Continuation - The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

[SweatyYeti]

Well sweaty, I've enjoyed the exchanges sometimes but I have to say that its hard to engage you when you avoid important issues such as subject scale, and direct comparison of that with Heironimus. (and how you arrived at scale estimates) This way you could actually show with real world numbers how BH could or could not have fit into the suit.

Until you're willing to post some non gobbly gook elbow reach around the points dodging bullets with a single 15 yard bound silently while slapping hogs into trees in the swamp 4 mile an hour strolling har tittay thingymabobby. Uhm, that makes about as much sense as your diagrams. I'm ashamed. You should be too. :-D Man, I really tried. Good luck with your, elbow reach and uhm, the whole real animal PGF thing.

Peace sweaty

(until you manage to address those all important figures)

Thanks for the advice, Riv.

 

[kitakaze]

kitakaze continues to misrepresent my statements....intentionally.

Sweaty, I will accept that the last part of your statement was in reference to Patty and not CC Bob. That does not change what you were saying and the fact you changed your claim and lied about it as I said you did.

I am going to paralyze you with your own dishonesty. You will be unable to provide simple yes or no answers to the following three numbered questions...

Sweaty, yes or no - (1) Did I misrepresent these statements?...

"...Bob has hand extensions in the suit..."

"Look at Bob's left hand, Drew. It obviously has an extension on it."

"I'm looking at the length of 'Bob-in-a-suit's' left forearm.....it's ridiculously long."

"Yup....no 'hand extension' there..."

(2) Did you or did you not make it perfectly clear for the reader in those statements that you were speaking about CC Bob using an internal object independent of Morris' suit inside it to make his forearms appear longer?

(3) Did you or did you not change your claim after I challenged you to a wager from an internal extension in CC Bob's suit to the suit arm itself doing the forearm extending?

I guarantee that Sweaty will not answer those three questions. All they require is honesty -something very difficult for Sweaty to have when speaking with the skeptics he reviles so much.

 

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

(2) Did you or did you not make it perfectly clear for the reader in those statements that you were speaking about CC Bob using an internal object independent of Morris' suit inside it to make his forearms appear longer?

I have said that the suit arm extends the length of Bob's arms/hands...and it does.


As for this wording....of yours...

"an internal object independent of Morris' suit inside it"

I never said that.

(3) Did you or did you not change your claim after I challenged you to a wager from an internal extension in CC Bob's suit to the suit arm itself doing the forearm extending?

Nope.

I haven't changed my thinking...or my claims....regarding the extension of Bob's arm-length....and the inability of Bob's fingers to directly make Patty's fingers bend at the last joint.

(1) Did I misrepresent these statements?...

You have intentionally misrepresented MANY statements of mine.

Would you like me to post a recent sampling?

 

[kitakaze]

I have said that the suit arm extends the length of Bob's arms/hands...and it does.


As for this wording....of yours...

"an internal object independent of Morris' suit inside it"

I never said that.

Yes, but you did say, "...Bob has hand extensions in the suit..."

That's in - as in inside. As in not the suit itself. It was 100% perfectly clear that you were speaking about an internal object independent of Morris' suit inside it. It doesn't matter if you used the words I did - it was perfectly understood what you meant by every reader. Your additional statements about the "ridiculously long" forearms and extension on CC Bob's left hand backed it up. So answer the question and stop trying to slither out of it. When you wrote, "...Bob has hand extensions in the suit..." you were clearly saying he had an object, not just the suit itself, inside the suit. Is this true? Yes or no.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Yes, but you did say, "...Bob has hand extensions in the suit..."

That's in - as in inside. As in not the suit itself.

That is your interpretation of the meaning of my statements/words.

it was perfectly understood what you meant by every reader.

It was perfectly understandable....that the specific points I was talking about were... 1) the fact that Patty's arms are longer than Bob's, and the suit-arm extends the length of Bob's arms....and, 2) that Bob's fingers cannot directly cause Patty's fingers to bend at the last joint.

Your additional statements about the "ridiculously long" forearms and extension on CC Bob's left hand backed it up.

Bob's forearms did look ridiculously long, didn't they?



Check this out.....note how much further forward Patty's head projects, relative to the center of the arm, than Bob's head does...

Imagine what it'll be like, someday, when kitakaze finds a significant error in one of my (many many) graphics, and latches onto it, like he has with this little "technicality" that he thinks he has me caught on!!!

Won't that be something to see?!

 

[Hitch]

Check this out.....note how much further forward Patty's head projects, relative to the center of the arm, than Bob's head does...

Necks don't move either?

 

[Marcus]

It was perfectly understandable....that the specific points I was talking about were... 1) the fact that Patty's arms are longer than Bob's, and the suit-arm extends the length of Bob's arms....and, 2) that Bob's fingers cannot directly cause Patty's fingers to bend at the last joint.

Forgive the interuption, I was just wondering about a particular point. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that Patty's fingers really do bend and it's not an illusion as shown by the doll hand comparison, why would this be a point in your favor? It's ridiculously easy to make fingers bend, a mechanical device is not even required, simple strings running down into the fingers pulled by Bob's fingers would do the trick.

 

[SweatyYeti]

Forgive the interuption, I was just wondering about a particular point. Assuming, for the sake of argument, that Patty's fingers really do bend and it's not an illusion as shown by the doll hand comparison

A quick re-cap for you, Marcus...


The 'doll-hand illusion' presents an illusion of fingers straightening.....not an illusion of fingers bending.

What has been disputed by the "Good Skeptic" is the bending of Patty's fingers....(not whether or not her fingers were ever straight.....that is beyond dispute.)

Since the doll hand thingy does not produce/present/purport to show an 'illusion of bending'......it therefore, thereby, and there-ever-after HAS NO RELEVANCE to the question of whether Patty's fingers actually bent, or not.

why would this be a point in your favor?

Putting these 2 facts together...

1) Patty's fingers were moving/bending, at the last joint, near the end of the fingers...

2) Her arm-length was longer than an 'average human's' arms, for her particular height....

....means that, if it was a suit, then either... A) some type of device would have been necessary in the hands of the suit, for the actor to cause the fingers to bend at that last joint....or.... B) the person inside the suit had to have exceptionally long arms, for his body height.


Patty's 'fingers bending, with exceptionally long arms' doesn't prove that Patty isn't a 'guy-in-a-suit'....but it's simply one specific point, which needs to be analyzed/determined....in building as clear a picture as possible, as to the details of Patty's physical body, and her movements.


'Analysis' is all about bringing out as many facts as possible....(however small)....to produce as clear a picture as possible, of whatever the subject is, that is un-clear.

It's ridiculously easy to make fingers bend, a mechanical device is not even required, simple strings running down into the fingers pulled by Bob's fingers would dothe trick.

The TRICK is to explain why Bobby-Boo has NEVER mentioned anything about any type of finger-bending device in the hands of the "suit" he allegedly wore.


Perhaps he didn't notice the device....even as he made the fingers bend.....as he also did not notice the massive amount of custom-formed, thick padding across his whole back, and sides.....and the massive butt padding.....along with a tad of pad around the thighs.

 

[Marcus]

I wasn't trying to address your current conversation with Kit, or even dispute the finger bending, I'm assuming that for the sake of argument.

I'm just wondering why finger bending would be evidence of Bigfoot, because it's so easy to do in a costume. A device is not even necessary, simple strings are sufficient. Visualize the way your hands work, tendons are pulled by muscles in the forearm, the suit fingers will bend if they are pulled.

I could be remembering this incorrectly, it seems to me you were the one who made a fuss with "if the fingers bend, you must pretend!" so it must be an important point to you.

I know this isn't strictly on topic with the current conversation, it just seemed as good a time as any to jump in.

 

[Marcus]

Kitakaze, if you don't mind a question from someone who's not as up on all the Bigfoot stuff as you guys, what does BH have to say about the way that the arms and hands on the costume fit?

 

[Vortigern99]

I have worn a pair of rubber "creature" gloves that extended the apparent length of my forearms and hands. My own fingers ended inside the palm of the fake hand. Yet it was easy to bend the fingers by pressing on the rubber palm, just underneath where the fake fingers began; simple physics would pull the fake fingers forward and make it look as though the "creature" were bending its own fingers. The rubber palm on which I was pressing was connected, of course, to the rubber of the fingers, so as I displaced the palm, the fingers would follow in an amusingly lifelike manner.

In short, my fingers ended at the glove palm, but I was able to use my own hands to manipulate the glove fingers. No device or even strings were necessary to create the illusion that fools unimaginative BF believers like Sweaty.

 

[Vortigern99]

The picture comparison in post #1785 is meaningless. The person in the suit is hunching forward, a perfectly human activity which I am doing right now as I type this. Sweaty does not appear to understand that the human body is flexible and can actually move itself into a variety of positions, including several in which the head is forward of the body. It does not rationally follow that these two pictures depict two different people.

 

[SweatyYeti]

I wasn't trying to address your current conversation with Kit, or even dispute the finger bending, I'm assuming that for the sake of argument.

I'm just wondering why finger bending would be evidence of Bigfoot, because it's so easy to do in a costume..

Again...it's a matter of determining small, specific details...one at a time....and putting them all together, to build as complete a picture as possible, of what Patty is, and is not.


From one detail....other things can be questioned, and determined......like the question I asked about Bob's testimony.....or, LACK thereof....concerning the "strings", or whatever device, was in the "suit hand", he says he wore.

A device is not even necessary, simple strings are sufficient.

'Strings' can be considered a 'device'.

Visualize the way your hands work, tendons are pulled by muscles in the forearm, the suit fingers will bend if they are pulled.

I could be remembering this incorrectly, it seems to me you were the one who made a fuss with "if the fingers bend, you must pretend!" so it must be an important point to you.

Actually....I like to think of the phrase as being HUMOROUS.


Most, or maybe all, of the points being analyzed are important...I think.

"One thing LEADS to another"........as they say/sing.

 

[SweatyYeti]

I have worn a pair of rubber "creature" gloves that extended the apparent length of my forearms and hands. My own fingers ended inside the palm of the fake hand. Yet it was easy to bend the fingers by pressing on the rubber palm, just underneath where the fake fingers began; simple physics would pull the fake fingers forward and make it look as though the "creature" were bending its own fingers. The rubber palm on which I was pressing was connected, of course, to the rubber of the fingers, so as I displaced the palm, the fingers would follow in an amusingly lifelike manner.

In short, my fingers ended at the glove palm, but I was able to use my own hands to manipulate the glove fingers. No device or even strings were necessary to create the illusion that fools unimaginative BF believers like Sweaty.

Demonstrate it. (If you'd like it to carry any weight.)

 

[SweatyYeti]

Vort wrote:

It does not rationally follow that these two pictures depict two different people

It does not rationally follow that ANY two pictures of Bob and Patty depict the SAME person.

(If "matching" lengths is any big deal! )

 

[SweatyYeti]

Here you go, Drew.....here is a thumbnail, of the Ratio Comparison image I posted the other day....with some more lines and numbers added to it...(clicking on it will link to a larger image)...





As far as Bob's numbers go....for most of them, I think 5% is too large a 'degree of error', to allow for. The location of his eyes is very clearly defined, within a couple of pixels....as is the location of his knee joint, and the bottom of his foot.

His 'elbow-joint', in that image, is not well-defined....but it's location can be determined, very accurately, by using other images....and applying the info onto this one....as I did.
But, regarding that placement...that may be off by as much as 5%...(5% would be about 5 pixels).


As for Patty's numbers....there is a little higher 'degree of error' possible....BUT, in my placement of Patty's elbow-joint, I intentionally placed it at a conservative point....a little higher-up on the arm than it really should be...(judging by information taken from other images of Patty.)
For instance, in the image I posted in post #1728......her elbow appears to reach as low as the dark-shaded area at the top of her butt....which would be lower than where I placed the elbow-joint in the 'Ratio Comparison' graphic.

Also...I added pixel measurements onto the arm, to show that the point I used for her elbow location is not in the middle of Patty's arm....but instead, it's higher-up.


And as for the placement of the bottom of Patty's foot...comparing the length I chose for her right lower-leg, to the measured length of her left lower-leg....it looks as though I may have given her too much length, for that....making her numbers appear closer to Bob's than they probably should be.

 

[Correa Neto]

Folks, honestly, it is looking more and more like makaya's case. I think its no longer about dicussing if PGF shows or not a real bigfoot or a guy in a costume. I think its just about attention whoring and it's been like this for quite a while.

The same may also be valid (at least as a component) for all the gossiping, bickering, verbal fighting and whining at the other threads.

 

[dafydd]

I was just watching Leonard Nimoy whittering on about Bigfoot in some garbage documentary.He said that Patterson had published a book in 1966 entitled ''Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist?''.Then Patterson goes off and films a Bigfoot.Never heard of publicity,Sweaty?

 

[kitakaze]

Kitakaze, if you don't mind a question from someone who's not as up on all the Bigfoot stuff as you guys, what does BH have to say about the way that the arms and hands on the costume fit?

He said his hands were partially in the gloves, not all the way, and that the gloves felt like stiff leather. He says there was large padding on the shoulders like football pads, a lot of padding stuff into the butt, and padding on the head.

 

[kitakaze]

That is your interpretation of the meaning of my statements/words.

That is because of the two languages I speak, English is one of them and I have a firm command of it. I also know that when you said CC Bob had hand extensions in the suit that everyone understood it to mean separate objects inside the suit. I also know that everyone here knows that when you were confronted with a challenge to a wager to back up your claim, you simply changed the claim. This is not a mere technicality. If you meant the suit itself was extending Bob's arms, why did you say there were extensions and that they were in the suit? Can you answer that question without lying, please? That's not in anyway vague to the people who read it. We all knew exactly what you meant and you can't run from your own words.

Answer me this about finger bending:

How do you know that what we see below isn't caused by the glove hand touching the leg of the suit when the arms swing or that the suit gloves had the detail of finger joints and when the hand inside that is not all the way in moves, it can bend the fingers in the way we see here?