Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

[SweatyYeti]

It was very amusing. I knew that you could not answer such a simple question with the inevitably correct answer of "no".

The fact remains.....I answered his question.

And I note now that you respond and conveniently ignore a simple demonstration that shows that not only are Patty's arms not inhumanly long, using your very own method of comparison we see that Patty's arms are not even longer than the average person.

From the 'Bob Heironimus and Patty' thread....a direct comparison showing that Patty's fingers reach closer to her feet than Bob's do, to his...

 

[SweatyYeti]

Astro wrote:

I am confused.
In one case you say they "ARE" longer (but provide no measurements to demonstrate this) and in other statement you say "They appear to be", which is more what I would expect from just viewing images as you so often do.

No need to be confused, Astro.....Patty's arms BOTH 'appear to be longer', and, they 'are longer'.

Both can occur.....at the very same time!

 

[SweatyYeti]

Another comparison, with 2 key points aligned....the eyes and the tops of their heads.....showing that Patty's arm is longer than your average human's arm......

"Look Ma........no numbers needed!"

 

[SweatyYeti]

Direct comparisons are fun!!

 

[Vortigern99]

More sewage....from the Sewage Master.

Sewer Boy's fountain of stink continues to pour forth.

... thoughtful counter-analysis, from the dude who swims in sewage.

If you weren't a walking, talking, portable sewer...of misrepresentations and false accusations, kitty....I'd respond to your questions, and "points".

Another spurt of raw sewage.....from the Sewer King.

I highlighted Sewer's misrepresentation in bold....

I call for an end to this kind of discourse right now.

I come to the JREF to analyze possible evidence for bigfoot and to examine the P-G film, not to wade through reams of puerile derogation and absurd fecal-imagery ad hominems.

If kitakaze is making false accusations, misrepresentations and inaccurate analyses, Sweaty, then please, demonstrate how this is so. Show us the data. Rebut his assertions with facts and evidence.

Resorting to schoolyard name-calling makes you look desperate, as if your only recourse in the complete absence of any supporting evidence on your side is to shout "You're a poo-poo head!" and then repeat the same disproven claims in louder tones. In short, your infantile behavior is destroying your credibility, regardless of whether your contentions themselves have any merit.

If such expert skeptical minds as Carl Sagan (dec.), Richard Dawkins or James Randi, or on your own "side" Jeff Meldrum, Grover Krantz (dec.) or Loren Coleman were presented with contradictory assertions, in all likelihood they would simply collect themselves, conduct a bit of research if the discussion called for it, and post the information which supports their case. They would not resort to name-calling, bold-facing and huge font sizes.

Whereas I am not in authority to demand a cessation of such childish derogatory attacks, I plead with our esteemed Moderators to take action here, and enforce the rules of this forum.

Thank you.

Noah David Henson
Vortigern99

 

[Vortigern99]

From the 'Bob Heironimus and Patty' thread....a direct comparison showing that Patty's fingers reach closer to her feet than Bob's do, to his...

Sweaty, Bob's arm is visibly foreshortened toward the camera, a conclusion based on 1) the overlap of folds of his shirt-sleeves, away from the camera, 2) the cylinder-base oval of the sleeve at his wrist, and 3) comparison with other pics of Bob, which reveal that his arms are in fact longer; AND his hand is tilted at a more oblique angle than the P-G subject's. These two factors combined mean that Bob's arm will be higher on a vertical line than the P-G subject's.

I've listed these factors in the past but you've never responded to them. Now you post the same old claim as though it's never been debunked. It has. Your move.

EDIT: There is also the arc-circle control for limb length, a principle of figure construction I've described at length elsewhere. In brief, as the limb moves away from a purely vertical position, its apparent length will diminish according to the outline of an arc-circle.

 

[Vortigern99]

Another comparison, with 2 key points aligned....the eyes and the tops of their heads.....showing that Patty's arm is longer than your average human's arm......

In addition to the factors I've listed above, these pics are improperly scaled. Your base-line for the P-G subject's height appear to cut "it" off about mid-ankle.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

I call for an end to this kind of discourse right now.

I come to the JREF to analyze possible evidence for bigfoot and to examine the P-G film, not to wade through reams of puerile derogation and absurd fecal-imagery ad hominems.

If kitakaze is making false accusations, misrepresentations and inaccurate analyses, Sweaty, then please, demonstrate how this is so. Show us the data. Rebut his assertions with facts and evidence.

Resorting to schoolyard name-calling makes you look desperate, as if your only recourse in the complete absence of any supporting evidence on your side is to shout "You're a poo-poo head!" and then repeat the same disproven claims in louder tones. In short, your infantile behavior is destroying your credibility, regardless of whether your contentions themselves have any merit.

If such expert skeptical minds as Carl Sagan (dec.), Richard Dawkins or James Randi, or on your own "side" Jeff Meldrum, Grover Krantz (dec.) or Loren Coleman were presented with contradictory assertions, in all likelihood they would simply collect themselves, conduct a bit of research if the discussion called for it, and post the information which supports their case. They would not resort to name-calling, bold-facing and huge font sizes.

Whereas I am not in authority to demand a cessation of such childish derogatory attacks, I plead with our esteemed Moderators to take action here, and enforce the rules of this forum.

Thank you.

Noah David Henson
Vortigern99

On a side note Darth, how is that hole in the wall you keep making with your head coming?

Theres an old saying I believe may be applicable here.

Never argue with a fool because he will wear you down and beat you with experience.

 

[Vortigern99]

Well, someone's got to do it. Imagine new readers/visitors to the JREF coming in and perusing Sweaty's illogical, desultory nonsense, with no one on the other side to rebut/respond to/question/denounce it. Kitakaze has his methods and I have mine. Factual errors and outright derogation must be addressed.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Well, someone's got to do it. Imagine new readers/visitors to the JREF coming in and perusing Sweaty's illogical, desultory nonsense, with no one on the other side to rebut/respond to/question/denounce it. Kitakaze has his methods and I have mine. Factual errors and outright derogation must be addressed.

Use the Force

 

[Crowlogic]

I call for an end to this kind of discourse right now.

I come to the JREF to analyze possible evidence for bigfoot and to examine the P-G film, not to wade through reams of puerile derogation and absurd fecal-imagery ad hominems.

If kitakaze is making false accusations, misrepresentations and inaccurate analyses, Sweaty, then please, demonstrate how this is so. Show us the data. Rebut his assertions with facts and evidence.

Resorting to schoolyard name-calling makes you look desperate, as if your only recourse in the complete absence of any supporting evidence on your side is to shout "You're a poo-poo head!" and then repeat the same disproven claims in louder tones. In short, your infantile behavior is destroying your credibility, regardless of whether your contentions themselves have any merit.

If such expert skeptical minds as Carl Sagan (dec.), Richard Dawkins or James Randi, or on your own "side" Jeff Meldrum, Grover Krantz (dec.) or Loren Coleman were presented with contradictory assertions, in all likelihood they would simply collect themselves, conduct a bit of research if the discussion called for it, and post the information which supports their case. They would not resort to name-calling, bold-facing and huge font sizes.

Whereas I am not in authority to demand a cessation of such childish derogatory attacks, I plead with our esteemed Moderators to take action here, and enforce the rules of this forum.

Thank you.

Noah David Henson
Vortigern99

Vort you'd do well to understand that the modality, and temperment of this place was established long before you and I arrived. When "unpleasant" exchanges occour it is simply the normal course of forum blather. If you want to actually discuss Bigfoot find another forum. You can only discuss Bigfoot as non existing here and if something does not exist there is no point in discussing it.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Vortigern wrote:

Resorting to schoolyard name-calling makes you look desperate, as if your only recourse in the complete absence of any supporting evidence on your side is to shout "You're a poo-poo head!"

All I'm doing, Vort, is characterizing kitty's statements as accurately, and appropriately, as I possibly can.

The vast majority of what he writes is pure garbage....consisting of misrepresentations, false accusations, and general disrespect.


And I absolutely have supported my assertion of 'misrepresentations'......most recently, in answering AMM and makaya's questions concerning Patty's arm length.

AMM himself even stated that I answered his question.

Again.....as far as I'm concerned, kitakaze is a walking, talking, typing, portable sewer system.....based on the voluminous amount of BS that emanates from his posts.


When I have time....I'll put together a collection of his BS, and post it, for everyone to read.

BTW....I had put together a collection, a very long time ago, which I entitled "kitty goes nuts".
Just for the fun of it....I suggest you do a search, and read it.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Vortigern wrote:

In addition to the factors I've listed above, these pics are improperly scaled.

Your base-line for the P-G subject's height appear to cut "it" off about mid-ankle.

The 2 points which had to line-up.....if Bob was Patty.....are lined-up. (Those points being the eyes and the tops of their heads.)

If, as a result of that necessary alignment......their feet don't match-up....that doesn't mean that the "images are mis-scaled".....it means that Bob's dimensions DO NOT MATCH Patty's dimensions.


You've completely missed the point of the comparison, because you're working with a false assumption....that Bob's and Patty's body dimensions match.

When, in fact, all direct comparisons of them show that they do not match.

 

[Vortigern99]

The 2 points which had to line-up.....if Bob was Patty.....are lined-up. (Those points being the eyes and the tops of their heads.)

If, as a result of that necessary alignment......their feet don't match-up....that doesn't mean that the "images are mis-scaled".....it means that Bob's dimensions DO NOT MATCH Patty's dimensions.


You've completely missed the point of the comparison, because you're working with a false assumption....that Bob's and Patty's body dimensions match.

When, in fact, all direct comparisons of them show that they do not match.

1) Bob's head is tilted at a more oblique angle than the P-G subject's. This degree of difference in head placement alters the vertically-measured distance between the top of the head and the eye socket.

2) Your placement of the top-line of the P-G subject's height is arbitrary, based on your subjective opinion as to where a possible suit-wearer's head might be inside of the imagined mask.

These two factors, which I've noted before and which you've neglected to address, combine to invalidate your line placement and attempt at scaling the two pics.

 

[Vortigern99]

Here's a crude MS Paint comparison of the angles of the head. Note that the angle change will affect the vertical measurement, as you can see for yourself using an action figure (if you have one) and a piece of lined notebook paper; a drawing or picture that you tilt and measure, tilt and measure; or your own or another live model's head.

 

[Vortigern99]

Vort you'd do well to understand that the modality, and temperment of this place was established long before you and I arrived. When "unpleasant" exchanges occour it is simply the normal course of forum blather. If you want to actually discuss Bigfoot find another forum. You can only discuss Bigfoot as non existing here and if something does not exist there is no point in discussing it.

Snarkily taking someone to task for ignoring the rules of scientific, rational and/or skeptical inquiry is one thing. I might hope/wish/prefer that we remain emotionally neutral in such discourse, but if wielded properly satire and ridicule can be effective tools, as I've noted elsewhere, for exposing the flaws in an opponent's case.

Juvenile insult and name-calling such as "sewer boy" and "another spurt of raw sewage", especially without offering any substantial counter-points, is another matter entirely. I am politely requesting that such infantile behavior cease, as it is no way constructive nor purposeful toward an exchange of ideas and facts.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Vort you'd do well to understand that the modality, and temperment of this place was established long before you and I arrived. When "unpleasant" exchanges occour it is simply the normal course of forum blather. If you want to actually discuss Bigfoot find another forum. You can only discuss Bigfoot as non existing here and if something does not exist there is no point in discussing it.

know of one that contains intellectual rational thinking people?

 

[SweatyYeti]

Vortigern wrote:

These two factors, which I've noted before and which you've neglected to address, combine to invalidate your line placement and attempt at scaling the two pics.

I did address the placement of the top of Bob's head inside of the alleged costume head.
It's placement is not arbitrary.....it can only be at a point which has very limited room for adjustment, up or down.

(And we can ignore the 'downward' adjustment completely, since that would only make the comparison worse for Bob.)



As for the tilt of their heads....I think your lines need a little adjusting. I'll do that later................trust me!


Edited to add:

The line you drew on Bob shows a greater angle, from vertical, than does a line drawn directly parallel to the back of his head...

I think your bias is showing, Vort.

 

[Vortigern99]

Stop talking about "bias" and "assumptions". I've made no such claims regarding your work; I'm addressing it point-by-point, and I expect you to do the same with me, without the accusatory language. I'm analyzing data here, with no preconceptions about whether Bob is in the suit or whether it's someone else, or indeed whether the P-G subject is a large hairy person, with no suit or costume evident at all. Let's stick to the facts, and identify opinions as such, shall we? Thanks.

Subjectively, the top-line of the P-G subject's head could come down a fraction, to where the horizontal slope of the "brow" reaches a plateau before coming up again. This would narrow the distance between the top-line and the eye-line on the P-G subject.

The oblique tilt of Bob's head, whether it's precisely as I've indicated with the admittedly crude MS Paint or whether it's closer to your own recent, slightly less oblique indication, means that there is a greater distance between the top-line of Bob's head and his eye-line than there would be if his head were tilted more vertically. IOW, this distance will narrow if you pull his head straighter. If we could somehow adjust the angle of the head to be more in-line with the P-G subject's, we could then re-size the images to match up more evenly.

In short, the two pics do not lend themselves to a 1:1 comparison. You can form all kinds of opinions about them as they are, but owing to the numerous discrepancies between head placement, camera lens size, angle of the camera-man, pictoral compression by the processing software, and limb position, it's practically impossible and virtually worthless to compare them or to offer opinions about those comparisons.

Such an exercise in visual data analysis is fun and challenging in its own right, but gets us nowhere with regard to determining the identity of the P-G subject.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Such an exercise in visual data analysis is fun and challenging in its own right, but gets us nowhere with regard to determining the identity of the P-G subject.

Its a bloke in a suit