Continuation - The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

Status
Not open for further replies.
For the meatball fanatics like Sweaty who want rub their hands together and cackle about my nefarious collusion with Philip Morris to boonswoggle the Bigfoot nation into believing him I say, go fly a UFO. You're a koo koo for cocoa puffs Bigfoot fanatic suckling on the teat of woo, living in a Bizarro World and I couldn't care less what backflips you need to do to maintain your clinghold on your goofball fantasies.

I think I have a new addition to my sig file... :)
 
Sweaty, you still have not shown that you are looking at the true length of Bob or Patty's upper arm. Are they both parallel to the camera lens? Please show your work.


I have plenty of images of Bob, viewed from different angles. I can put a few together, that should show whether or not Bob's arm...in the image above...is being held out away from his side, and thereby fore-shortened.

I don't think that it is...but that should be able to be determined, fairly easily.


Edited to add:

The image of Patty above shows that her upper arm cannot be Heirony's, for another reason. This one is due to the simple fact that Patty's extreme shoulder-width (approx. 27") would require Bob's shoulder-joints to be located 2-3 inches inboard of Patty's shoulders...(per side.)

This amount of 'padding-out' of the shoulders would produce an unnatural bend in the upper-half of Patty's upper-arm....(in this view of Patty, where her arm is swung so far forward)...at the point where Bob's humerus moves out of the suit arm, and into the upper-body suit.

There isn't an unnatural bend......so it can't be Bob's upper arm. :)

More on this, later.
 
Last edited:
I have plenty of images of Bob, viewed from different angles. I can put a few together, that should show whether or not Bob's arm...in the image above...is being held out away from his side, and thereby fore-shortened.

I don't think that it is...but that should be able to be determined, fairly easily.


Edited to addited:

The image of Patty above shows that her upper arm cannot be Heirony's, for another reason. This one is due to the simple fact that Patty's extreme shoulder-width (approx. 27") would require Bob's shoulder-joints to be located 2-3 inches inboard of Patty's shoulders...(per side.)

This amount of 'padding-out' of the shoulders would produce an unnatural bend in the upper-half of Patty's upper-arm....(in this view of Patty, where her arm is swung so far forward)...at the point where Bob's humerus moves out of the suit arm, and into the upper-body suit.

There isn't an unnatural bend......so it can't be Bob's upper arm. :)

More on this, later.

Will you be doing Barney any time soon?
 
When you DO something...other than rant....let us know.

That's funny. Yes, I have done that. I am interviewing Phil Morris tomorrow and I have let everyone know the details. That is actually doing something and letting people know, is it not? LOL You walked smack into that.

I will do something else. I will point out the two questions you failed to answer in the post you responded to as well as one more. You see, addressing your arguments with appropriate questions is not ranting. Let me show you. Here are three statements of yours followed each by the relevant questions I asked in response to them that you won't answer...

Bobby-Boo is still having a tough time matching-up with Patty...:).....(even over-scaled, his upper arm is still too short for the elbow-joints to line-up)...

I won't spam this thread with the same images over and over as you do, but I will ask you, do I have an image of Bob in a suit and Patty in which the eyes, elbows, and knees line up?

But he will have time.

There is no 'surprise factor' involved here...in Morris being confronted with questions allegedly intended to expose him...(though those questions are coming from skeptics on the 'same side of the fence' as Morris)......and the amount of time Morris will have to prepare his answers is being told to us by kitakaze, who is sitting on the same side of the fence as the person being....."confronted"...."grilled"..."Investigated"....what a joke.

Also, as you know have read, Phil and I have agreed that he will not see the questions I will ask him on camera until I meet him face to face. Phil's at his son's graduation now. He really does have better things to do than try and figure how to please fanatic losers. People from all corners of Bigfoot nation are submitting good questions to me for when I sit down with Phil tomorrow.

Again I ask you, are questions from an informed person who thinks Morris is a liar and seeks to expose him as such with those questions that of someone on his side of the fence?

That 'standing height' would have to have been about 2-3 inches taller than Bob's standing height...due to the cone-shaped headpiece.

Pre- or post-piano?

Those are all totally relevant questions concerning your arguments which have nothing to do with ranting and you just can't seem to handle them. Why is that?
 
[snip][/snip]
I'll respond to those questions.....as soon as I can, River. :)

Well Sweaty, I'm willing to consider your "elbow reach" theory if you will take the neccesary steps in considering alternatives for the discrepancies that you offer between PGF subject and Heironimus. I've noticed in the images youve presented in the past (some with measurements) that you have not considered how those numbers may be influenced by a padded undersuit. This image represents an actor using shoulder and arm pads that are used to disguise and make the actor appear much more bulky and muscular than he is underneath.


gemora.jpg



I'm not suggesting this was the exact padding used, but this type of under padding is common with ape/gorilla suits. Do you think a well made suit with properly placed padding could distort or rather... disguise where the proper joint placement would be? (after all, that is what its designed to do right?)

To what degree, or percent would this influence your measurements? The illustrations I've seen you use do not account for this, or have alternatives to why it may appear to have inhuman proportions, or appear to be wider than possible by someone of Heironimus size.

I've seen you say many times over that its impossible to have been Heironimus, but I've yet to see you prove it. If you took into account some of the important factors such as but not limited to: (sounds like a lawyers statement? lol) The film clarity and resolution (weve seen the ever changing head shape of patty, unless you believe its a shape shifter then there is definitely a high degree of variance due to this alone) The under padding, as well as the fur which would help hide things as well. Lets also consider movement, specifically arm movement.

Do you think any of those factors could influence your numbers on "elbow reach"? To what degree? How much for each one of those factors?

This also of course would depend on your comparison images, the perspectives and angles of the subject would definitely influence your perception on those measurements.

I'm thinking that by saying that those measurements dont matter, you mean that youre not sure, or you dont have accurate numbers yet. However, I'm very willing to discuss this further if you will answer those basic questions I asked (which you will get to later of course!)

Its a good starting place... and important for establishing some important comparisons. Without that, we cant talk apples and oranges. If we cant talk apples and oranges, we sure as heck cant talk about the differences between them. So let me have it, when you have some solid numbers on those figures, something youre willing to stand behind and we will continue this talk about elbow reach.

:)
 
Last edited:
Well Sweaty, I'm willing to consider your "elbow reach" theory if you will take the neccesary steps in considering alternatives for the discrepancies that you offer between PGF subject and Heironimus. I've noticed in the images youve presented in the past (some with measurements) that you have not considered how those numbers may be influenced by a padded undersuit. This image represents an actor using shoulder and arm pads that are used to disguise and make the actor appear much more bulky and muscular than he is underneath.


http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k273/iammenotu/gemora.jpg


I'm not suggesting this was the exact padding used, but this type of under padding is common with ape/gorilla suits.

Do you think a well made suit with properly placed padding could distort or rather... disguise where the proper joint placement would be? (after all, that is what its designed to do right?)



Thanks for your thoughtful post, River. :) I'll respond to the rest of the questions sometime tomorrow, but, for now...just the one highlighted above.

A padded suit can hide/disguise certain body joints...but not all of them. The location of the elbow-joint, along the arm, can't be altered by padding...at least not in a suit made to look like Patty. (I'm not talking about all types of suits....just 'human-like' suits.)

As for the shoulder-joint...a padded-suit can hide it's actual location....but, at the same time, the padding can also reveal it's true location....if the bulky padding is reducing the open-space between the inside of the upper arm and the side of the body.

The graphic I posted in post #1381 shows what I mean, by this.


More....tomorrow...
 
He asked only that when I come and meet him at the hotel and we sit down to dinner, I have the questions then that I can show him on paper or whatever so he's not totally blind when the camera goes on. That works perfectly for me as there is simply no way Phil can research the questions or get any support. It is going to be only him, his wife if she joins us then, myself and my cameraman. After dinner we walk over to the Royal BC Museum, do an intro shot for Phil, myself, the PGF, the museum, etc, then head back to the hotel for the main interview. Bingo bango, it's in the bag.

Well, it's not perfect but I guess it will have to do. His not being able to do research is good. I bet his mind will be in overdrive for the rest of the evening trying to come up with plausible-sounding answers to the hard-hitting questions (or maybe even ways to make some private phone calls), though.
 
I just am getting back in the door from my interview with Phil and Amy Morris. The entire process lasted from about 7:30 pm to 12:40 am and was shot on two cameras - one tripod, one handheld. We shot three segments - one in front of the Royal BC Museum at Thunderbird Park, one in the executive presentation room at the Victoria Marriott Inner Harbour, and the final segment in his room at the hotel. The interview was a fanatastic experience and both Phil and Amy were extremely gracious and accommodating. I had told Phil that I was really looking forward to talking Amy and would love to get her on camera if possible. Phil said Amy is quite camera shy and that I could ask her about it when they came. Amy turned out to be the sweetest lady ever and after getting to know each other she agreed to participate for the entire interview. Once again, I did not pay Phil a single dime for anything whatsoever. No reimbursement, nothing. Here is a rundown of how things played out...

1) Phil and Amy arrived in Victoria on the Clipper ferry from Seattle shortly after 6 pm. Phil and Amy checked into their hotel and had dinner there while I had dinner at home with my cameraman and discussed the shots for the interview.

2) We met Phil and Amy at the hotel lobby at about 7:30 and had our introductions. We sat down to discuss the shooting schedule and one of the first things Phil said is that he would be fine with not seeing the questions. The main reason he actually said this was he was due to our original plan to have dinner together and let him see the questions then. The timing worked out to be tight with all of us meeting after dinner and not having much daylight to shoot the external museum segment. Phil thought if we stopped to review the questions we would lose the light and therefore said for me not to worry about it. I told him I had no problem with him taking a few minutes to review the questions while we set up the equipment for the second segment in the hotel's executive presentation room after we shot the first.

2) We walked literally around the corner to the museum and set up the shot at Thunderbird Park where I explained the intro segment to Phil. The scene was mostly me talking: Introducing myself, the location, the person with me, and what we were doing there. I spoke a bit about Greg Long's book, the PGF, Don Abbott, Curator of Archaeology of the museum and his connection to the film, and had a look at totem pole carved by Mungo Martin depicting Dsonoqua, The Wild Woman of the Woods. Shooting was fine except for a bus, a rig, and a couple Harley's that rolled by during the shoot and interfering with the sound.

3) We returned to the Marriott to shoot the second segment. The walk to the museum and back I spent mostly speaking with Amy, first chatting and then talking about the first time she saw their suit in the PGF on TV. While setting up the cameras and seating for the second segment, I suggested Phil go ahead and have a quick look at the questions for the interview which I referred to as the "Gotcha! List." There were three pages of questions in this order: 25 from Bill Munns, 4 from Atomic, and 4 from Wolftrax. Phil spent most of those minutes looking at Bill's questions, only briefly looked at Atomic's, and never got to see Wolf's at all. Never at anytime after I took out the question for Phil to review did he leave the room or ask Amy to help him.

Before shooting began Phil and I started having a bit of PGF and general Bigfoot conversation, but I asked that we stop and save it for the cameras. Phil asked if we could first begin shooting with him addressing the camera to discuss some general points. I agreed but explained that once we started shooting, it would be a continuous shot and there would be no stopping until the entire segment was finished. Phil spoke for a bit in a manner in which he tried to lay out his involvement with Patterson and answer some questions he thought the viewers would have. Phil has a tendency to want to elaborate on many things and I know in part this is because of the concept that we are putting his claims under scrutiny. After Phil finished his first talk, we broke into discussing some of the points he raised, mostly where I was correcting Phil on minor things about the PGF and Patterson. An example being that while Phil knew generally about Patterson's '66 book Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist? he knew little to nothing about Patterson's '67 fictional Bigfoot film Bigfoot: America's Abominable Snowman. We also broke into discussion about Phil's idea that Patterson made the PGF purely for scam and financial gain and my idea that Patty was originally conceived as a representation of the William Roe encounter for his Bigfoot movie which he then decided to turn into a real encounter.

What ended up happening is a conversation that ate up a lot of camera time and me every so often trying to steer things back to the Gotcha! List. It was all very productive but not exactly according to plan. Then while shooting, the hotel interupted to let us know they would be needing the room soon. We had told them we only needed the room for an hour. We decided to finish up that segment with the rest of the conversation and shoot the Q&A segment in their room.

4) We shot the Gotcha! List in Phil's room with he and I sitting side by side with a small table between us. We agreed for time constraints that the first of Bill's questions would be answered quickly by me with Phil clarifying if need be. I realized there was no way we could keep a reasonable timeframe if I let Phil answer 33 questions in his elaborative way with many of them already covered. BTW, only Bill's initial questions were touched on previously, none of Atomic's or Wolf's. We plowed through all 33 questions with Phil having no trouble whatsoever. There was one or two questions from Bill that were written in a rather confusing way, but those too were fully answered by Phil. Amy weighed in from time to time when the question had to do with certain measurements. We finished at 12:40 and I was profusely thankful to the Morris'. After a brief chat, we said our goodbyes to allow them to get to bed for their departure the next morning. It impressed upon me then that as beautiful a city as Victoria is with so many thing for them to do, they had literally come only to speak with me and do this interview.

What I now have ahead of me is a long editing process for the documentary and to decide which parts of the interview will quickly be released on Youtube. I will keep everyone updated as this continues.
 
kitakaze wrote:
and to decide which parts of the interview will quickly be released...


How 'bout dropping a quick Bombshell??!! :covereyes

I loved those Bob-shells you dropped, earlier...
 
What kind of questions did Bill Munns have?


http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=29810&pid=602575&st=0&#entry602575

Bill Munns @ BFF said:
1. How did you become aware of the Patterson-Gimlin Film? Was it from a TV program, a magazine writeup, or other?

2. Do you recall when this was?

3. When did you first think that the PGF was showing a suit your company had made? What were you looking at to see enough similarity to your suits to know that was one of yours?

4. When did you first bring this to the attention of other people? Is there any documentation you may have to verify this answer?

5. At what point did you make the general public aware that the film has one of your suits? How was this announced? Press release, advertising, some kind of article or interview about you or your company?

6. What prompted you to make this disclosure public?

7. How did Roger Patterson contact you to purchase the suit? Letters, phone calls, meetings?

8. Is there any particular reason you remembered this customer?

9. Did he purchase or rent a suit?

10. What exactly did this customer purchase or rent?

11. What are your financial terms of sale or rental?

12. By any chance are there any customer receipts, billing invoices, other documentation of transaction kept?

13. It is reported by Bob Heironimous that the suit he wore was a two piece configuration, a pants section and a tee-shirt like section, apart from mask, gloves, etc. Do you sell a suit constructed this way?

14. If not, can you think of any reason why it was modified to have more closure seam areas than the suit you provided?

15. Is the fur material stretch fur?

16. If not, what is the tallest a man could be and wear the suit, so head to toe, he fits in it?

17. If a person is shorter than the maximum height to wear your suit, what do you recommend for the legs of the suit bunching up at the ankle, where the excess length sags to?

18. Is the foot designed for a person to wear it barefoot or with shoes? If with shoes, do the costume toes extend beyond the shoe, or are the costume toes fused together so the shoe can go closer to the tip of the toes?

19. What size shoe is the largest you think can fit in your costume feet?

20. The feet, hand gloves, and face mask are made of what material?

21. If the costume feet are separated from the fur pant legs of the suit, how high up the ankle do the costume feet go?

22. Does the suit fur around the ankle taper into the ankle size, or are the legs just straight down like regular pant legs?

23. Is there a chest piece on the suit?

24. If so, when you make your suit, does the chest piece simply attach over the fur chest section, or do you sew or glue the fur only to the edges of the chest piece?

25. What would you estimate is the waist diameter or size of your costume? How large a man, in terms of pant waist size, would fit into your suit?
 
Was that supposed to be a standard brown Dynel color? Can Morris point you to any other examples of that color in either his gorilla suits, others' suits, or things like bathmats, etc.? Can you post other pictures of this brown Dynel material?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom