• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
In brief:
"Daniel Boone told tales of “killing a ten-foot, hairy giant he called a Yahoo,” says John Mack Faragher in a 1992 biography of Boone."

Boone was known to tell many tales. A tale is a story that is usually told in an entertaining fashion to amuse an audience. The teller of the tale is not automatically considered to be telling the truth. As an example, I doubt Homer actually saw Ulysses defeat a giant Cyclops.
 
That may be. If so Boone may be where the legend began of the 10 feet tall hairy men referred to as the "Yayhoo" in Ky. 200 years is a long time. I suppose his tall tales of the "yayhoo" could have spread to the PNW, but folks there seem to have their own names for the hairy creatures of similar description.
 
Are you promoting the Boone tale as a sort of thing where if it feels right to your audience that's cool - but if it doesn't feel right then that's cool too?
 
It's possible Boone actually killed a 10 foot tall hairy creature. However, since the entertainment of the day was largely reading, story telling, and listening (by those who could not read) It's also possible Boone was telling a tall tale. A tale of a similar creature matching the description of Bigfoot that is still reported to be seen in these modern times.

So we have the possibility Boone shot one, but the presence of other previously mentioned factors take away from that possibility and point to tall tale. That's my view, I can't explain it any better.

What's your view of the Boone story?
 
Where are the suits from the same time or earlier that are just as good?

I don't think anyone mentioned " 2001: A Space Odyssey "

Released in 1968, but certainly in production well before then..

What_zpsb99e0a46.gif



My, my .. Shot a little bit closer than 200 feet, we might note..

There was a rumor that the ape suits were passed over for an Oscar nomination because the powers that be, did not realize they were costumes...
 
What's your view of the Boone story?

No Bigfoots to shoot so he didn't shoot one.

Maybe he shot a strange person and decided to call them a Yahoo and you decided to call them a Bigfoot.

That scenario has to have some sort of statistical probability too.
 
I cannot read minds. This thread is full of posts, if you have one to discuss in particular, which one?

Yes, I do not know and am not the member "Northernlights" If that is interesting then great.

Chris-
They are referring to me. I jumped in here last month as well and am posting on rare occasions, when time permits. I too enjoyed the Munn's presentation and found his conclusions reasonable. That obviously isn't the prevailing sentiment, but that isn't shocking considering the audience.

Try to have fun and enjoy the debates. Take care.

NL
 
Chris knows that Bigfoot exists in Kentucky and NL knows they exist in Minnesota. I wonder if we can get knowers from almost everywhere. From that the rest of the world can know where Bigfoot lives.

That has to be true because the only other alternative is that knowers really don't know.
 
I don't think anyone mentioned " 2001: A Space Odyssey "

Released in 1968, but certainly in production well before then..

As you know, there are numerous examples of suits that look just as "good" as Patty that have been posted in these threads over the years, by members such as yourself and AtomicMysteryMonster (just to name a couple..) Chris claims he has gone through these threads, but also demands that the wheel be re-invented and be presented with examples... again.

The picture posted earlier of the "gemora" butt also is an example of costume features comparable to Patty.. Chris is playing dumb, like most of the Bigfooters here (OntarioSquatch). He doesn't actually care if you present him with examples of suits comparable with Patty or not. He will find some way to dismiss them, or just ignore your post altogether if needs be.
 
Last edited:
I hear what you are saying, and I should know better. I used to be quite active in these threads - I started Part 1 of the PGF discussion a few years back..
I only recall one person who came into these threads thinking the subject of the PGF was not a costumed human, with realistic muscles and muscle movement; took a closer look at what we were pointing out in the way of anatomical error if not impossibility, and came to acknowledge they were wrong...

I should know better...

You might find this post interesting in the context of the current discussion..

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg ( 16th January 2009 ):
What's sad, is that the PGF will get another 40 year boost when Bill Munns declares, in his expert opinion, we are not looking at a costume that could have been cobbled together by RP with his limited resources and materials .. ( .... or something to that effect )

Obviously Patty was the last of her kind..

It's sad when you go extinct, but have never been acknowledged to exist.. ( .... by the community at large )

Me Psychic.. No?
 
Last edited:
Exactly. I don't know how one looks at this and doesn't see a trainwreck suit, especially at the legs and waist...

PattyTurningAG2.gif

That Gif certainly highlights the top of the hip wader

I think so as well. I think it shows quite clearly a separation from the top and bottom segments of the suit. Of course, it's all just tufts of hair and Patty being out of shape, right? Patty is a rippling hulk of muscle when she needs to be and a lardass when she needs to be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom