Continuation - The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

[kitakaze]

Kudos Kit!!! This would the most significant advancement with the PGF in a long time, and maybe just in time. I'll be PMing you some questions for Bob(s).

As the Devil's advocate...

Cheers, Óðinn. I get all Jeff Goldblum just thinking about it. BTW, if I was a government, I'd want you for the opposition.

Because Bob H was always jealous that he was close to the PGF, yet didn't get in on it.

OK, so the idea is that Bob got jealous and claimed to be a part of the film that he was involved with. When he starts claiming to friends in Yakima in '68 that he was in the suit, he opens himself up to litigation by Patterson who is running around all over the place trying to make money with the film.

There is also the fact that BH has always been a fairly quiet fellow. If he really was looking to get attention and soothe his wounded ego, you think he would have rocked the boat a lot harder. He didn't do that. He kept it limited to a few people in his wee little town. He kept acting like a guy waiting for the $1000 dollars he was promised and then acted like a guy that wasn't overly go get 'em when he he didn't get that money. Makes sense to me.

No doubt they all knew each other well, which gave Bob H a sense of entitlement.

OK, let's roll with that. You're Bob H. This is your crew...

Shortstop and Tonto and Slim and Tex and Cooter and the rest, those are your boys. So Shortstop and Tonto take a break from the Bigfoot movie they're putting you in and take your great big horse Chico down to California for like a whole month and come back jumping up and down with an actual female Bigfoot on film (which looks just like the one drew in his book last year). You're all screwed up with jealousy and dagnabit, you miss Chico, and you go ahead and start telling people that you were the ladyfoot. Don't you expect Shortstop and Tonto and Slim and Tex and Cooter and the rest to come roll over you like a ton of bricks?

On what charges and how could you prove any of it?

Libel. You get your lawyer who gets an inkling of how much revenue the PGF has generated to worry about proving it. Certainly in 2004 Bob Gimlin should have been threatening his neighbour and friend with legal action if he didn't STFU.

Patterson passed one too.

Let's drag that one out. Bob's polygraphs are well documented. What about the Roger took? Where is the documentation?

They likely can't avoid each other. They know where each other stands. Neither is likely to budge, so why discuss it?

If the Bigfoot film thing was as much of a big deal as Gimlin makes it out to be and everybody knew Heironimus was in the suit, Gimlin could have left Yakima or at least S 90th Ave decades ago. He didn't. He remained friends with Heironimus and they still hang out. Outside wee little Yakima people are debating the film endlessly, but there in town Bob H is the guy in the suit who asked Gimlin to come foreward and Gimlin is the guy who won't because it's too far gone now. There are horses to break in, Chevy's to restore, and pints to have, so why discuss it?

He admitted it because it's Gimlin's word against his, and in his mind he should have been the guy in the suit anyways. But he may not even know who or what was actually in the suit.

Let's say Heironimus was lying. Not only was he risking Shortstop and Tonto and Slim and Tex and Cooter and the rest coming to roll over him like a ton of bricks, he risks having the real guy come foreward and making him look like an a lying ass. he certainly didn't think it was a real Bigfoot. But if they really did film Bigfoot, they had every possibility of then going and finding one after the film was made, which again makes BH look like a lying ass.

ETA: I smell book deal here for Kit. Ghost writers need not apply.

I smell Óðinn lighting a fire under my ass. LOL

Working title is 9 Doors Apart...

 

[Bill Munns]

Kit:

Wishing you success in interviewing Bob H.

Questions you may want to ask Bob H.

1. Could you describe the parts of the suit and the sequence of dressing into it?

Also, can you describe these particulars:

a. head mask, was anything inside it, or was it just a thin rubber mask?
b. body suit, was it in one or two pieces, and if more than one piece, what part of the body did each piece cover, and which piece was worn first?
c. gloves, where there any and were they separate from the arm sleave or attached to the sleave?
d. feet, were they separate from the leg fur or attached?
e. Was there any inner padding, or football shoulder padding, worn under the fur?


2. What were you wearing when you put the suit on?

example: Normal clothes (like jeans and shirt), long johns, socks, shoes, boots, ?

3. Was the costume loose fitting or snug when you wore it?

4. Were various suit pieces connected and held together by zippers, buttons, hook & eye devices, snaps, or velcro?

5. Hip waders have been mentioned as being in the suit. If so, were they put on before the fur suit, or were they fixed in the fur suit so your foot and leg slipped into the wader as it went into the costume?

6. When you were dressed up, and Roger had the camera ready to film, who decided how you should act and move?

Who chose the path that was eventually walked?

Was there any reason why none of the footage showed you fully facing the camera before walking away?

The film shows you just walking and walking further and further away. How did you know when to stop walking and that the filming was done, so you could turn around and walk back?

7. Why did you look back at the camera?

8. Did your walking while being filmed make the trackway footprints later cast by Roger and Titmus, or were those added later?

9. Did the costume have feet larger than you own, and if so, can you describe them?

10. Did you try the costume on before that day, to see how it would fit, and if so, where and on what day?

11. Did you breathe through the mask nose or mouth? Aside from the holes around the eyes to see out of, were there any other holes in the mask face?

12. Could you remove the face mask by yourself, after you were done, or did you need one of the other guys to help you get the mask off?


Bill

 

[kitakaze]

kitakaze wrote:



Here's a question for you to ask Bob, kitakaze...


"Did Roger ever "skin-out a dead, red horse", to make his suit with?"

(And...did the suit really stink??)

Here's a question for you, Sweaty. How's your Ballzheimers?

Answer: bad.

Remember this?

It has been noted a thousand times, that BH never had any first hand information that the suit was made from horse hide...

Thanks for the info, Greg.
I'll have to do some searching to find out exactly how he described the "suit".

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5110526&postcount=2106

Of course not. Let me help you...

Howard Heironimus, Bob's brother, said that Patterson talked about making the suit from a dead red horse. Those are words coming from Roger Patterson, not Bob. So the answer to your poor attempt at discrediting Bob would be he doesn't know, that's just what his brother said he heard from Roger.

Oops for you, Sweaty faceplants again. Try to keep up, old boy...

Yes, if his story is not contrived then the jig is up. But even if he has contemporarily added changes and/or new affirmations about the event, it doesn't mean that he wasn't the guy in the suit after all. Maybe Heironimus is too human to work as a fully-convincing confessor. He doesn't strategically slice out the parts that obviously don't make sense or customize the story to perfectly counter the arguments of the Pattycakes. No, he just tells it the way he tells it. If you don't believe him then you don't. He has always been a pretty stereotypical working guy in Yakima, and now he tells us about his experience wearing the suit in the PGF. No matter how much any of us wishes he could produce physical evidence or get his recollective accounts in a better sort of order (Bob, leave out apparently contrary bits, would you please?)... he only just tells it like it was as far as he can remember. Bob seems willing to go on live radio shows and be asked questions that he doesn't know about in advance. He sounds like an average guy that is gonna tell you what he remembers about the event. He doesn't even seem to make stuff up as he goes. Some things he has no knowledge of, nor had opportunity to know and for these you will get a blank from him. If he was a constantly scheming liar, I would expect him to try to spontaneously concoct deadly answers to every question. He doesn't.

If he is a conniving liar trying to convince the world that he wore the suit, why in the world would he tell us that his brother said that Patterson talked about making the suit from a dead red horse? WTF? That doesn't even sound like something a liar would say. I think we can presume that BH, Howard, RP & BG are not colorblind and that all of them could see that Patty was not red. So why interject some stupid lie that the suit was the skin of a red horse? Because that's not what Bob Heironimus is saying. He can't tell us exactly what materials were used in the suit because he never really knew. He tells us what his brother was told by Roger. You get what you get from Bob. He doesn't even say that Patterson said he took a red horsehide and dyed it black. If Bob speculates that it was a red hide dyed black, it's not because he heard that from his brother or Roger. It would be because he actually thought that Patterson told the truth to Howard, but didn't mention coloring the whole thing black or very dark brown (it always looks like shades of black to me, and never brown).

What are we expected to think of this kind of a crazy addition to a hoaxed confession story when you just decide to talk about your brother being told by Patterson that the suit came from a dead red horse? I mean, you not only gotta make up the story of your brother hearing this from Patterson, but you have to fabricate the color of the skin and you pick RED. WTF?

If Bob Heironimus is lying about wearing the PGF suit, then it is much more than an armchair hoax. It's some kind of unique psychopathy that compels the "victim" to even go as far as implicating his neighbor (Gimlin) as the real liar. I wore the suit and that's the truth. My old buddy Bob Gimlin, who still lives real close to me, has for some reason decided to continue lying about this film. Bob Heironimus is telling us that Bob Gimlin hasn't stopped lying about the PGF right from the start. PGF skeptics already presume that, no matter what they think about BH.

 

[Blackdog]

What do you think about the fact that Bob Heironimus has passed two separate polygraphs concerning his involvement with the PGF?

Patterson passed one too.

He did? You say that like it's a fact.
I'd love to see any documentation on that, even a newspaper article where Patterson says that.
I think this is one of those types of rumors that grew legs on it's own.

I thought you were a man of facts? You aren't getting all Sweaty on us are you?

 

[kitakaze]

Kit:

Wishing you success in interviewing Bob H.

Questions you may want to ask Bob H.

(snip)

Bill

Thank you for the questions, Bill. They are all good. Regardless of our perspectives on the PGF, I'm thinking our Bigfootery lives are about to get very interesting. You'll be interested to know that I will also be speaking with Philip Morris, Greg Long and a number of other people very soon. I will also be approaching some publishing and production companies to discuss my interview project.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Here's a question for you, Sweaty. How's your Ballzheimers?

Answer: bad.

Remember this?



http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5110526&postcount=2106

Of course not. Let me help you...

Howard Heironimus, Bob's brother, said that Patterson talked about making the suit from a dead red horse.

Those are words coming from Roger Patterson, not Bob. So the answer to your poor attempt at discrediting Bob would be he doesn't know, that's just what his brother said he heard from Roger.

Oops for you, Sweaty faceplants again. Try to keep up, old boy...

Well, according to John Green...these are Heironimus' words...

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Heironimus, the supposed wearer, says: “It was made in three parts. It had legs. It had a corset or middle piece between the neck and waist. And it had a head.” “….the legs of the suit…felt like they were hip boots or wading boots…” “They helped me stand up, and Roger and Bob slipped the torso part down over my head and shoulders. I raised my arms up. I kind of wiggled into it. I put my hands and arms into sleeves. It was like putting on a T-shirt.” “It stunk. Roger skinned out a dead, red horse.” “There are bare patches and then hair parts like it was shedding. I remember it had a smell. It could have been horse hide. I don't know.” [/FONT]

and...

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]The nephew even confirmed that the suit stunk. [/FONT]

Article:

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/response_si.htm



Even if Bob H. was wrong about the 'horse-hide' construction, there's still a serious problem with his claim that the "suit stunk".

Because...if Patty was a suit.....the suit would have to have had an inner core....specially designed....due to it's bulk...(front-to-back, and side-to-side)...and it's distinctively curved contour.

Notice the smoothly curved shape of the upper back, all the way up to the back of Patty's head....and the contour of the shoulder blade area....along with Patty's extreme upper-torso width....all of which would have been designed features, requiring an 'inner core muscle suit', underneath the fur...

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]

[/FONT]


An inner core, this sophisticated, would have most likely been designed by a professional...and, thus, would have been rather costly. So, it makes absolutely no sense that the suit would have "stunk", at all....(due to either the nature of the material used, or to it being allowed to get wet, and become moldy.)

One likely material to be used, which would have been inexpensive, and rigid enough to hold it's shape, would have been some kind of foam rubber....but that material doesn't normally have a bad smell.

So...why would it have stunk??



Also from the article...

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]In response to the Skeptical Inquirer’s July/Aug 2004 article titled “Exposing Roger Patterson's 1967 Bigfoot Film Hoax” uploaded here: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/korff04.htm written by Kal K. Korff and Michaela Kocis comes this response from one of our orthopedic physicians, this one addressed specifically to Michaela Kocis reads:
To: mkocka@hotmail.com Michaela Kocis
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 12:34 PM
Subject: your outrageous theory


[/FONT] [FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Madam,
I read your absurd assertion that some guy named Hieronymous was the bigfoot creature in the Patterson/Gimlin film of 1967.
One of my colleagues, Dr. Phil Mortensen actually met this Hieronymous; allow me to say that if you believe that he actually was in the film, you are a fool's fool. ( )[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]I have had the opportunity to examine the film frame by frame, and no way, especially in '67, was such a suit able to exhibit muscle movement and contraction available. [/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif](Check out the muscle contraction/movement......[/FONT]

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]

[/FONT][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Nor would one be easy to create today.

I have attached frame 72 -Prior and subsequent frames show muscular contraction and expansion, as one would expect from an upright, walking biped. I speak specifically, the latissimus dorsi of the back, the gluteus maximus of the rear, the semitendinosus and biceps femoris of the back of the upper leg, and the pplantaris tendon and gastrocnemius of the calf area. Even if none of that makes sense to you, this Hieronymous is not nearly big enough to fill the suit out.

We have determined the creature in the film to be nearly 7 feet tall, and in the area of 450-500 lbs. I know you have to write books, and hopefully this is just a ploy to sell them. You can't actually believe the guy-in-the-suit theory...Can you?

Dr. Lawrence Willard Foley, Orthopedist
- - - - -[/FONT]

Here's Bob Heironimus,.....playing RUG - by........with one of Morris' amazing, RANDOMLY-SHAPED RUGS......(don't forget to chuckle!)...(and, notice the realistic calf muscles, too!)...

There is, also, a major problem with Heironimus' claim that he "didn't know what the suit was made of"...

Given the nature of the alleged "suit"....(having a specially-designed inner-core, with it's massive bulk, distinctive contour, and flexibility).....along with the "fact" that Patterson, Gimlin, and Heironimus took this very long trip together, out into a mountainous wilderness, to make a movie with it.....how could it be that Roger NEVER, at any point in that trip....ever mentioned anything to Bob Heironimus about the construction of such an impressive suit???

Was it NOT note-worthy?????

Roger NEVER ONCE thought to say to Bob..."Hey, check this thing out..."


And, in addition to that, HOW could Bob have NOT NOTICED it, while putting it on???


It's absolutely ludicrous to suggest that something like that ever actually happened.

 

[SweatyYeti]

I'm twisting nothing, Sweaty.

You failed in your attempt to rule out Bob. You can try again and this time I would advise you remember that arms to not move confined to two-dimensional planes.

Now let's try something wild and new, Sweaty.

Let's put aside elbows for a moment.



I promise you won't. You will go nowhere near any of that.

fear is the mind killer.

If that is too corner-huddle inducing, maybe you can whip out your crayons and address the evidence that Patterson faked Patty's tracks.

Look in the mirror, kitakaze....as you huddle in your little corner, going nowhere near any of my measurements of Patty's and Bob's elbows....in total fear of REALITY.

I noticed that you failed to address the elbow-reach measurements, yet again...in this post of yours.


You can't show 'where, and to what extent', there are any significant errors in my measurements of Patty's, and Bob's elbow-reaches....can you?

From kitakaze...

"Let's put aside elbows for a moment"...

 

[kitakaze]

Well, according to John Green...these are Heironimus' words... (snip)

These are the words of Heironimus according to Heironimus...

"Roger told my brother Howard he made the whole thing out of horsehide. Roger had skinned a red horse and attached or glued fur from and old fur coat onto the horsehide skin."

"It weighed maybe twenty, twenty-five pounds. It was a little heavy. Nothing to make me uncomfortable or anything. You could feel the weight. Horsehide would be heavy."

"It was dark, real dark brown."

"It stunk. Roger skinned out a dead, red horse"

Bob also said that the suit was stiff from his waist to his shoulders.

Do your homework.

Even if Bob H. was wrong about the 'horse-hide' construction, there's still a serious problem with his claim that the "suit stunk".

Because...if Patty was a suit.....the suit would have to have had an inner core specially designed due to its bulk...(front-to-back, and side-to-side)...and it's distinctively curved contour.

Notice the smoothly curved shape of the upper back, all the way up to the back of Patty's head....and the contour of the shoulder blade area....along with Patty's extreme upper-torso width....all of which would have been designed features, requiring an 'inner core muscle suit', underneath the fur...

An inner core, this sophisticated, would have most likely been designed by a professional...and, thus, would have been rather costly. So, it makes absolutely no sense that the suit would have "stunk", at all....(due to either the nature of the material used, or to it being allowed to get wet, and become moldy.)

One likely material to be used, which would have been inexpensive, and rigid enough to hold it's shape, would have been some kind of foam rubber....but that material doesn't normally have a bad smell.

So...why would it have stunk??

Blah blah blah... That is a giant pile of special pleading. Good luck getting me to agree there was a specially designed inner core muscle suit. Shouder padding, yes, maybe, but muscle suit? Nice try. I don't know exactly what the suit was made of or how it was made. Going from Bob's description, there is no reason at all to think that the suit could not have stunk.

Here's Bob Heironimus,.....playing RUGby...with one of Morris' amazing, RANDOMLY-SHAPED RUGS......(don't forget to chuckle!)...(and, notice the realistic calf muscles, too!)...

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Fun/BobRugbyAG2.gif[/qimg]

Yeah, that suit matched Patty's arms pretty good. Hey, BTW, why are you addressing me as if I support the claim that Philip Morris made the suit? Really, now, why is that?

There is, also, a major problem with Heironimus' claim that he "didn't know what the suit was made of"...

Given the nature of the alleged "suit"....(having a specially-designed inner-core, with it's massive bulk, distinctive contour, and flexibility).....along with the "fact" that Patterson, Gimlin, and Heironimus took this very long trip together, out into a mountainous wilderness, to make a movie with it.....how could it be that Roger NEVER, at any point in that trip....ever mentioned anything to Bob Heironimus about the construction of such an impressive suit???

Not only is your special pleading useless, your ignorance of the facts is embarrassing. You have no idea what you're talking about. Let me help you, Sweaty. Bob Heironimus says that he drove his mother's new blue 1967 Buick from Washington to California (to avoid using his gas-guzzling Corvette) and met Roger and Bob at 5:00 pm in the evening at a mini-service station in Willow Creek. He said he then followed Roger and Bob in Bob's truck to Bluff Creek where they hid Heironimus' car in tall buck brush half a mile north of the campsite which was beside the Bluff Creek road. He said after they arrived at the campsite they spoke for a while and then he went to sleep in his sleeping bag in the over-hang over the cab of Gimlin's truck at about 8:00 pm.

Heironimus says they went the next day to the film site about half a mile from the campsite. They shot the film in one take. After they returned to the camp they spoke for a while before Patterson and Gimlin said they had to return to make the tracks. They then drove Heironimus in Gimlin's truck back to Heironimus' car and gave him the suit and the film which he was to mail in Eureka. Bob H drove to Eureka where he mailed the film, stayed the night and drove back to Yakima the next day.

According to BH's story he was with RP and BG for a short time in the evening and the early part of the next day at Bluff Creek. Your special pleading that there must have been an inner core muscle suit and all your giant text and boggled smilies about Roger not discussing the design of said inner core to Bob in all that very long time they were together is complete garbage. Once again the skeptic knows the fact better than the Bigfoot enthusiast. Try doing your homework before you go on your giant text, smiley-abusing flights of fancy.

Oops for you, another faceplant.

 

[kitakaze]

Look in the mirror, kitakaze....as you huddle in your little corner, going nowhere near any of my measurements of Patty's and Bob's elbows....in total fear of REALITY.

I noticed that you failed to address the elbow-reach measurements, yet again...in this post of yours.

You can't show 'where, and to what extent', there are any significant errors in my measurements of Patty's, and Bob's elbow-reaches....can you?

Ballzheimers.

Here and here. Done.

There is nothing Sweaty will ever post that I can't handle. Meanwhile, Sweaty continues to run...

What do you think of the fact that the only person who has ever claimed to be Patty was friends with Bob Gimlin at the time the PGF was made and appears at various points on Patterson's film? What do you think about the fact that Bob Heironimus lives only nine doors from Bob Gimlin and has done so since the PGF was made? What do you think about the fact that Bob Gimlin has never taken any legal action against the man whose testimony threatens his credibility to people all over the world who see him as a hero and endangers his personal profit from the film? What do you think about the fact that Bob Heironimus has passed two separate polygraphs concerning his involvement with the PGF? What do you think of the fact that Heironimus confirms that he is still friends with his neighbour, Gimlin, and sees him on occasion in which there is no discussion about Bigfoot at all?

Do you not find it troubling at all that the only person to ever claim to be Patty is that closely associated with Patterson and Gimlin?

If that is too corner-huddle inducing, maybe you can whip out your crayons and address the evidence that Patterson faked Patty's tracks.

Secondly, and far more importantly, there is absolutely no reliable evidence that the subject of the Patterson film made any of the impressions Patterson cast. Conversely, there is significant evidence that Roger faked his casts. Those are two left feet. They are not the same feet.

If Patty's feet and Patty's casts are not the same thing, then any comparison you make assuming they are is totally meaningless. To what extent is the degree of error? Pick a number. Based just on the issues you had with Frame 72 before, you'd be off by several inches. What the real extent is can not be reliably measured. All we can say is... Controls not set. Comparison invalid.

Fear is the mind killer.

 

[kitakaze]

I think (not sure) he said he wore his boots inside the costume.

Bob Heironimus on the suit the first time he wore it from The Making of Bigfoot...

"It was made of three parts. It had legs. It had a corset or middle piece between the neck and waist. And it had a head."

"Yeah. I sat down on a log and took my boots off and slipped my legs into the legs of the suits, which felt like they were hip boots or wading boots, you know, those long boots that go up to your waist. My feet slipped into the feet of the suit. I think the feet were made of those old house slippers you used to see around, that looked like a big foot with toes on them. They had wrinkles on the bottom of them, you know"

"Yeah. All I can say is it felt like rubber boots."

On the day Patterson filmed him...

"We dismounted and unloaded the sack. I had to kind of sit down an pull it [the suit] on. It was stiff from about here [he gestured from the waist up]. They kind of helped me up and put the top on."

 

[SweatyYeti]

This comparison shows the significantly different lengths of Bob's and Patty's 'upper arms', in proportion to their body heights...(Patty's, of course, being longer )...

This comparison is consistent with...and supports...what the elbow-reach measurements for Bob and Patty show.

 

[Drewbot]

This comparison shows the significantly different lengths of Bob's and Patty's 'upper arms', in proportion to their body heights...(Patty's, of course, being longer )...


[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Pattys%20Elbows/PattyBobElbowCompCombined1.jpg[/qimg]


This comparison is consistent with...and supports...what the elbow-reach measurements for Bob and Patty show.

What? I really can't see what you are talking about. I try, and try, but don't see where the elbows look different. It looks like Bob, or any other (approx. 6' tall) person could be in that suit. And if not, your example certainly doesn't show it.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Ballzheimers.

Here and here. Done.

There is nothing Sweaty will ever post that I can't handle

Neither of those two posts SHOW specifically where, and to what extent, there are any errors in my measurements of Patty's elbow-reach.

You can't deal with those measurements DIRECTLY....so you resort to your little Poser 7 dollies. Nice work, kitakaze!


When you get a minute, can you shake your Poser 7 skelly at that graphic I just posted......and make Bob's elbow "all better"!!

 

[SweatyYeti]

What? I really can't see what you are talking about. I try, and try, but don't see where the elbows look different. It looks like Bob, or any other (approx. 6' tall) person could be in that suit. And if not, your example certainly doesn't show it.

The graphic shows that when the length from Bob's and Patty's 'eyes to their elbows' are matched-up....their knee joints are then significantly mis-matched.

Those points....the eyes, the elbows, and the knees...are all unaffected...(and un-movable)...by padding. So the difference must be due to a difference in skeletal lengths/proportions.



(If Patty and Bob were re-scaled, to make their eyes and their knees match-up...then their elbows would be significantly mis-matched.

Either way....Bob loses.)

 

[kitakaze]

This comparison shows the significantly different lengths of Bob's and Patty's 'upper arms', in proportion to their body heights...(Patty's, of course, being longer )...

It does? Would you care to grace us with a numerical value for that difference, Sweaty?

Somebody needs some Folgers.

 

[kitakaze]

Neither of those two posts SHOW specifically where, and to what extent, there are any errors in my measurements of Patty's elbow-reach.

You can't deal with those measurements DIRECTLY....so you resort to your little Poser 7 dollies. Nice work, kitakaze!

The simple concept of making two-dimensional degree measurements on a three-dimensional subject as if it were a stick man eludes you. After you've had some coffee stick your hands in your pockets and move your elbows back and forth to see if it dawns on you.

I can talk elbows. Can you talk about Bob H's connection to Patterson and Gimlin? Can you talk about the siginificant evidence Roger faked Patty's tracks? Is it really that hard to even try or what?

When you get a minute, can you shake your Poser 7 skelly at that graphic I just posted......and make Bob's elbow "all better"!!

Yes. Wait... I feel like using the DAZ skelly. They both work.



Oops for you.

 

[kitakaze]

The graphic shows that when the length from Bob's and Patty's eyes to their elbows...

Those points....the eyes, the elbows, and the knees...are all unaffected...(and un-movable)...

The length from the eye to the elbow is unmovable?

Tylenol. Extra strength. Make it so.

Just for Sweaty.

 

[Drewbot]

I'm on ROMPER ROOM! I can do it too.

Why are you using a Giant picture of BobH in relation to Patty?

They look dead-nuts on his elbow is right where it should be if he is in a costume, same with his shoulder, knee and face. Where do u get this stuff?

 

[Óðinn]

He did? You say that like it's a fact.
I'd love to see any documentation on that, even a newspaper article where Patterson says that.
I think this is one of those types of rumors that grew legs on it's own.

I thought you were a man of facts? You aren't getting all Sweaty on us are you?

Yep, I like the facts. And I have no idea whether Patterson actually passed a polygraph exam. There are indications that he did, like BH. But I haven't seen an independent review of BH's tests either. It is my understanding that he hasn't released them, so what good are they? No better than RP's "alleged" polygraph, IMO. When we get the facts maybe that will change. In the meantime...

I did a very quick search on the BFF for "Polygraph+Patterson" and here's an early reference by David Murphy to RP taking a polygraph.

I am working on a book about the life of Roger Patterson. This book should be completed around May of 2006. As a result of my research, I found out that in 1970 National wildlife magazine did an article on Bigfoot written by George Harrison. The article states that Roger Patterson passed a lie detector test and that the magazine would not have done the story had he not passed it. In speaking to George Harrison via the telephone, he stated to me that his direct boss and Chief Executive Editor, Dick Kirkpatrick(now dead), attended the polygraph exam with Roger and was told by the examiner that Roger Patterson had certainly passed in his professional opinion.I am currently looking into this matter further. As I see it, at best we have two people who have passed Lie Detector tests. Furthermore, and I don't know if this is true, I was told that Bob H. is on a heart medication that could cause a person to be able to pass a lie detector test. Obviously this should be examined in greater detail. The information I have uncovered thus far in my 20 plus taped interviews out of a total of about 70 scheduled interviews, leads me to believe more than ever before that we are looking at a real Bigfoot when we gaze upon the creature in the P/G film.

David Murphy

I never read his book tho. I just think the "passing polygraphs" claim doesn't hold much for pathological liars, which 1 of them would have to be IF they both passed polygraphs. Neither of which is a known fact.

Where's the link to the results of BH's polygraphs? Just the facts please.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti
The graphic shows that when the length from Bob's and Patty's eyes to their elbows...

Those points....the eyes..., the elbows, and the knees...are all unaffected...(and un-movable)...

The length from the eye to the elbow is unmovable...(by padding)?

(NOTE: I added back in my original words, since kk decided to twist and distort what I said, by omitting them. It's what he does best!)

Yup.

In Patty's case......the 'length from the eyes to the elbow-joint'...for any particular arm-angle...(in any direction)....could not have been changed, or altered by padding.

This is due to the fact that, if Patty is a man-in-a-suit, the actor's eyes must be located exactly where Patty's eyes are located....and the actor's elbow-joint must be located exactly where Patty's elbow-joint is located.
(The elbow joint cannot be moved up or down, along the arm, by padding.)

Since neither point can be moved, or altered by padding...then the length 'from the eyes to the elbow', of the actor, must match Patty's....when the arms are at comparable angles.

In Bob's case....they don't match.