Bigfoot encounter illustrated by Morton Kunstler.

- Rip-off of the illustration made by Patterson and credited to himself in his book the year before the PGF.

Patterson was highly influenced by the Roe encounter featured in his book. The PGF and Patterson's subsequent description of the encounter play like an actualization of the the story. This represents astronomical odd when considering the Roe story was so prominently featured in his book only the year before the PGF.
 
kitakaze wrote:
- Poser 7 skeletal overlay using single human skeleton proves Patty had same height and proportions as Bob Heironimus.



Actually...those are two different skeletons...not one.


Here's the proof. Look at the different lengths of the upper arms ...(Naturally, Patty's is longer)...


FF22.jpg
 
Last edited:
kitakaze wrote:
Properly scaled photo overlay showing Jim MacLarin taller than Patty.


But, according to your Fric and Frac image...the one on the far right....if Patty straightens-up, she gains about 5-6" in body height.


That doesn't mix with the claim that Patty's body height is equal to Bob H.'s body height.....as supposedly demonstrated by the McClarin overlay comparison.


So.....which one is in error??
 
Sweati, do you know how ridiculous you are with the image above ? If the arm was horizontal pointing forward instead of slightily going behind and near vertical , would you conclude the skeleton has got a arm length of near zero ? That is why your red line are totally and uterly worthless. You would have to calculate the angle with the plan of the photo, and the angle with the vertical and then in both case using trigonometry go back to the original length.
 
Sweaty, I've tried to explain the principles of foreshortening and perspective to you, but you seem unwilling to listen. Mangler even posted another image from Poser7 showing that if the human skeletal model angles its arm a bit toward the camera, the arm joint will lift in relation to the viewer, placing it at precisely the same height you extol as evidence of Patty's inhuman limb length.

Try this simple experiment, if you have any interest at all in fathoming the workings of human anatomy, perspective and foreshortening (which will help you analyze not only the P-G film but the workings of all visual data):

  1. Go stand in front of a mirror, arms hanging loosely by your side.
  2. Raise your right arm slightly toward the mirror, say at an angle of 45 degrees. Notice how your arm suddenly looks shorter, and how the base of the hand is higher than the base of your left hand (which should still be hanging loosely by your side).
  3. Raise your right arm even higher, so that the hand is pointing straight at your eye. Notice how you can hardly see any of your right arm at all! Noticve how short it looks! That's called "foreshortening".
  4. Apply these observations to the Poser7 skeleton, to your viewing of the P-G film, and to all visual data everywhere around you.
 
kitakaze wrote:



But, according to your Fric and Frac image...the one on the far right....if Patty straightens-up, she gains about 5-6" in body height.


That doesn't mix with the claim that Patty's body height is equal to Bob H.'s body height.....as supposedly demonstrated by the McClarin overlay comparison.


So.....which one is in error??

Actually, this is a good point. McClarin is walking erect, while the P-G figure is stooped a bit. "It" would gain a few inches in height if it stood erect.

However, I'm not convinced those pictures are properly scaled, which is why I don't use them in any of my own arguments. Lens size among other factors could distort the vertical and/or horizontal proportions of the photographic image.
 
But, according to your Fric and Frac image...the one on the far right....if Patty straightens-up, she gains about 5-6" in body height.

I thought our previous discussions demonstrated that the point at the top of "bunny's" head was probably part of the costume. Perhaps it was to make the person wearing it look a little taller. To me, that point/cone could add a few inches of height but that is just a guesstimate.
 
Actually...those are two different skeletons...not one.

Here's the proof. Look at the different lengths of the upper arms ...(Naturally, Patty's is longer)...

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Patty%20and%20Bob/FF22.jpg[/qimg]

Okay, Sweaty. Let's see if I understand what you are saying. Here is a skeleton in two different poses that are similar to the ones Mangler presented:



These are the same skeleton (done using DAZ Studio...the free version of Poser). However, in my images, the shoulders line up and the elbows line up, unlike in Mangler's image:



Is it your contention that I couldn't, by bringing the left figure's right arm in towards the body slightly and/or the right figure's right arm slightly back create a mismatch almost identical to Mangler's.

If I did that and presented the result, would you accept that Mangler used the same skeleton in his two images?
 
Actually...those are two different skeletons...not one.


Here's the proof. Look at the different lengths of the upper arms ...(Naturally, Patty's is longer)...


[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Patty%20and%20Bob/FF22.jpg[/qimg]

Silly fanatic woo has ballzheimer's:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4576163&postcount=1076

That would be the mental defect where you selectively forget the things that destroy your crappy arguments and have the balls to just try again.
 
neltana wrote:
Is it your contention that I couldn't, by bringing the left figure's right arm in towards the body slightly and/or the right figure's right arm slightly back create a mismatch almost identical to Mangler's.


I haven't made that specific claim, neltana.

I'm not saying that something to that effect couldn't be produced by moving the skeletons into different positions.

But...looking again at mangler's explanation (his animated-gif) of how Patty's upper arm bone could be manipulated to match the shorter length of Bob's upper arm bone...


ManglerAG2.gif



....what I find very interesting, is precisely the manner in which mangler presented this animated-gif, in his post, #1072...


sweaty,

I rotate the Humerus back and then out from the body, I then bend the Radius and Ulna to fit (check below for final result), know that if it’s a costume there’s all kinds of wiggle room for joint placement.

I’m guessing that I could tweak BH (with a different method) and get pretty much the same results.

Sweaty it’s a hack/eye-balled, this stuff is not that complicated, you’re brain is just wired to see what you want to believe.



Notice his precise wording....not "I rotated".....but, instead...

I rotate the Humerus back...

and:

I’m guessing that I could tweak BH...



Mangler did not present the above animated-gif as how he created these 2 skeletons...

FF22.jpg



...but rather, as how it could be done.

WHY is that?

Why didn't mangler simply post a short clip, showing the continuous movement of Patty's upper arm, into the position seen in Bob's image?
Isn't that how these two skeletal positions were originally generated??

The animated-gif that he did post is clearly not part of any such continuous animated-gif.

To me, this raises a red flag of suspicion as to the veracity of mangler's original skeletal comparison.



Another thing that I noticed about mangler's skeleton's, is that on Patty's image....Fric's fingertips do not reach all the way down to the ends of Patty's fingertips......while, on Bob's image, Frac's fingertips seem to extend beyond Bob's fingertips.

A nice way to "make-up" for some of the difference in Patty's and Bob's arm lengths. ;)



If I did that and presented the result, would you accept that Mangler used the same skeleton in his two images?


No.

I don't think that mangler's original skeletal overlay should be "accepted" as anything of meaning....until it can be demonstrated that the skeleton over Patty can be moved, continuously, into the exact position, with the exact same bone lengths that it's seen in, over Bob's image.

As 'standard practice' in any scientific analysis...it should also be replicable by others.


And.....at that point, it would then need to be demonstrated that Bob's arm is actually being held away from his body, to the degree needed to produce the supposed shortening of his arm.
(It's nice that the effect 'could be' produced by skeletons...but if Bob's arm isn't being held away from his body, in any images, then what does it even matter? :) )


In post #1065, I posted 2 images of Bob, a front view and a side view, which demonstrate that his arm is, in fact, hanging down very close to the side of his body.
Thereby showing there's no reason to think that Bob's arm is appearing shorter than it actually is.
 
Actually, this is a good point. McClarin is walking erect, while the P-G figure is stooped a bit. "It" would gain a few inches in height if it stood erect.

However, I'm not convinced those pictures are properly scaled, which is why I don't use them in any of my own arguments. Lens size among other factors could distort the vertical and/or horizontal proportions of the photographic image.


Thanks, Vort. :)

This point needs to be looked into, in-depth.

I don't have the time to get into it right now, because of my move.....but I will at a later date.

In the meantime....I will try to respond to your post from April 12th...sometime in the near future.
 
As 'standard practice' in any scientific analysis...it should also be replicable by others.

I find it hilarious that you try so hard to discount the Poser 7 direct comparison and say it should replicable by others. Mangler willingly gave you the information you need to try for yourself and you're still flapping your gums doing nothing. Yes, it should be replicable by others. I accept the comparison, you don't. You qualify as "others". What's the hold up?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom