• 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.
For the sake of argument, let's allow that Bob Heironimous cannot be the figure in the film. Let's grant, hypothetically, that the subject has been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt to be so tall/wide/long-limbed/short-legged/small-headed/whatever as to logically exclude the possibility of BH being inside of a suit.

Now what?
 
Vortigern99 said:
For the sake of argument, let's allow that Bob Heironimous cannot be the figure in the film. Let's grant, hypothetically, that the subject has been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt to be so tall/wide/long-limbed/short-legged/small-headed/whatever as to logically exclude the possibility of BH being inside of a suit.

Now what?
Click to expand...

Well, it's all about eliminating possibilities. Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, is the truth.

If Bob H wasn't bigfoot, what was he? An alien, Nessie? D B Cooper?

This is a mystery that needs to be unraveled and I just pray to god that the crayons hold out until it is solved!
 
For the sake of argument, let's allow that Bob Heironimous cannot be the figure in the film. Let's grant, hypothetically, that the subject has been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt to be so tall/wide/long-limbed/short-legged/small-headed/whatever as to logically exclude the possibility of BH being inside of a suit.

Now what?
Click to expand...

Hey, we've been down that road before. Many times we have given Sweaty what he wants for argument's sake. It has gotten us nothing but scorn and derision.

Be careful, if you take a position just for debate purposes, Sweaty may well claim that is your actual position and make a joke about it...over and over and over...
 
Fair enough. I just want to reiterate the point here that, even if we exclude BH from possibly being the film's subject, the possibility of some other person being inside a suit remains. Nothing can be gained by rejecting Bob as the man in the suit, so I just have to wonder why we spend so much effort trying to hang onto that proposition.
 
Vortigern99 said:
Fair enough. I just want to reiterate the point here that, even if we exclude BH from possibly being the film's subject, the possibility of some other person being inside a suit remains. Nothing can be gained by rejecting Bob as the man in the suit, so I just have to wonder why we spend so much effort trying to hang onto that proposition.
Click to expand...

People do not want Patty to be a hoax, and they feel they cant turn back after they made all of their ambigious claims regarding the film.
 
Vortigern99 said:
For the sake of argument, let's allow that Bob Heironimous cannot be the figure in the film. Let's grant, hypothetically, that the subject has been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt to be so tall/wide/long-limbed/short-legged/small-headed/whatever as to logically exclude the possibility of BH being inside of a suit.

Now what?
Click to expand...



Analysing the PG Film is all about determining "probabilities"....concerning as many aspects of the film as can possibly be analysed.

Bob H. claiming to be the 'guy inside the suit' is just one of those aspects.



If it's detemrined that Bob H. is indeed full of bull.....then we have to consider the consequences of there being, after 41 years, nobody with a credible claim to being Patty...(or even anybody with a claim.)


The situation would then be...

1) No deathbed confession by Roger Patterson.

2) No confession by Gimlin.

3) No Suit.

4) Nobody with even a slightly credible claim to being the "Man in the suit".

5) No 'tell all' book by anyone involved with the filming.....despite the enormous (to put it mildly) popularity of this supposed "Hoax"....and the potentially huge pile of money awaiting the author of such a book.

6) No reproduction of the alleged 'suit', which comes anywhere near the realism, or ambiguity, of Patty.


and last but not least.....:)...


7) No scientific analysis, in all these years, which has reliably ;) shown Patty to be a 'suit'.


Bottom line.....the hoax crowd would have nothing.



Edited to add:

Actually.....they will always have the freedom to type into their computers..."I think the suit is crappy".
That can never be taken away from them! God Bless America!
 
Last edited:
SweatyYeti said:
1) No deathbed confession by Roger Patterson.
Click to expand...
2) No confession by Gimlin.
Click to expand...
3) No Suit.
Click to expand...
4) Nobody with even a slightly credible claim to being the "Man in the suit".
Click to expand...
5) No 'tell all' book by anyone involved with the filming.....despite the enormous (to put it mildly) popularity of this supposed "Hoax"....and the potentially huge pile of money awaiting the author of such a book.
Click to expand...
6) No reproduction of the alleged 'suit', which comes anywhere near the realism, or ambiguity, of Patty.
Click to expand...
7) No scientific analysis, in all these years, which has reliably ;) shown Patty to be a 'suit'.
Click to expand...
Bottom line.....the hoax crowd would have nothing.
Click to expand...

None of these are required to make the claim of "THAT IS OBVIOUSLY A GUY IN A SUIT" or "IF THAT IS A CREATURE AS YOU SAY, THEN PLEASE SHOW ME THE CLASSIFICATION INFORMATION"
 
SweatyYeti said:
If it's detemrined that Bob H. is indeed full of bull.....then we have to consider the consequences of there being, after 41 years, nobody with a credible claim to being Patty...(or even anybody with a claim.)
Click to expand...

If you were able to determine that Bob is not the guy in the suit, this does not mean that it can not be a guy in a suit. So what if the person chooses not to come forward. Perhaps he recieves money to keep quiet. We really do not know. However, it is still more probable that there is somebody out there that was the guy in the suit than it being a creature that nobody has been able to locate in over forty years. So far, you have yet to provide adequate evidence that it can't be Bob in a suit. I can't see how you can demonstrate that it can't be ANY person in a suit.
 
SweatyYeti said:
Bottom line.....the hoax crowd would have nothing.
Click to expand...

LOL. What do the bigfoot proponents have? Butt and foot prints? A forty year old film that could be a guy in a suit? Audio tapes of people yelling in the woods? Tall stories about bigfoot scaring somebody? All of it equates to zero. I recently saw Brian Dunning say the following:

As I often say, you can stack cowpies as high as you want, they won’t turn into a bar of gold. Good evidence is composed of good evidence, not lots of bad evidence.

Draw all the crayon lines on blurry pictures you desire. You can not turn lousy evidence into good evidence. The default explanation still stands. Provide better evidence to show that bigfoot really exists. Until then, it is most likely a guy in a suit.
 
neltana said:
If Bob H wasn't bigfoot, what was he? An alien, Nessie? D B Cooper?

QUOTE]

What was/is Bob H? A guy who was close enough to the central circle of a couple of guys who managed to carve out a bit of fame and fortune that from which he decided to grab a piece of the pie. In a way it worked because his proximity, physical as well as operational was enough to give him a certain measure of circumstantial credibility. Does the hand fit the glove comfortably? You decide.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Astrophotographer said:
If you were able to determine that Bob is not the guy in the suit, this does not mean that it can not be a guy in a suit. So what if the person chooses not to come forward. Perhaps he recieves money to keep quiet. We really do not know. However, it is still more probable that there is somebody out there that was the guy in the suit than it being a creature that nobody has been able to locate in over forty years. So far, you have yet to provide adequate evidence that it can't be Bob in a suit. I can't see how you can demonstrate that it can't be ANY person in a suit.
Click to expand...

It takes more tailoring and shoehorning to put Bob in "the suit" than it takes reason to not put him in it in the first place. If the Morris recreaton had never been created then "Bobnicks" would have had a gloss of Bob is the man. However the world did get to unquestionabley see Bob as Bigfoot and whatever talent he may have had for the role sure didn't come on line this time when the camera rolled. Was he the walker? IMO no. Is he an opportunist? IMO yes.
 
Astro wrote:
So what if the person chooses not to come forward.

Perhaps he recieves money to keep quiet.
Click to expand...



Good one, Astro! :D I think you hit the nail right on the head with that one!

And also.....maybe Gimlin doesn't write the 'tell-all' book because he's been threatened by the guy who's being paid to keep his trap shut....and then, maybe the guy who made the custom-formed padding for the suit has been recieving a fruit basket every single week, for the last 41 years, to keep his mouth from runnin'.......and maybe.......whatever you want to think, Astro....that's what the TRUTH of the matter is!! :)
 
Astro wrote:
it being a creature that nobody has been able to locate in over forty years.
Click to expand...


That's not necessarily true.

There have been lots of reported sightings....and if some of them have been actual sightings of Bigfoot, then people have indeed located it.


It would be more accurate to say that 'nobody has proven it'.


The default explanation still stands
Click to expand...


I'm happy for you, Astro, that you have a 'default thought' in your head, that you're 100% comfortable with.
"Comfort" is a good thing. :)
 
Drewbot wrote:
None of these are required to make the claim of "THAT IS OBVIOUSLY A GUY IN A SUIT"
Click to expand...


Absolutely true, Drew.

I said that very same thing, earlier...


Edited to add:

Actually.....they will always have the freedom to type into their computers..."I think the suit is crappy".
That can never be taken away from them! God Bless America!
Click to expand...



Freedom....like comfort....is a very good thing!
 
SweatyYeti said:
kitty....you are a deeply troubled human being.
Click to expand...

Feel free to substantiate that. I find myself to be quite happy.

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.
Click to expand...

See, now you're just lying. You made the initial claim that Patty's arms are inhumanly long. That is why we are wasting time talking about arms. Other proponents like Munns are not wasting time talking about arms as they see nothing inhuman about them. Atomic knows your games and your complete disrespect for debate etiquette. He told you what he required for him to answer your question. He needs no other reason for making that stipulation other than the fact that it is you asking the question. You know, like you refusing to answer my questions because of lack of disrespect (that thing you show to many people you ask questions to).

Nevertheless he explained exactly why he needed you to answer his question regarding your initial claim. You still refused, he went ahead and demonstrated what he was talking about, and noted what a coward you are. He's given you what you asked for and you're still dancing.


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

You will not. It has been proven many times with you. Not a single person here need doubt that.

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.
Click to expand...

Call your fear of debate with me whatever you like. I simply know your games too well and exactly what makes you cornerhuddle. I dare you to ask me any question you like. There is not one thing you could dream up that I would fear to answer. The only condition being that you answer one Bigfoot-related question in return. You will not because you are an intellectual coward.

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.
Click to expand...

Sweaty is lying and I will now prove it. Here is the first question, drop-dead simple, that did not come from me:

AtomicMysteryMonster said:
Yes or no: Are Patty's arms longer than the arms of a human?
Click to expand...

Let's see how promptly Sweaty answers this. If Sweaty wants to claim Atomic did not demonstrate his claim he is also lying. Here is Atomic's demonstration:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4685742&postcount=1536

Please note that Sweaty, rather than answer a simple "yes" or "no", will attempt to sidestep by quibbling some issue with Atomic's demonstration. This will be further evidence of his cowardice as all that matters is that Atomic took the time to comply with Sweaty's request and demonstrate the point as he saw it.

There's the question. Here comes more dodging.
 
Last edited:
Skeptical Greggy wrote:
This has got to be the most idiotic statement you could possibly make.
Click to expand...



farside2.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom