Continuation - The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

Status
Not open for further replies.
Update:

I told everyone that I was invited by Tom Biscardi to appear on the Bigfot Live Radio Show to discuss my investigation of the PGF, but hadn't made a decision as to whether I would be able to go on the show tonight. Unfortunately, due to schedule conflicts for me, I will be unable to join the show this week. I have spoken with the program director and rescheduled to appear on next week's show. I think that works best, as I will have spoken with more key PGF controversy people by then.

This week's show is starting now for anyone interested in listening. Just press the pink.
 
Tom Biscardi skipped out tonight. Thanks for the link Kit. :)

picture.php
 
ROFL! :D

One thing you will notice right away is that a lot of these guys are really good people. You hear them asking for prayers for one researcher guy's dying wife and it's pretty sad and touching.

One thing I thought was hilarious is that while you listen to the show, two images show Tom and a still from the PGF. You know, considering Tom told me himself he knows the PGF is fake.
 
kit,

Here's my question for Mr. Morris:

On page 37, Chapter 5 of How to Operate a Financially Successful Haunted House by yourself and Dennis Phillips. (1997 Morris Costumes. ISBN: 0-911137-11-4. Library of Congress # 87-80906), you wrote:

"A lot of publicity stunts will be covered by the press and electronic media. One of the authors of this book pulled a classic stunt to promote the opening of his new costume shop. It went like this: A friend of his from his old circus days called and told him he would be through his area in a few hours to talk and visit. The fellow happened to be an elephant trainer, and always traveled with a few bulls (elephants). So the wheels of publicity began to turn and an idea emerged in the author's head. He called the local newspaper and radio station and explained that he was the owner of the local costume company and they had just received a contract to manufacture some elephant costumes and blankets and the big international circus star and all of his elephants would be arriving shortly. What followed is a classic funny story. In comes a motor home and tractor trailer and the two old friend meet with TV camera cranking out film and newspapers grabbing pictures. The elephant trainer had no idea what was happening! He soon caught on and went along with the stunt. He unloaded an elephant in the parking lot and they began to take measurements and put on a big show. When they went to move the truck, the trainer was having problems starting the engine, so the elephants were brought around to "give a push!" This story and the pictures dominated the 6 o' clock news and feature page for the next day, It didn't cost the author a penny! This is a fine example of using your imagination and exploiting all the possibilities."

In light of this story, why should we believe you actually sold Roger Patterson a gorilla costume in the 60's? Can you please provide something a little more concrete to support your claims?

I'd also like to hear more on his claim of having "the original suit" at a museum.

Short on time, will post more some other time. I pretty much agree with wolftrax except some of the costume stuff, though.
 
So...as for your diagram, Drew....I haven't made any 'elbow-reach' measurements of Patty, using images of her from a direct-on side view...and I don't have any plans, too, either...


DrewDiagram2.jpg




So, there's nothing in your diagram for me to comment on. :)
 
wolftrax said:
Well, I for one don't read his posts. Again and again the guy keeps fudging his measurements, like the lady in the dance studio. He measures Patty from the spine to the elbow and then makes a measurement on the lady that isn't to the spine and isn't to the elbow. Same with all of his other comparisons where he's edited the Patty frames to "suit" his purposes. The film doesn't need to be a hoax with that guy supporting it, because half the stuff he fudges and the other half doesn't make any dang sense, and I got to say I can barely get to the real good stuff in this thread because I just scroll right on down past his posts and responses to them.
Click to expand...

Yes, both Bigfoot skeptics and proponents consider what Sweaty calls "analysis" to be a waste of time and an eyesore. Here is what is typical for a Sweaty "analysis" in which he manipulates images to suit his preconceived notions...

http://s172.photobucket.com/albums/...tion=view&current=Patty352JimJimWeeRoger5.jpg

Sweaty posted that in post #324 as supposed evidence of how tiny Roger Patterson is when seen next to Patty. Now certainly, Roger was a very short man. Just a few inches over 5 ft. Patty is just a bit over 6 ft. Anyway, Sweaty went ahead there and hacked Roger's entire left foot when doing his comparison graphic so as to make Roger look significantly shorter. That is typical of the intellectual honesty that we see so often in irrational fanatics such as Sweaty. You would think that Sweaty would learn that his emoticon-smattered, giant text font-gasm kaleidoscope rants do little more than cause people to ignore him. I suspect Sweaty is one of those people in life that think the louder you yell, the more powerful the argument.

Anyways, Kit, I commend you on taking the initiative on interviewing Bob Heironimus, but I got to say it's difficult to buy what the guy is saying. Each time he gets any new information from somebody else he goes with it and changes his story, the problem here is obviously the guy's testimony is contaminated, and the evolution of it has been witnessed by most who have paid attention to it.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much, Wolf. You have my respect and your counterpoint is invaluable. The issues and questions you post are very good. The great thing is that I can put those questions to Bob personally. I am dedicated to either vindicating Bob, or showing beyond the shadow of a doubt he is a liar. I have no doubt that just as so many of the people of Yakima know, Bob has been telling the truth all these years, but I am also confident that if Bob is lying to me, it will become apparent.

The film is a fake. I have never been more certain of that in my life. I grew up looking at it endlessly, thinking it was a real Bigfoot, and now I know better. I know the PGF is a hoax like I know the sun wiil rise tomorrow. Wolf, I would appreciate if you could address post #527 with the questions that Sweaty is to afraid to answer. I will go ahead and address your points in a post after this one, but first let me put out a few things to you.

If the PGF were made now, Bigfoot enthusiasts would eat Roger Patterson alive. The BFF would be his roasting pit and would reek of the smell of charred human flesh. Wolf, did you know Roger claimed to John Green when John visited him in February 1967 the year after he released his book and eight months before his film was revealed to the world to be the inventor of the little plastic thingy that keeps bread bags closed? That's not a joke. Who does that remind you of? A guy with an alleged Bigfoot on film claiming the invention of widely used items. Can you say Creekfreek? Here's some of the blood in the water that would trigger the feeding frenzy on Roger...

- What's that? You mailed a film Friday evening, October 20th, 1967 from Eureka to Yakima by registered airmail to arrive at Yakima Saturday, October 21st and be taken by the guy funding you to Seatte to be developed and then shown at his house back in Yakima on Sunday afternoon? Did you know that there were no airports in Eureka or Arcata in 1967? Maybe a chartered aircraft, you say? Did you know that of the five charter pilots living in the area in 1967, Peter Byrne spoke with four (fifth deceased) and all of their log books showed heavy rain and strong winds for October 20th, 1967. Neither did any of the logs show any deliveries at all for that day in which the pilots would have flown only under extreme emergency conditions.

Of course, if they gave the film to Bob Heironimus to mail by U.S. Postal Service from Eureka well before that date, as Bob claimed he did, then, well, problem solved. Bob did say he was there only overnight and that he had come down on either a Monday or a Wednesday of either September or October and that it was hot. Bob also told me that Roger and Bob only had his horse, Chico, for eight days.

(Personally, I think Bob came to Bluff Creek either October 16th or 18th, possibly. I base this on that fact that he said to Greg Long that Roger and Bob came to his house in Gimlin's one ton truck to get Chico on a Friday or Saturday (Oct 13th or 14th) and that he was told to come later and left on maybe a Monday or Wednesday. If Chico was gone eight days and Roger and Bob left Bluff Creek the morning of Saturday, October 21st, the timing is perfect.

- Sweaty often has sarcastically stated that Roger Patterson was a lucky guy because of certain features on Patty he thinks that are consistent with a real animal. BFF Bigfoot enthusiasts would have a field day with the luck Patterson had if he were around now. You make a book about Bigfoot one year in which you steal some guys art, slap your name on it, and prominently showcase an encounter that matches nearly verbatim your description of of the encounter you film the very next years?

I used to think that astronomical luck element was one of the most glaring indicators of a hoax by Patterson. Now I know there is much, much worse. It seems Roger Patterson was a literal Babe Ruth. Let me explain. The PGF started out as supposed to be a three-way deal with Al DeAtley, the money man funding Roger, and Patterson and Gimlin sharing the profits. Roger screws Gimlin and him and DeAtley go on to make serious money. Years later Bigfoot legendaries John Green and Peter Byrne at separate times individually try to talk to DeAtley. In 1998 John Green tried to find out from DeAtley where the film was processed. DeAtley didn't want to talk to Green. Wouldn't tell him anything. Byrne tries the same thing. He has a big problem with the way the film was handled after being shot and traveled up and down the west coast investigating it. In his words about trying to ask DeAtley how the film was processed...

"I did. I talked to him two or three times on the film. I tried to see him but he wouldn't see me. He doesn't want to talk about it. It's extremely difficult to get him to talk."

But Byrne was dogged and finally did manage to get DeAtley on the phone...

"He said to me, 'It's fake. I know it's fake' I said 'How do you know it's fake?' He said, 'Listen. He (Patterson) told us all he was going down there and find the Bigfoot and shoot some footage and come back. He did. He went down there. That's just goddamn luck, or something. That doesn't happen in real life, you know.' Ivan marx did the same thing. He was living in Northern California, and he told people he was going to northern Washington and find a Bigfoot, get footage, and come back and sellit and make lots of money. he did exactly the same thing. Then, at the same time, almost in the same breath, DeAtley said, 'But, don't quote me on that with people here. This is the family here (in Yakima).' DeAtley is married to Roger's sister. DeAtley said, 'They all believe Roger. They all believed in his integrity. They all believe that film is real.I'm the outsider here.' he had a few very derogatory things to say about Roger. My guess is he really didn't like him."

Of course Roger told DeAtley he was going to film a Bigfoot at Bluff Creek. DeAtley was the money. He had to make the money man excited. And then he comes back with just what he said he would. Sweet Zombie Jesus, somebody give that man a baseball bat. He just pointed out to center field. That is just no reality at all. Seriously, if that happened now, Patterson would be served on a platter with an apple in his mouth at the BFF.

- If Roger was alive now and shot the PGF now, what would the BFF Bigfoot enthusiasts make of the fact that he was arrested for grand larceny? Harold Mattson was the owner of Sheppard's Camera Shop in Yakima where Patterson rented the 16mm camera. Peter Byrne spoke with Harold mattson about the charges he brought against Patterson. In Byrnes own words...

"He confirmed that Patterson rented the camera in May 1967 and never paid the rental fees to where in November they went out to his house after sending him several warnings and a registered letter. The Yakima County Sherrif's Department went out and arrested him and hauled him in."

I've seen apologist footers hum that away as simply being forgetful. I don't think they'd be so quick to do that if it was now and they knew Patterson was obviously dodging his rental fees. And what would BFF proponents do if Patterson was around now and they knew he signed a bad check for $300 or $400 worth of film? And what would they do with Patterson now if they knew he had swindled a woman for a very large sum of money. You will remember the money Patterson borrowed from Vilma Radford...

896148b94575567b8.jpg


Here are some letters Vilma sent Roger when Roger refused to pay he back the money she had given him...

De. 29, 1967

Since you have ignored us regarding money already six months past due, our patience has worn thin.

Unless we receive money immediately and an accounting of receipts, for our percentage of BIG FOOT, we will be forced to take legal action.

Another from January 10th, 1968...

You have numerous notices for collection of note re BIG FOOT, leaving us no alternative but to turn this over for collection by attachment of magazine rights, etc. Unless money is received by January 17th, we will proceed to do so.

She did. She sued Roger. She hired attorney Bill McArdle to handle her case, who had alread beeen approached by a number of people wanting to take legal action after being swindled by Patterson.

I think Roger Patterson had attempted the same thing now that he had in 1967, he would have been taken down to Chinatown quicker than you can say "Georgia Boyz."

Wolf, I'll address the rest of you comments regarding Heironimus in a separate post.
 
kitakaze said:
Bob did say he was there only overnight and that he had come down on either a Monday or a Wednesday of either September or October and that it was hot. Bob also told me that Roger and Bob only had his horse, Chico, for eight days.

(Personally, I think Bob came to Bluff Creek either October 16th or 18th, possibly. I base this on that fact that he said to Greg Long that Roger and Bob came to his house in Gimlin's one ton truck to get Chico on a Friday or Saturday (Oct 13th or 14th) and that he was told to come later and left on maybe a Monday or Wednesday. If Chico was gone eight days and Roger and Bob left Bluff Creek the morning of Saturday, October 21st, the timing is perfect.
Click to expand...


William Parcher said:
Bob Heironimus says he was filmed at Bluff Creek on either October 5 or October 12. He can't remember which one. He says it was a Thursday.
Click to expand...

He told Tom Biscardi that he arrived on a Wednesday and was filmed the following day. He said he was filmed on Oct. 5 or 12 - so it can't be the 17th or 19th as you suggest.
 
kitakaze said:
"The legs felt kind of like hip boots, you know? And you can see my wallet! Forgot to take my wallet out." He laughed again.

That wallet thing, I thought to myself. That was something I had heard before. Right under what was a completely unreal folding crease on Patty's leg there was a bulge that had been famously called by Bigfooters as a hernia on Patty's leg. I thought of the argument that the bulge could not possibly be Bob's wallet because it was too low on the leg. "So which pocket was the wallet in?" I asked. "My side pocket,' he replied. "Yeah, the Bigfooters call that a hernia." Bob started chuckling. I decided it was time for a different question.
Click to expand...


What kind of pants have a side pocket that will hold a wallet? Were they cargo pants from Banana Republic? These weren't denim blue jeans?

Where is the wallet here?


0b4283e9.jpg
 
:D Good question, WP. Yeah, that was the same thing I was thinking about. I want to ask Bob when he first had realized he could see his wallet. I don't think the part in your pic labeled "Fur ruffed" is the wallet, if there is a wallet. I think he did wear blue jeans and I think if he had a wallet in his side pocket, it is higher up the side...

picture.php
 
kitakaze wrote:
Sweaty posted that in post #324 as supposed evidence of how tiny Roger Patterson is when seen next to Patty.
Click to expand...


In actual fact....(cleaning up yet another kitakaze distortion)....it's purpose was to show that mangler's arbitrary scaling of Patty...(a walking height of 5'9-5'10")...leads to a non-sensical result, with the series of comparisons I put together.


Since the graphic clearly flew straight OVER kitakaze's head...I think I'll re-cap it, and at the same time, show that the "significant error" he claims is in it, with Roger's foot, has no bearing on the end result:

Mangler's scaling of Patty is incorrect....and, therefore, the 'skeletal match' is also incorrect.
 
Agreed. The whole "wallet" thing puzzled me.

I'm wearing chinos today, and they have fairly deep pockets. My entire hand, wrist, and about 1.5" of my arm can fit in there. Most jeans have shallower pockets than this; I think classic Wrangler jeans (the cowboy jean of choice) are a bit deeper than Levi's or Lee's.

Anyway, I moved my wallet to my front pocket. Then I measured my thigh at 16" from my hip joint to the top edge of my knee cap. Where was the bulge from the wallet in my pocket? 8" - halfway down the apparent length of my thigh.

"Patty's" bulge isn't as far as this; it might be more like 1/3 the distance from hip joint to knee cap, which is what you would expect to see if Bob was wearing pants with pockets not quite as deep as mine, a la, jeans.

So, weird as this sounded at first, Bob's remark is entirely plausible. If his wallet was in his front (side) pocket, it very likely could have created a bulge right where Patty's bulge appears to be - no cargo pants necessary.
 


There could be a wallet in this area.
You can definitely see some shading where a wallet could be bulging.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom