The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

No, you don't need anything from me, in order to support your claims....such as...

The thing is, there are two possible ways for me to present the issue to you. I can already support my claim, but I require your input in order to determine which way I should present my argument to you. So, again, do you feel that Patty's arms are longer than a human's?

1) A photograph can make a person's arm appear longer than it actually is.

Silly Sweaty, I already provided you with instructions for a simple experiment that could demonstrate this to you.

and...

2) That Dfoot's arm appears longer than it actually is, in that image you referenced.

Did I not specify what pictures of Dfoot you'd have to look at in order to see that I'm correct?

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

Especially comparing 2 frames with different body positions and distances from the camera.

How come the experts aren't screaming that the skeleton comparison is not scientifically valid?

I know something you don't know...

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

I know you are but what am I? Grow up.

Oh BTW, heres a message for your alter ego

>>>Your report on the "thermal imaging of an alleged sasquatch" should do. Where is that report anyway?

After mine and Rocks silent "no reason given" banning for a few months, I told "them" basically to stick it up their ...... and to go straight to hell. Kinda like I have told GF except in that particular case, it was more direct.

>>>Come to think of it, in spite of the myriad of claims you make I haven't seen a single thing you've done.

If I wanted the opinion, I would have told him what his opinion was. Other than pure incompetence and deliberate evasion on critical points and obfuscation of facts, I've seen less than nothing. Funny thing is, thats been pointed out by others too.

>>> if you think that the process you described is the only way to conduct a photogrammetric analysis, then...well you know. I'd just like to reassure others that is not the case.

All talk and no nothing. Where are those measurements again? Now who talks in circles.

>>> I just don't happen to buy it

I wonder if the imbecile in question has any idea how little his opinion and thoughts are worth plus the fact I'm not selling.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

I know something you don't know...

Millions of people can say the same thing

 

[SweatyYeti]

The thing is, there are two possible ways for me to present the issue to you. I can already support my claim, but I require your input in order to determine which way I should present my argument to you. So, again, do you feel that Patty's arms are longer than a human's?



Silly Sweaty, I already provided you with instructions for a simple experiment that could demonstrate this to you.



Did I not specify what pictures of Dfoot you'd have to look at in order to see that I'm correct?

You can't back-up your own claims, can you?

You can't demonstrate that a picture can make an arm look longer than it actually is...or that that picture of Dfoot is making his arm appear longer than it actually is....can you?


You don't need me to do a little 'song and dance' for you, in order for you to back-up....support....demonstrate....your claim, AMM.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Bob outside the suit is not a valid comparison.

Astro is stating that comparing Bob's body dimensions/proportions to Patty's is an "invalid" (inappropriate...meaningless???) thing to do.


This is the only appropriate response to that, that I can think of...

 

[Astrophotographer]

Astro is stating that comparing Bob's body dimensions/proportions to Patty's is an "invalid" (inappropriate...meaningless???) thing to do

It is because the figure of "Bunny" is possibly somebody in a suit (possibly Bob). Therefore, the suit is going to hide and distort apparent body measurements. The problem is you can't comprehend this anymore than you can comprehend any real analysis. Now go back into the playroom with your crayons and coloring books while the adults talk.

 

[SweatyYeti]

I'll continue to compare Bob's and Patty's body dimensions/proportions, Astro....while you sit around and talk......like an idiot.

 

[Óðinn]

Oh BTW, heres a message for your alter ego

>>>Your report on the "thermal imaging of an alleged sasquatch" should do. Where is that report anyway?

After mine and Rocks silent "no reason given" banning for a few months, I told "them" basically to stick it up their ...... and to go straight to hell. Kinda like I have told GF except in that particular case, it was more direct.

>>>Come to think of it, in spite of the myriad of claims you make I haven't seen a single thing you've done.

If I wanted the opinion, I would have told him what his opinion was. Other than pure incompetence and deliberate evasion on critical points and obfuscation of facts, I've seen less than nothing. Funny thing is, thats been pointed out by others too.

>>> if you think that the process you described is the only way to conduct a photogrammetric analysis, then...well you know. I'd just like to reassure others that is not the case.

All talk and no nothing. Where are those measurements again? Now who talks in circles.

>>> I just don't happen to buy it

I wonder if the imbecile in question has any idea how little his opinion and thoughts are worth plus the fact I'm not selling.

Sticks and stones, Longblabber.

After mine and Rocks silent "no reason given" banning for a few months, I told "them" basically to stick it up their ...... and to go straight to hell...

Riiiiight. Your report was due long before then. Say, if it's already done, it would be a shame for it to languish in obscurity. why don't you post it here? You said it would prove that the thermal image was a human. I'm sure everyone would love to see you stick it to MM and the BFRO.

I'll hang up now and listen...

 

[Vortigern99]

Sweaty, once again your measurements are in error. Not only do the line segments not match up between the two images, but Bob has a more erect posture in the right image, as evinced by his straighter legs, throwing off the scale. Further, the base lines of the hands do not match; the line is visibly below the hand of the left image, but bisects the hand of the right image. Your stated opinion that these images line up on a 1:1 basis is demonstrably erroneous. Your inability to process and compare simple visual information is staggering, and renders you unqualified to comment intelligently on data of this kind.

Sorry to burst a bubble, or two........but here's another comparison of Bob with Bob.......and guess what it shows...

Alas.....no foreshortening of said arms....


The image on the right is from the same NG Video as the frontal-view image that I used in the other Bob-to-Bob comparison.

In that NG Video, they filmed Bob from both the side, and the front......and, I believe it's just 2 different looks at the same walk. (As opposed to 2 separate walks.)


But, whether it is or not....Bob is clearly walking with his arm hanging down very close to his side, in that side-view video.



This comparison also highlights the fact that, despite all the differences in these 2 images....taken years apart, with different cameras, different lenses, different distances from the subject-to-camera....Bob still matches Bob.

And in every direct comparison of Bob with Patty....they don't match.

 

[Vortigern99]

Odinn, please demonstrate why known properties of figure construction, rules of perspective, and laws of objective reality should be thrown out on your say-so. If your numbers are telling you that Bob's arm is not foreshortened in the image under review, then whatever math you're using to calculate these numbers is in error, and you should re-examine your percentages and equations.

To answer Odinn's question, above, I can tell that Bob's arm is foreshortened based on three pieces of visual information:

1) The overlap of folds away from the camera. This is a "trick" of figure construction I've picked up from anatomist/artist B. Hogarth. The way the two anterior (front-facing) folds of Bob's sleeve overlap the forms behind it indicate that the forearm is closer to the camera than the upper arm. IOW, the arm is foreshortened toward the camera. (If the fold overlaps were reversed, we would know that the arm is angled away from the camera.)

2) The circular shape of Bob's sleeve. Yet another Hogarth "trick", this one having to do with cylindrical forms. If you will imagine the forearm as a cylinder, like a soda can, it will become apparent that we will only see the underside/base of the can if the cylinder's bottom (the wrist) is angled toward the camera. Bob's sleeve shape reveals just such a "soda can base", indicating that the arm is angled toward the camera.

3) The hand is higher along a vertical scale than the average human hand. Judging from various pics of the subject, Bob's limb proportions appear to be within normal human range; IOW, standing at full height with his arms at his sides, Bob's fingers should fall to the mid-point of his thigh, like most human beings. In this image, however, Bob's hand barely grazes the base of his buttock. The hand is tilted obliquely, further distorting the apparent length of the arm, but even if we were to straighten out the hand so that it continues parallel to the line of the arm, the hand would still fall short of the vertical placement evident in other images of the subject. Therefore, the arm is foreshortened toward the camera.

Vort, none of this matters. Measure the pixels on the scanned images. Bob's body dimensions are a constant, known parameter. He can be measured against himself. What is your estimate for the relative length of his arm? If it was foreshortened by 18% (as suggested by the skeleton(s) overlay(s)) then it couldn't POSSIBLY be more than 22% of his height. This is clearly not the case.

Kit, these computer graphic models are oriented by the user until they fit. When foreshortening is allowed, then the model can shore up a limb to ANY size. Whether you are fitting the model to the actual 3D figure is unknown. Often with reverse kinematics there are multi-solutions for a limb orientation. All the skeleton Poser can do is foreshorten the limbs to "fit" the image. But it isn't "solving" the Z coordinate.

 

[Vortigern99]

Vort,

You are still engaging Sweaty, when you announced that you would no longer do so..

I know, it hurts; but you must resist the urge .. ( as much as I like his sig line... )

Well, in fairness, I did tell Sweaty:

... short of correcting one of your numerous errors of perception, analysis or judgement, I will never again join you in a discussion.​

 

[SweatyYeti]

Sweaty, once again your measurements are in error. Not only do the line segments not match up between the two images, but Bob has a more erect posture in the right image, as evinced by his straighter legs, throwing off the scale.

Further, the base lines of the hands do not match; the line is visibly below the hand of the left image, but bisects the hand of the right image.

Your stated opinion that these images line up on a 1:1 basis is demonstrably erroneous. Your inability to process and compare simple visual information is staggering, and renders you unqualified to comment intelligently on data of this kind.

Bob's hand is angled backwards more in the image on the left.

If it's straightened-out (as his hand is, in the other image), it would be at, or a little below, the white line...

The difference in the leg positions/extension is pretty minimal. The left legs look virtually identical to each other.


The are plenty more frames in that video...so I'll put together some more comparisons.

 

[Astrophotographer]

Bob's hand is angled backwards more in the image on the left.

If it's straightened-out (as his hand is, in the other image), it would be at, or a little below, the white line...

No it isn't. It is difficult to examine the right most image because it is so blocky. The right image has the hand angled 10 degrees from the horizontal. The left image is about 15-20 degrees. The 5-10 degree difference is not enough to make up for the 7 pixel difference between the hand positions. Feel free to provide us with better resolution images so more accurate measurements can be made.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Sticks and stones, Longblabber.



Riiiiight. Your report was due long before then. Say, if it's already done, it would be a shame for it to languish in obscurity. why don't you post it here? You said it would prove that the thermal image was a human. I'm sure everyone would love to see you stick it to MM and the BFRO.

I'll hang up now and listen...

Listen all you want. I didnt give a damn then and dont now because what you "think" really doesnt matter. You have been pegged as an instigator then as well as now. You have failed to meet the standard.

>>>Riiiiight. Your report was due long before then. Say, if it's already done, it would be a shame for it to languish in obscurity. why don't you post it here?

Once again you twist facts to suit your obfuscations. It was a class project, I made it clear I was simply presenting it. That project crashed due to other reasons and we demobed. I have the majority of it but as i said before- I'm done with that for reasons beyond the report.

>>>You said it would prove that the thermal image was a human. I'm sure everyone would love to see you stick it to MM and the BFRO.

I sent it to people who mattered- you were not on that list.

BTY, where are those measurements again? You keep missing that all important point.

All mouth, no anything else. Its like dealing with sweaty. A total waste of my time.

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

You can't back-up your own claims, can you?

Sure I can. Interestingly enough, you can't seem to answer a simple question or confirm your beliefs. Run, coward, run!

You can't demonstrate that a picture can make an arm look longer than it actually is...or that that picture of Dfoot is making his arm appear longer than it actually is....can you?

Okay everyone, grab a ruler and check my math. I positioned my ruler over each picture's arm and got a length of 1.13 inches each. Now, I know what you're thinking: "But wait, doesn't that mean that the lengths are both the same and that your point is wrong?" Nope! You see, Dfoot is wearing a foam muscle suit in the image where his arm is normal. This means that padding is contributing to the length. And since padding has to be applied in order for his arm to match the length of his arm in the Patty comparison picture, it means Dfoot's arm really does appear to be shorter.

I'm guessing that Sweaty is going to complain that I didn't slap on some crayon lines on those images. The thing is, even if I plotted out two 1.13 inch lines over those pictures, the results would still be the same.

For more of Dfoot in his padding, watch this video.

 

[kitakaze]

False accusations suck. Sweaty says I do this to him. I don't like the idea of accusing someone of something without the ability to back it up. Further proof of Sweaty's intellectual dishonesty:

I'll never refuse to answer a question.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2430159&postcount=3205

Unlike skeptics here, who time and time again refuse to answer questions (examples later), I'll never refuse to answer any questions....which are relevant to the subject of Bigfoot, that is.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2332955&postcount=1615

I've stated before that I'll never refuse to answer a Bigfoot-related question.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2434933&postcount=3247

I have NEVER refused to answer a question....and I NEVER will.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3482524&postcount=12136

Skeptics are the ones who will truly evade, and outright REFUSE to answer questions.

Also, there is no question that I'm afraid to answer. It's only the skeptics who outright refuse to answer questions.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3481830&postcount=12127



Back in February Sweaty made a bold claim regarding Patty in the PGF 3 thread:

Patty's arms are clearly longer than a human's arms, proportionally speaking.

The other day in this thread Atomic asked Sweaty a simple Bigfoot-related question regarding Sweaty's initial claim which Sweaty outright refused to answer:

Sure, I could do that. However, I need one thing from you before I begin:

Yes or no: Are Patty's arms longer than the arms of a human?

No, you don't need anything from me, in order to support your claims....such as...(snip)

The thing is, there are two possible ways for me to present the issue to you. I can already support my claim, but I require your input in order to determine which way I should present my argument to you. So, again, do you feel that Patty's arms are longer than a human's?

You can't back-up your own claims, can you?

You can't demonstrate that a picture can make an arm look longer than it actually is...or that that picture of Dfoot is making his arm appear longer than it actually is....can you?


You don't need me to do a little 'song and dance' for you, in order for you to back-up....support....demonstrate....your claim, AMM.

Sure I can. Interestingly enough, you can't seem to answer a simple question or confirm your beliefs. Run, coward, run!

(snip)

As I said before, people like this have no place in rational and sincere debate. Sweaty's best contribution at the JREF is demonstrating how not to conduct oneself in an honest discussion.

 

[makaya325]

Thats Sweaty for you!

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

As I said before, people like this have no place in rational and sincere debate. Sweaty's best contribution at the JREF is demonstrating how not to conduct oneself in an honest discussion.

kitty....you are a deeply troubled human being.


I am not refusing to answer Atomic Dude's question. I simply stated that I did not need to answer his question in order for him to back-up his claim...."that a picture can cause a person's arm to appear longer than it truly is".


I will be more than happy to answer his question....just not before he demonstrates the validity of his claim.....since, as I stated in one of my earlier posts....Patty's arm length, and my estimation of it, are both completely irrelevant to the 'basic principle' of photography that he's claiming is true.


I will also happily answer any other Bigfoot-related question that anyone else wants to ask me.


The only exception is my decision to avoid getting into a debate/discussion with you, kitty.....precisely for the reason which you just demonstrated in your post............never-ending garbage........sewage........BS. (Even at that...I'll answer any question that you can think of...as long as someone else asks it. It's not the question I would avoid....only you.)

As fas as I'm concerned, kitty dear....you are a walking, talking portable sewer system.




Now....once again.....in an attempt to wash kitty's sewage off of myself.....if anyone wishes to accuse me of absolutely refusing (not 'failing') to answer a question...then they're welcome to ask me the "Big question" that I'm supposedly afraid to answer.....and I'll promptly answer it.


AGAIN.....I will never REFUSE to answer a Bigfoot-related question.....outright. There is no Bigfoot question that I am afraid to answer.

 

[billydkid]

Here again is one of my favorite comparisons...


[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Patty%20and%20Bob/Patty1lined1.jpg[/qimg][qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Patty%20and%20Bob/Bob1lined1.jpg[/qimg]



Lining-up the eyes, (which had to line-up if Bob was inside the "suit")....and the feet.....Bob's arms come up well short of Patty's.

The idiocy of all this and the way it somehow just keeps dragging on as though there is actually something to debate or discuss is staggering. It's a guy in a monkey suit. There is no big foot.