Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

[William Parcher]

I think this is correct...

 

[WGBH]

I did not say Patty Patterson is Richie Rich. She does get significant cheese on occasion for the PGF.

Yeah right. Next time you are in the Yakima area and you can tear yourself away from whatever saloon Bob H meets you in, go look for yourself.

 

[kitakaze]

John, can you check me with a yes or no beside each on of these?

1) Bob Heironimus has made significant money off his claim of being Patty.

2) Patty Patterson does not get paid significant money for use of the PGF in media.

3) Bob Heironimus is an alcoholic.

4) Bob Heironimus, his family, friends, and individuals who are neither have neafriously colluded to defraud with the claim of Bob being Patty.

 

[kitakaze]

you forgot to mention coincidence of the pictured deadfall/roots. I'm wondering what kind of hat Gimlin was wearing?

First sentence of the post of mine you quoted.

 

[WGBH]

Those are not yes or no questions.

 

[kitakaze]

Ee nay chuck...

1) Bob Heironimus has made significant money off his claim of being Patty?

2) Patty Patterson does not get paid significant money for use of the PGF in media?

3) Bob Heironimus is an alcoholic?

4) Bob Heironimus, his family, friends, and individuals who are neither have neafriously colluded to defraud with the claim of Bob being Patty?

 

[William Parcher]

LOL, I located the knee joint by assuming Gemora was in there and that he was a human, with avg proportions. Patty's knee joints are evident.

Right, and you'd have to also assume a human inside to locate the hip joint. The hip socket ought to be about even with the center of the glut max in a living biped. But we know that Gemora's hip joint could not have been there. The shoulder joint seems to be another mystery even though you seem to be able to see the elbow.

Locating Patty's hip and shoulder joints is challenging. It matters if you are looking at a live creature or a suited and padded actor.

 

[William Parcher]

i don't need to ask Bob about this again we have talked about now over 100 times.

Oh yes you do. Because you have to specifically ask him about the faked demo casting footage. Roger told Krantz that the demo was filmed a couple days before Patty at Bluff Creek. That means that Gimlin was there and he knows about it.

The image you are looking at is from the second role of film Roger loaded into the camera after the Patty role was finished. He is casting one of the two footprints castings he made that day.

Titmus said that four tracks were cast, not two. You need to talk to Gimlin again. This is all screwed up.

Bob Gimlin is holding the camera. Bob does not remember holding the camera but admits that he probably did,on more than one occasion. some of the footage taken on the Patty role was taken by Bob as well as it is Roger on film pulling the pack horse.

Probably? Not certainly? That's like saying Roger was probably the only guy with me at Bluff Creek. Gimlin is not certain that there was no other person available to hold the camera? You need to talk to Gimlin again.

Roger had the small horse while Bob rode a larger horse. Also taken later on this second role of film is the jump test, Just before the jump test is a shot of the line of footprints in the sandbar. One of which has already had plaster poured into it but is still drying. Later you see Roger standing under a large tree with both castings in his hands. He is wearing his jacket in those shots.

Later when? Like later the same day after he cast those tracks? When? You need to talk to Gimlin again.

this second role of film is in the hands of the BBC. It was loaned to them just before Roger died and they never returned it. Patrica has been talking about trying to get it back for years but nothing has ever come of it.

Thomas Steenburg

That might be a lie. Hoaxers tell lies.

 

[WGBH]

Ee nay chuck...

1) Bob Heironimus has made significant money off his claim of being Patty?

2) Patty Patterson does not get paid significant money for use of the PGF in media?

3) Bob Heironimus is an alcoholic?

4) Bob Heironimus, his family, friends, and individuals who are neither have neafriously colluded to defraud with the claim of Bob being Patty?

Ee nay chuck...

1) I doubt it and never claimed that he has. What does that have to do with my asking you to back up your insinuation that Roger or Patricia Patterson is "rolling in buckets of cash" in the past or present.

2) Define significant. Based on her current living conditions that I am personally aware of, in my opinion no she does not. I only asked you to take a look for yourself and then pass your own personal judgement.

3) I have no idea and it would be disrespectful for a recovering alchololic to throw stones even if he was one. An illness even if he was afflicted would have no bearing on his character anyway.

4. Town gossip or opinion from anyone in Yakima (on camera or off) regarding this topic (pro or con) is not the proof needed for verification of the film's authenticity.

 

[DennyT]

Ee nay chuck...

3) I have no idea and it would be disrespectful for a recovering alchololic to throw stones even if he was one. An illness even if he was afflicted would have no bearing on his character anyway.



4. Town gossip or opinion from anyone in Yakima (on camera or off) regarding this topic (pro or con) is not the proof needed for verification of the film's authenticity.

in other words, those are important.

 

[DennyT]

oh, you mean I have to read for comprehension?

 

[DennyT]

And where are all these buckets of money? I have seen how Patricia lives.

well, how does she live? when did you visit her? how long were you with her? how is her health? what is her income? how much is from the PGF? did you ask her whether the PG movie is a hoax? did you ask her where the camera original footage is? did you ask her why she won't release the entirety of the original footage?

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

The suit arms extend the length of Bob's arms..and the 'Patty/Bob-in-a-suit' comparison image, that you've been posting, kitakaze, shows Patty's arm length and the suit's arm length to be very close to equal, if not exactly equal.

Well, one of those is wrong, but Sweaty has had no interest in clearing that up.

There is nothing to "clear up"....those two proposals do not conflict with each other.


Not only are you clueless, kit....you're also confused.



Again.....re-capping...........for the clueless...


1) The 'suit arms' extend the length of Bob's arms...


and...

2) The 'Patty/Bob-in-a-suit' comparison image, that you've been posting....shows Patty's arm length and the suit's arm length to be very close to equal, if not exactly equal.




A suit can extend the length of a person's arms...and, in Bob's case, it would have to extend the length of his arms, in order for his arm length to equal/match Patty's arm length.

 

[kitakaze]

There is nothing to "clear up"....those two proposals do not conflict with each other.

Not only are you clueless, kit....you're also confused.

Either you are intentionally leaving out the actual conflicting statements or the Ballzheimers is getting more aggressive. These statements of yours do conflict and you know it...

...Bob has hand extensions in the suit...(Hey....just ask him ).

"A hand in a glove is just fine"....WASN'T just fine....it was insufficient.

VS...

The suit arms extend the length of Bob's arms..and the 'Patty/Bob-in-a-suit' comparison image, that you've been posting, kitakaze, shows Patty's arm length and the suit's arm length to be very close to equal, if not exactly equal.

There are hand extensions in the suit. It's obvious. A hand in a glove is not sufficient. These are your words.

Oh, wait. The suit arms are making Bob's arm length equal Patty's. A hand in a glove is sufficient. But it can't be Patty because of the way her fingers bend. This is what you are also saying.

Conflict. Contradiction. * Does * not * make * sense *

So, who's clueless? Can you account for the discrepancy in those two statements by you?

 

[Correa Neto]

Quick observation: Gemora suit pic was taken from slighly above, check the box where the guy in the gorilla costume is standing. This alone will distort the proportions. The Patty image, however, seems to have been taken from roughly the same level where the guy in the bigfoot costume was.

 

[WGBH]

well, how does she live? when did you visit her? how long were you with her? how is her health? what is her income? how much is from the PGF? did you ask her whether the PG movie is a hoax? did you ask her where the camera original footage is? did you ask her why she won't release the entirety of the original footage?

Not my place to post on a public forum, Suffice it to say I did not see buckets of money. May 2009. How is your health? What is your income? I did not question her about the PGF.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Either you are intentionally leaving out the actual conflicting statements or the Ballzheimers is getting more aggressive. These statements of yours do conflict and you know it...

...Bob has hand extensions in the suit...(Hey....just ask him ).

"A hand in a glove is just fine"....WASN'T just fine....it was insufficient.

VS...

The suit arms extend the length of Bob's arms..and the 'Patty/Bob-in-a-suit' comparison image, that you've been posting, kitakaze, shows Patty's arm length and the suit's arm length to be very close to equal, if not exactly equal.

There are hand extensions in the suit. It's obvious. A hand in a glove is not sufficient. These are your words.

Oh, wait. The suit arms are making Bob's arm length equal Patty's. A hand in a glove is sufficient. But it can't be Patty because of the way her fingers bend. This is what you are also saying.

Conflict. Contradiction. * Does * not * make * sense *

So, who's clueless? Can you account for the discrepancy in those two statements by you?

You are thoroughly confused, kitzakaze. (Not to mention clueless! )

You've mixed together statements of mine from various posts, made in reference to different aspects of the arm length...and finger-bending issues.



Regarding this single statement of mine...(see Posts #3581, and 3586)...

A hand in a glove is just fine"....WASN'T just fine....it was insufficient.

....I made the statement in reference to Bob's hand being able to bend Patty's finger-joints at the end of her fingers....not in reference to 'a glove being able to 'extend the length' of the arm'.


Additionally.....regarding the alleged "contradiction"...

"A hand in a glove is just fine"....WASN'T just fine....it was insufficient.

VS...

The suit arms extend the length of Bob's arms..and the 'Patty/Bob-in-a-suit' comparison image, that you've been posting, kitakaze, shows Patty's arm length and the suit's arm length to be very close to equal, if not exactly equal.

They don't contradict each other.

Your term..."VS"....is inappropriate.....because the statements are refering to different things.

One statement is refering to Bob's ability to 'bend the fingers'....and the other statements ARE NOT.

Therefore, there is no conflict between them.


You are confused....and clueless.


(Oh, also....you've been DUPED.... Bob could not possibly have been Patty.....their elbow/knee joints cannot align, when their body heights are matched-up. Sorry.)

 

[kitakaze]

You are thoroughly confused, kitzakaze. (Not to mention clueless! )

You've mixed together statements of mine from various posts, made in reference to different aspects of the arm length...and finger-bending issues.

Regarding this single statement of mine...(see Posts #3581, and 3586)...

....I made the statement in reference to Bob's hand being able to bend Patty's finger-joints at the end of her fingers....not in reference to 'a glove being able to 'extend the length' of the arm'.

You lie. You stated as fact that Bob had hand extensions in his suit. I challenged you to a wager that he didn't. I know he doesn't because I have pictures of him putting the suit on - the whole process. You turtled and fled when I came after your statement of fact. Then you changed it to the suit is what's doing the length extending. Total 180. Here are your very own words unedited in any fashion from one single post that I have not mixed together from separate unrelated posts...

kitakaze wrote....without his 'SPEKS' on...

I don't think any illusion is necessary, nor extensions, nor inhuman arms.

A hand in a glove is just fine

Wrong......

In the comparison image that you use, to show that 'Bob-in-a-suit matches Patty'....Bob has hand extensions in the suit...(Hey....just ask him ).

Note the 60-pixel difference in length, on the arms...

[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Fun/Pattybobbob3.jpg[/qimg]


"A hand in a glove is just fine"....WASN'T just fine....it was insufficient.

Your exact, specific straight from the horse's mouth point was that Bob had extensions in the suit that were elongating the arms. You made a strong point of the length. "Note the 60-pixel difference in length on the arms," you said. You are a liar with no place in honest debate among adults. You are totally nailed, exposed, busted. Caught smack in the middle of a blatant lie. Fortean addiction has clouded your wits and the need to score points on evil skeptics has shorted out any integrity you have when communicating with people with opposing viewpoints.

Stand by you statements 100%, you say? I dare you to actually stand by them and accept my wager that in reality, opposed to what you claimed as farct, Bob Heironimus never wore hand extensions in the suit Phil made for him at Cow Camp in Yakima. You will not accept. You will run. You, sir, have been owned.

 

[SweatyYeti]

You, sir, have been owned.

You've been DUPED. But, I guess that goes hand-in-hand with being clueless........doesn't it?

You lie. You stated as fact that Bob had hand extensions in his suit.

FACT: The suit arm extends the length of Bob's arms.

 

[kitakaze]

FACT: The suit arm extends the length of Bob's arms.

A-ha...

Bob has hand extensions in the suit.

"A hand in a glove is just fine"....WASN'T just fine....it was insufficient.

Fact?

Fact: SweatyYeti is a fortean addicted Bigfoot fanatic who has trouble not lying when talking to skeptics. Totally busted. How about that wager?