The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

[kitakaze]

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

Funny how selective you are with which relevant issues you think need to be looked at in-depth. Because you are an obviously biased believer you pursue whatever point might support your preconceived notions but others that are very troubling for that belief are fled from and evaded. Like the issue concerning these photos:



You wear your belief like a Carmen Miranda fruit hat.

You were the one who started this threaad and you run from one of the most relevant issues of all.

 

[kitakaze]

Guys/gals, whether or not I am able to get in to Bobby G's Yakima round-up I am forming a plan that I would like feedback for. I want to make a youtube presentation called "JREF Skeptics Interview Bob Heironimus on the PGF". I want to organize this and will need help to do it. I was thinking to ask tube to do this with me. I will be on Vancouver Island which is an hour and a half ferry ride to Seattle where tube lives and form Seattle it would be an easy weekend drive to Zillah where Bob Heironimus lives. I think tube would be a good choice as he is a better known skeptic than I am and has good standing in the Bigfoot community.

I would like to have an exact list questions prepared by us for this interview which I would like to take full advantage of. I am confident that Heironimus will be more than willing to talk with us. If appropriate we can have a special thread for it but for now this thread should be appropriate to discuss the plan.

 

[rockinkt]

Ask him about the lead up to the actual filming.
When did the subject of faking a film come up?
Who brought it up?
Who else was in on it?

In other words - question and establish each and every detail from the time it was first mentioned to him up until the day of the actual filming.
Go over it and over it until there is a complete timeline of the entire build-up. Who? When? Where? How?

Then question him in the same way about everything that happened after the filming.
The minutes, hours, days, weeks, years, after the event.

That's how I would start.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti
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?

I'm extremely busy at the moment.

But that's not a real problem.....since there is no hurry...no 'time limit' involved here.

If the Poser 7 images are legitimate, then they'll be replicated, and confirmed, in time.



There are videos of Poser 7 skeletons in motion, on Youtube....and I may use those for comparisons, for now.

 

[SweatyYeti]

There is one particular question which I would like to ask Bob H....that I think he would have a lot of trouble answering.
Potentially, I think it could make it undeniably obvious that he was......not Patty.

But I wouldn't want to let anyone know what the question is, until it was actually time to ask him....so there'd be no way that he could prepare an answer, in advance.

 

[kitakaze]

I'm extremely busy at the moment.

Yes, you're moving. I hope it goes smoothly and your new home is all you want it to be. That's not sarcasm. We argue oodles and oodles and maybe too much but you're still a person with the same realities we all face.

I just think it's silly that you can take the time to put the flare you do in your posts (which I like and I think you pick up tidbits from me) but you don't immediately setout with the information mangler gave you willingly to prove the hoax you accuse him of.

Why, oh why, oh why, old Sweat?

 

[kitakaze]

There is one particular question which I would like to ask Bob H....that I think he would have a lot of trouble answering.
Potentially, I think it could make it undeniably obvious that he was......not Patty.

But I wouldn't want to let anyone know what the question is, until it was actually time to ask him....so there'd be no way that he could prepare an answer, in advance.

Hey you know what, Sweat? I don't like being played. If BH is pulling a fast one or mangler is too, I want you to help me smoke 'em out. If you have a question that I could ask BH face to face, my first reaction is to tell you to see post #1117. That's also my second reaction and every other. But, while I highly doubt BH will see anything posted on the JREF, if you PM me that question, I will include it if and when I meet BH face to face. I don't have a will to believe BH and if there is a good way to bust him, I welcome it.

Sometimes I tire of our back and forth, Sweaty, as I'm sure you must. This is one of those times. If you have something worthy to bring to the table, please bring it. I won't foil you out of spite or any silly garbage between us. If you can answer the important questions I asked you, I will be stoked. If not, it's just another day. If BH is a liar, proving it is in both our interests.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Yes, you're moving. I hope it goes smoothly and your new home is all you want it to be. That's not sarcasm. We argue oodles and oodles and maybe too much but you're still a person with the same realities we all face.

Thanks, kitty....I appreciate that.

I just think it's silly that you can take the time to put the flare you do in your posts (which I like and I think you pick up tidbits from me) but you don't immediately setout with the information mangler gave you willingly to prove the hoax you accuse him of.

Again, it's simply because I don't have the time to try learning, and using Poser 7, right now.

It looks like a very complex program, since it involves moving objects in 3 dimensions...and probably would take several hours to really learn how to operate it.


I'll respond to your other post later tonight.

 

[neltana]

neltana wrote:

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.

Okay. So, at least we are on the same page here.

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.

[snip]

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

Precisely why I got DAZ studio and a skeleton model, to attempt to produce just such an animation. Of course, now I keep getting sidetracked posing fight scenes between orcs and dragons and what not...too many fun things to play with.

I'll try to get back to my original objective soon, though.

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.

Well, I think I come to a different conclusion looking at these images. That is, given the orientation, I think it necessarily would have to be foreshortened somewhat.

I will try to create one of my fairly incoherent illustrations to fail to convey this point.

 

[SweatyYeti]

neltana wrote:

Well, I think I come to a different conclusion looking at these images. That is, given the orientation, I think it necessarily would have to be foreshortened somewhat.

I will try to create one of my fairly incoherent illustrations to fail to convey this point.

I'm looking forward to seeing your 3D animation, neltana.

Just think.....positively!

 

[William Parcher]

Ask him about the lead up to the actual filming.
When did the subject of faking a film come up?
Who brought it up?
Who else was in on it?

In other words - question and establish each and every detail from the time it was first mentioned to him up until the day of the actual filming.
Go over it and over it until there is a complete timeline of the entire build-up. Who? When? Where? How?

Then question him in the same way about everything that happened after the filming.
The minutes, hours, days, weeks, years, after the event.

That's how I would start.

I know that you and Longtabber are professional investigators. Do you guys sometimes interview people about complex events that happened 42 years ago? I would think that it would present some special problems because the (claimed) witness may have errors of recollection.

A number of questions you posed have already been answered by BH. More information might become available if follow-up questions are posed based on his previous answers. IOW, a list of questions is good, but responding to his specific answers makes it better.

 

[GT/CS]

Don't forget to have him show you the bullet wound!

 

[rockinkt]

I know that you and Longtabber are professional investigators. Do you guys sometimes interview people about complex events that happened 42 years ago? I would think that it would present some special problems because the (claimed) witness may have errors of recollection.

A number of questions you posed have already been answered by BH. More information might become available if follow-up questions are posed based on his previous answers. IOW, a list of questions is good, but responding to his specific answers makes it better.

You are absolutely right that questioning someone about details 40+ years ago would be difficult (putting it mildly).

You have a PM...

 

[SweatyYeti]

Hey you know what, Sweat? I don't like being played. If BH is pulling a fast one or mangler is too, I want you to help me smoke 'em out. If you have a question that I could ask BH face to face, my first reaction is to tell you to see post #1117. That's also my second reaction and every other. But, while I highly doubt BH will see anything posted on the JREF, if you PM me that question, I will include it if and when I meet BH face to face. I don't have a will to believe BH and if there is a good way to bust him, I welcome it.

I just can't give this one particular question out to anybody.
The reason is because, if I did, and Bob answers the question in a way that looks good for him, there'd be no way of knowing whether or not his answer was prepared ahead of time.
I don't mean this as a personal attack against you, kitty...it's simply a matter of principle, regarding the weight of Bob's potential answer, as evidence.

His answer will carry the most weight, if it is known that Bob is answering the question without any fore-knowledge of the question.


There is one important thing you could do, if you meet Bob in-person....for analytical purposes.

Could you possibly get a picture of Bob from a direct-on side view??
(Or, maybe even a video of him doing his "Bigfoot" walk.)


This is the only good side-view image of Bob (that I know of), but it's taken from slightly behind him...

This image, which I took from a video, is a direct side-view of Bob, but it's of very low quality...

A high quality image of Bob, from the side, would be very useful for doing a comparison with this image of Patty...

If BH is a liar, proving it is in both our interests.

That's absolutely true....and the best way to prove something like that, is by being able to know, with 100% certainty, what the true weight of the evidence actually is.
Hence.....questions asked of Bob from 'out of the blue'...with no possibility of being fore-warned.

 

[GT/CS]

Here's something crazy I just found on youtube from the crazy pareidolia freak, Blevins, that may in fact be worth noting:



Noting that Heironimus in his account of of the filming of the PGF says that the suit was stored in a white tarp and placed on the back of a horse, Blevins points out that a white tarp can clearly be seen on the back of one of the horses in the PGF.

Certainly not any kind of proof but it is interesting. What would Patterson and Gimlin be carrying in a big white tarp?

A poster at the BFF claims DFoot is Blevins.

The question no one has asked or I haven't read is? Why Mr. Blevins a.k.a. Dfoot must show the PGF to be Faked? I have an Idea....from a p.m. from him off of YouTube....He must prove God and the bible are real! God made us in his own likeness and no other human type creature must exist, ever. If PGF is real ...Then God and the Bible are fake stories...You can't have both being true...that is his M.O. As I've always heard if you look for something wrong you will find it.... I would be impressed by his findings if he was an Atheist and wasn't compelled to find Fakery of the PGF to prove his beliefs in the Bible Stories are true! But somehow I feel all this effort and time originating from him, is meaningless after 40 years... since the PGF was filmed, we have thousands of sound reports, photos, audio and footage....I hope Mr. Blevins understands he will need live to a see his millionth birthday to show it's all fake!

This post has been edited by canuck: Apr 1 2009, 08:01 PM

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Dfoot's name has been made public before.. I can't recall it now, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't Blevins ..

I could be wrong.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

I know that you and Longtabber are professional investigators. Do you guys sometimes interview people about complex events that happened 42 years ago? I would think that it would present some special problems because the (claimed) witness may have errors of recollection.

A number of questions you posed have already been answered by BH. More information might become available if follow-up questions are posed based on his previous answers. IOW, a list of questions is good, but responding to his specific answers makes it better.

I've never had to go back that far and at best, difficult would be an understatement and unless you had hard evidence to compare the statements to- I would use the information as more of a guide rather than taking it as fact.

Its the follow up questions and the time range i would focus on

>>>A number of questions you posed have already been answered by BH.

True but here is investigating 101. "I" didnt ask those questions, I wasnt there to guage the body language with those answers and I dont know if they were leading etc. I also dont know if those questions were scripted and given in advance so a canned answer could be prepared.

I wouldnt be looking for a "smoking gun" with interviewing him because none exists. ( if it did, you figure BH would have played the trump card or either everyone else would know he COULD play it- often times you can gauge the credibility of a witness by the PERP because if the perp is afraid of what a person MIGHT say- you really need to listen to what that witness has to say)

For me, I wouldnt be interested ( or even ask) how many pieces the suit had, how it looked,smelled etc because if he answered them, i would still have nothing because theres no suit in evidence.

I would want to know from start to finish what happened from the time he said he was hired to be a BF in the film until he went home the day of filming)

How long was it planned, how many rehearsals, how many fittings, who was there, who he told, how did he get to the film site, what was the film plan, who was the director and such.

Thats how i would approach it then do 2 things

1) see if any additional leads pan out

2) see who ( if anyone) squirms or rebuts.

 

[Vortigern99]

Dfoot can't be Blevins unless, as Blevins, he intentionally writes poorly, as though English is his second language. Dfoot writes clearly and fluently. Also, Blevins does not seem to know a lot about make-up/costume effects, struggling to find examples to back up his claims, whereas Dfoot is obviously an expert in this field who has crafted his own Patty-like suit. Blevins has never posted anything comparable to what Dfoot has done.

 

[Crowlogic]

Patterson hoaxing Gimlin without Gimlin's knowledge is absurd. It would have required Patterson planting BH in the locaiton,helping BH into the very bulky and hot suit then having BH wait at the spot for an extended period of time while Patterson rode 2 miles back to get Gimlin then waiting while Gimlin readies himself and they ride SLOWLY (remember they're supposed to be searching for Bigfoot) back to the location where BH is waiting in the HOT suit. So just how long would BH have been in that hot suit? 1, maybe 1.5 hours? Then what happens to BH once he's managed to flawlessly walk across stage and disappear into the woods. Running as he fades into the forest. Who got him out of the suit and how did he get far enough away quick enough for Gimlin not to catch up while still on horseback? I doubt BH would have been sprinting any 4 minute miles in that thing.

Lastly what's the point of hauling Gimlin out to the woods only to fool him? Patterson still would have had to contend with BH a potential whistle blower once they all returned to Yakima. As far as hoax vs real its either all a hoax with P.G,BH in on it or its real.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Patterson hoaxing Gimlin without Gimlin's knowledge is absurd. It would have required Patterson planting BH in the locaiton,helping BH into the very bulky and hot suit then having BH wait at the spot for an extended period of time while Patterson rode 2 miles back to get Gimlin then waiting while Gimlin readies himself and they ride SLOWLY (remember they're supposed to be searching for Bigfoot) back to the location where BH is waiting in the HOT suit. So just how long would BH have been in that hot suit? 1, maybe 1.5 hours? Then what happens to BH once he's managed to flawlessly walk across stage and disappear into the woods. Running as he fades into the forest. Who got him out of the suit and how did he get far enough away quick enough for Gimlin not to catch up while still on horseback? I doubt BH would have been sprinting any 4 minute miles in that thing.

Lastly what's the point of hauling Gimlin out to the woods only to fool him? Patterson still would have had to contend with BH a potential whistle blower once they all returned to Yakima. As far as hoax vs real its either all a hoax with P.G,BH in on it or its real.

>>>Patterson hoaxing Gimlin without Gimlin's knowledge is absurd.

I wouldnt say absurd but highly improbable for many of the reasons you stated. If I were to offer a "conspiracy theory" I would think that BH and BG ( and some help) fooled Patterson.

>>>As far as hoax vs real its either all a hoax with P.G,BH in on it or its real

I would tend to agree- they were all in on it