Merged Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 4

[Mister Earl]

Kill one.

 

[Resume]

Yes of course, there was another sighting in the same area just a couple weeks ago. If you are asking me to come along or guide a field hike, let's go.

I would think that such reliable sightings would lead to an inevitable capture/collection.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

So, before Munns' presentation you already believed? Then would you say it wasn't hard for Bill to convince you Patty was real?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Kill one.

Not interested in killing. Only in the case of self defense would I draw on one of these creatures.

 

[Resume]

Confirmed by science or by local sightings?

One is decidedly not like the other, not by a longshot, not for this popular yet uncataloged cryptid.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

I would think that such reliable sightings would lead to an inevitable capture/collection.

That's the plan.

 

[Resume]

That's the plan.

Lot's of folks have had that plan. Bupkis.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

So, before Munns' presentation you already believed? Then would you say it wasn't hard for Bill to convince you Patty was real?

Believed what? Patty was real? Nope. Did I already have an encounter with some sort of unknown primate in KY, yes.

 

[GT/CS]

As soon as NorthernLights leaves Chris shows up.
Chris are you just trying to screw with us?
You're obviously not interested in a debate or even a discussion so what's the deal?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Lot's of folks have had that plan. Bupkis.

I don't know if I can agree with that. It seems like most folks like to go out in the woods after dark and knock on trees, make strange sounds and calls, and normally scare themselves by hearing a limb snap or some other noise commonly found in nature.

I guess that's ok for them but I have to ask: What next? Those folks seem contempt with hearing a wood knock or coyote call or whatever. Then they leave the area and maybe return next year to do the same thing.

Again, what next? If they determine there may be a population of creatures in that area, then comes the foot work. Daily or at least every other day. Trekking miles back into the woods searching for sign or tracks and trying to determine a home range. Most guys don't go that far, but I'm of the opinion that's what it's about. If you can't put in the mileage in the woods how can you ever have a sighting?

 

[William Parcher]

Confirmed by science or by local sightings?

Locals confirm things like fairies, Chupacabras and Nessie - so that realm of confirmation is not reliable enough to matter. Locals would have confirmed Bigfoot with dead bodies long before our grandparents were born.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

As soon as NorthernLights leaves Chris shows up.
Chris are you just trying to screw with us?
You're obviously not interested in a debate or even a discussion so what's the deal?

I have no idea as to the Northern lights reference. I thought that's what this was, a discussion. Am I not welcome here?

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Locals confirm things like fairies, Chupacabras and Nessie - so that realm of confirmation is not reliable enough to matter. Locals would have confirmed Bigfoot with dead bodies long before our grandparents were born.

Just like the Gorilla?

So in other words if someone has seen a Gorilla or a Bigfoot, they are just as likely to have seen things like fairies, chupacabras and nessie? That's interesting.

 

[STRONG LIKE BEAR]

If you can't put in the mileage in the woods how can you ever have a sighting?

Bigfoot doesn't solely exist in the "deep" woods of North America. They are almost everywhere

According to the BFRO, only four (!!!) [one of them being Illinois, which only has 3 more sightings listed] states have more bigfoot sightings than Ohio.

Do you not see a problem with this?

How does Bigfoot exist in Kentucky and Ohio without being 100% totally confirmed and classified? Sorry to be flippant.. but have you looked at a god-damn map? How is this possible if "Bigfoot" is anything but a social construct.

 

[eerok]

If you saw one would you still think they're a myth, hoax or delusion?

For a sighting, a more complete list is hoax, prank, joke, misperception, psycho-social bias, and delusion.

I think it's safe to say that I'd respond differently than you if I thought I saw something impossible. Perhaps I'm just wired for a more default impulse toward error correction. I'd first of all want some objective confirmation, which is something that bigfoot witnesses never seem to care much about.

You didn't respond to me about Munns, though. I guess by footer ping pong logic that gives me a point? Can I cash this in for something to eat?

 

[Resume]

I don't know if I can agree with that. It seems like most folks like to go out in the woods after dark and knock on trees, make strange sounds and calls, and normally scare themselves by hearing a limb snap or some other noise commonly found in nature.

I guess that's ok for them but I have to ask: What next? Those folks seem contempt with hearing a wood knock or coyote call or whatever. Then they leave the area and maybe return next year to do the same thing.

Again, what next? If they determine there may be a population of creatures in that area, then comes the foot work. Daily or at least every other day. Trekking miles back into the woods searching for sign or tracks and trying to determine a home range. Most guys don't go that far, but I'm of the opinion that's what it's about. If you can't put in the mileage in the woods how can you ever have a sighting?

Well, others claim to be doing this (NAWAC) but I fear that bupkis will be the result no matter who or what is doing the . . . research. Need a biological for that, and there ain't one.

 

[Gilbert Syndrome]

A belief in BF before seeing the Munns talk, is what I was referring to, Chris. I still invite you to post your encounters.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

Bigfoot doesn't solely exist in the "deep" woods of North America. They are almost everywhere

According to the BFRO, only four (!!!) [one of them being Illinois, which only has 3 more sightings listed] states have more bigfoot sightings than Ohio.

Do you not see a problem with this?

How does Bigfoot exist in Kentucky and Ohio without being 100% totally confirmed and classified? Sorry to be flippant.. but have you looked at a god-damn map? How is this possible if "Bigfoot" is anything but a social construct.

I don't place much weight in the BFRO database or their methods. I can't say "How" they exist but they do.

 

[ChrisBFRPKY]

For a sighting, a more complete list is hoax, prank, joke, misperception, psycho-social bias, and delusion.

I think it's safe to say that I'd respond differently than you if I thought I saw something impossible. Perhaps I'm just wired for a more default impulse toward error correction. I'd first of all want some objective confirmation, which is something that bigfoot witnesses never seem to care much about.

You didn't respond to me about Munns, though. I guess by footer ping pong logic that gives me a point? Can I cash this in for something to eat?

I didn't respond about Munns . Sorry, yes I was under the impression there would be some credible evidence to counter the Munns presentation. There is none, only opinions.

 

[The Shrike]

Nope, I was merely pointing out you made a statement that you are unable to know. Knowledge of the unknowable isn't allowed in my view by anyone on either side. Next.

Bullpucky. The whole point is that we are able to use comparative anatomy to predict the underlying musculature of animals that engage in specific forms of locomotion. If one could not do this, then no physician could have ever passed Vert Morph.

The vastus lateralis is on the side of the thigh. The "knee pit" is behind the leg. Those two structures must be oriented at roughly right angles to each other. In "Patty" they are not: the knee pit appears to face the camera at the same time the side of the thigh faces the camera. That can't be with a bipedal leg that bends back at the knee such that the heel ends up behind the glutes: as we see in human locomotion, as we see in "Patty's" locomotion, and as evidenced by Patty's alleged footprints. Thus, the structures that we think we see in these film frames are subjective.