The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

[SweatyYeti]

See? That wasn't so hard. So if Dfoot's arm appears to be as long as Patty's in that comparison picture, what does that say about Patty's arms? I'd imagine that for someone who's adamant about Patty's arms being longer than a human's (average or otherwise), they'd insist that it was just an illusion.

That's right....it wasn't a difficult question to answer, at all.


The only reason I waited on answering it was because my answer wasn't required for you to back-up your claim.....that "a picture can make a person's arm appear longer than it actually is".


Your explanation, in post #1536...

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.

...is neither very convincing, nor very clear.

Can you elaborate on it....and, possibly demonstrate that what you're claiming is actually true?



Also....you said "Dfoot's arm appears to be shorter"....but I'm asking you about how a picture causes an arm to appear longer than it actually is.

As for your comments about Gimlin not cashing in by writing a tell-out book:

Seeing as how Greg Long's book detailing an interview with the alleged man in the suit (aka the star of the film) wasn't a bestseller, why on Earth would a book by Gimlin sell any better?

Because Gimlin was THE GUY who was behind the alleged "hoax".....that's why!

 

[wolftrax]

All it says is that Patty's arm length can be equal to the arm length of a person who has been unlucky enough to become engulfed in ratty, re-cycled carpeting.

Bolding mine. There you have it, all the rest is semantics.

 

[SweatyYeti]

....should actually be distorted in such a way that it is appearing shorter than it truly is....(and shorter than Bob's upper-arm).

But yet..........Patty's upper-arm appears longer than Bob's upper-arm.



The 'upper-arm lengths' in mangler's animation are contradictory....BACKWARDS.....from what your "viewed from the rear", elliptical diagram says they should be.

Sweaty this is after all the PGF and "special spacial realitivity" applies to all who dare enter.

Ahhhh.....yes, Log......The Theory of "special spacial realitivity". I forgot about that very special feature of Jref.

It allows all things to be possible......except for Bigfoot, of course.

But lets just give Bob H his due for just this once. I don't need to consider special spacial realivity to give Bob long ape arms. Heck no and he don't need no stinkining arm extensions either.
See he agreed to allow his arms to be wrenched from their sockets so's they'd hang nice and long and low as he strutted his stuff.
But what POed the lad was after he allowed to be subjected to such torture in the name of artistic excellence was that Roger welshed on the deal and never paid him. Can't say I blame him

You know, I've never heard that about Bob's arms, before!
So....I just went and did a little searching on Google.....and, lo and behold......I found an old picture of Bob, runnin' late for work...

It's amazing what you can find with Google!

 

[SweatyYeti]

Bolding mine. There you have it, all the rest is semantics.

Only for those who live in 'make-believe' land.

Finding the truth requires much more involved thinking, and analysing.

 

[kitakaze]

Only for those who live in 'make-believe' land.

Bigfoots across the continent, UFO's overhead, and civilizations on Mars is not a make-believe land?

Finding the truth requires much more involved thinking, and analysing.

Unless it takes as much as 15 seconds and shows a conclusion you don't like.

 

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

That's right....it wasn't a difficult question to answer, at all.

The only reason I waited on answering it was because my answer wasn't required for you to back-up your claim

Incorrect. As I explained to you before, I had two different ways of backing it up, each one being dependent on how one approached the film. But, I decided to provide the "no" option first.

Can you elaborate on it....and, possibly demonstrate that what you're claiming is actually true?

What, you mean like taking pictures of myself? Sorry, I'm afraid I lack certain necessary materials for that (and the money to obtain them). However, as I explained before, me drawing 1.13 inch lines on those pictures would yield the same measurements. Drawing lines would change nothing. However, anyone with a ruler is free to see/check my results for themselves.

Also....you said "Dfoot's arm appears to be shorter"....but I'm asking you about how a picture causes an arm to appear longer than it actually is.

You misunderstand. I'll explain it real simple-like, just in case there's anyone else out there who made this mistake:

1. I measured Dfoot's arms in two pictures
2. The measurements came out the same...HOWEVER...
3. They only reason they are the same is since Dfoot is wearing padding in the picture showing his normal arm length. Padding adds to his apparent bulk (including his shoulder). If we removed the padding and remeasured, it is almost certain that his arm would have a shorter measurement than he does in the comparison picture. In other words:
4. Arm position can create the illusion of longer length, as Dfoot's arm doing the "Patty swing" is seemingly longer than his normal arm.

Because Gimlin was THE GUY who was behind the alleged "hoax".....that's why!

No, that'd technically be Roger Patterson. Gimlin just tagged along. In professional movie terms, here's how it would break down.

Star: Guy in monster costume
Director: Roger Patterson
Production assistant: Bob Gimlin

Books by movie stars and directors (and often their ghostwriters) related to famous movies tend to be big sellers. However, a production assistant is not the type of person one would expect to author a high-selling book.

And, again, a book featuring the testimony of the man believed by many to be the guy in the suit (aka the star) did not sell well. Outside of footerland and Bigfoot debates, Gimlin is not a big name.

 

[wolftrax]

Only for those who live in 'make-believe' land.

Finding the truth requires much more involved thinking, and analysing.

You mean complicating things and playing around with people's words instead of addressing the real point of the conversation?

You've been arguing for pages and at least a week now on this whole arm issue, arguing over foreshortening and perspective in 3d images by using 2d images, and when those are turned into a more natural perspective view you then try to use that to argue with another point you made a week ago again about the 3d images, while ignoring the difference in the height angle. What really is your point?

The point is this: Are Patty's arms too long for a human to be in? As you acknowledged, obviously not.

Why waste any more time arguing with people over nonsense trying to keep an arm on a 2d plane while ignoring the various angles it could be, when it doesn't make a difference because you already know that the length of Patty's arms can be attained.

Is it because you want to "Make believe" or over "Analyse" to find some other truth than the one that really matters?

 

[SweatyYeti]

Bigfoots across the continent, UFO's overhead, and civilizations on Mars is not a make-believe land?

No, 'non-natural', created, objects on Mars is not 'make-believe'....it may be right in front of your eyes...

........

In a VERY LARGE Universe (which is, for all practical purposes, limitless).....it's only people with very small minds who laugh at the possibilities of life outside of the Earth.

kitakaze would be one of those folks.

 

[Astrophotographer]

The definition of an open/small mind is in the eye of the beholder. Feel free to watch this clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI

 

[SweatyYeti]

wolftrax wrote:

The point is this: Are Patty's arms too long for a human to be in?

As you acknowledged, obviously not.

No, that is not the only 'point', or question which needs to be analysed.


If it was determined that Patty's arms were several inches loooooooooonger than an average human's, or Bob's arms.....the next question to be considered would be how Patty's fingers managed to bend, and what the likelihood would be of Roger incorporating such a device into the hands of the "suit".
(Remember Bob H. has never mentioned anything about any type of remote-controlled fingers in his alleged suit.)

 

[makaya325]

No, 'non-natural', created, objects on Mars is not 'make-believe'....it may be right in front of your eyes...



[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Mars/mars14.jpg[/qimg]


[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Mars/rocky222.jpg[/qimg]




[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Mars/mars222a.jpg[/qimg]........[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Mars/mars222b.jpg[/qimg]


In a VERY LARGE Universe (which is, for all practical purposes, limitless).....it's only people with very small minds who laugh at the possibilities of life outside of the Earth.

kitakaze would be one of those folks.

Kitz is not one of those folks, sweaty. Even though most members here think its probable life exists elsewhere, the idea of not only life, but CIVILIZATIONS on Mars is woo. You see what you want to see.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Kitz is not one of those folks, sweaty. Even though most members here think its probable life exists elsewhere, the idea of not only life, but CIVILIZATIONS on Mars is woo.

You see what you want to see.

There's an interesting contradiction in people's thinking. While many people will agree (as you just stated) that... "it's very likely (alien) life exists elsewhere in the universe".....they'll also scoff, laugh and giggle at the idea that... " (alien) life has visited the Earth, or Mars".


But yet.....there is no basic difference between those 2 postulates.

Intelligent, alien life can.....potentially.....exist ANYWHERE in this universe.


Again....it's only people with small minds who will laugh at the possibilities that exist in a near-limitless universe.

 

[SweatyYeti]

makaya's statement is a perfect example of the contradictory reactions to the possibility of alien life...

Even though most members here think its probable (very likely) life exists elsewhere....

....the idea of not only life, but CIVILIZATIONS on Mars is woo. (preposterous....giggle...giggle. )

 

[billydkid]

So, is it really that easy to create a phenomena? If I were to go out, dress up in some sort of an outfit - say a Martian or a yeti or the mothman or Santa Clause - and put a grainy video on youtube would people seriously be debating the possibility of its authenticity 15 years from now? If I were to make plaster casts of manufactured footprints and post the pictures with claims that I came across them in the woods would people seriously discussing their fine points - is the depth appropriate to the weight of the supposed creature they came from? Are the relative toe length anatomically appropriates? Is the stride length consistent with the presumed height of the creature I am claiming they come from? - as a way of ascertaining their authenticity?

It is always the tack of some of those who want to believe in a particular fairy tale to claim cynicism and closed mindedness on the part of those who are not ready to buy into their particular brand of gullibility.

 

[SweatyYeti]

billydkid, from beautiful Upstate NY, wrote:

So, is it really that easy to create a phenomena?

No, it isn't.

The PG Film is unique, in that respect. 41 years, and still 'cookin'!

I think it has something to do with "realism".

 

[Crowlogic]

No, 'non-natural', created, objects on Mars is not 'make-believe'....it may be right in front of your eyes...



[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Mars/mars14.jpg[/qimg]


[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Mars/rocky222.jpg[/qimg]





[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Mars/mars222a.jpg[/qimg]........[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Mars/mars222b.jpg[/qimg]


In a VERY LARGE Universe (which is, for all practical purposes, limitless).....it's only people with very small minds who laugh at the possibilities of life outside of the Earth.

kitakaze would be one of those folks.

Heck everyone knows there are artificial artifacts on Mars and the moon. Its been known for a few decades proof positive. But let's not stop there. You'll find them on Venus, and the outer planets and moons. We ourselves put them there. Have any other's been plying the waters so to speak. Well each and every new planetary system discovery is uncovering proof that our own little rock is not so unique. Let's not forget that the universe is mega old. Beings from afar could have easily left behind evidence of visitation only to have gone extinct eons before we ever came down from the trees. Hell make that eons before we ever made it into the trees to evolve into something able to come down from the trees.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Heck everyone knows there are artificial artifacts on Mars and the moon. Its been known for a few decades proof positive. But let's not stop there. You'll find them on Venus, and the outer planets and moons. We ourselves put them there. Have any other's been plying the waters so to speak. Well each and every new planetary system discovery is uncovering proof that our own little rock is not so unique.

Let's not forget that the universe is mega old. Beings from afar could have easily left behind evidence of visitation only to have gone extinct eons before we ever came down from the trees. Hell make that eons before we ever made it into the trees to evolve into something able to come down from the trees.

Thanks for making that point, Crow.

I was going to add that to one of my earlier posts....regarding the Universe being virtually limitless....that vastness includes not only space, but time also.


When you consider the vastness of time....and then consider the fact that solar systems (and, consequently, their native life) are out-of-step with each other as far as their stages of development.....you have the potential for life on one planet to be thousands, or even millions of years ahead of life on another planet.


Bottom line.....the possibilities are absolutely staggering.

(Except to a Jref skeptic, that is....... "It's all Woo". )

Heck everyone knows there are artificial artifacts on Mars and the moon. Its been known for a few decades proof positive.

Yowza!

 

[JohnWS]

Bottom line.....the possibilities are absolutely staggering.

(Except to a Jref skeptic, that is....... "It's all Woo". )

This is ridiculous. What do you make of SETI then Yeti? They search for solid, repeatable evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence, yet they are quite adamant that the UFO phenomenon as it stands is worthless of scientific study to that end.

However, you may wish to reflect on the fact that if there were interesting, verifiable evidence that extraterrestrials were visiting our planet, tens of thousands of university scientists would be busy investigating this idea. They're not.

CLICK ME

You may like to search the site for 'Cydonia' too.

You seem to be unable to separate reality from pseudo-scientific nonsense and popular tabloid tripe. Rejecting silly fantasies as evidence for life in the universe is not the same as rejecting the fascinating possibility that life may well exist elsewhere.

 

[wolftrax]

wolftrax wrote:



No, that is not the only 'point', or question which needs to be analysed.


If it was determined that Patty's arms were several inches loooooooooonger than an average human's, or Bob's arms.....the next question to be considered would be how Patty's fingers managed to bend, and what the likelihood would be of Roger incorporating such a device into the hands of the "suit".
(Remember Bob H. has never mentioned anything about any type of remote-controlled fingers in his alleged suit.)

The first question needs to be are the fingers truly bending or do they appear to because of motion blur and/or shadows? So far that has yet to be shown.

The next question needs to be can the position of a non-moving hand have the appearance of different finger positions when rotated and viewed at different angles and the film is blurry? Whoever posted that doll's hand in different positions did a good job of showing that.

The next question is can the fingers move and look like they are bending with just the fingertips in them, as Bob H claimed? Dfoot did a good job of showing that.

 

[RayG]

Sweaty does a good job of showing fallacious arguments.

RayG