Bigfoot - serious, not follies

[Skeptical Greg]

And it's a small part of the total site, or didn't you notice? Did Noll have anything to do with reports of mating or birthing? Were these direct observations? By whom? Or is it a safe assumtion they mate and have young like any other mammal?

It's not a safe assumption that they do anything... But you don't seem to understand assumptions as they relate to science..

 

[LAL]

The most damning evidence that this was a hoax has yet to be discussed:

Was there ever an attempt to make a real documentary out of this?

Patterson goes out to shoot a documentary and ostensibly doesn’t expect to get much more than tracks…due to the waste of footage on scenery. He gets lots of scenery, and then manages to film a Bigfoot, and film lots of tracks and casting.

Wouldn’t Patterson then proceed with his plan? Or was there never a plan to film a documentary to begin with?

The documentary was made and shown in theaters in the Northwest after science more or less scoffed it off.

 

[Thurkon]

A lurking member sent me this:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050812/ap_on_re_us/secret_waterfall

If the forests in Northern California are dense enough to hide a 400' waterfall, why not a new species?

I knew as soon as I saw that article in Yahoo you would post such nonsense.

A waterfall takes up a relatively small area of space. It doesn't move around foraging for food. The fact that someone found said waterfall was news because there aren't many areas of this country that haven't been explored.

Again, if Bigfoot exists, there has to be a number of them to sustain the population, and they don't just stand in one unexplored area.

No one ever claimed you could never discover Bigfoot. If he exists, you most certainly could. So go get him and show us.

Maybe his family is living under the waterfall?

 

[Thurkon]

The BFRO site is a primary source about the Skookum expedition, or didn't you notice?

If Noll doesn't want to be associated with BFRO, I'm sure he is free to do something about it..



So, how do you think the testicle print ended up in the Skookum cast?

I notice the illustration here doesn't include it..

Is the testicle print info a bonus in the book?

Jesus.

I’d heard so much about the freakin’ Skookum cast, I was actually expecting something other than a bunch of blobs in the mud. Are you kidding me with this? This is some of the best evidence Footers have?

How many buttocks does Bigfoot have?!? Is this Monty Python or something?

Seriously…is this for real?

 

[Thurkon]

And it's a small part of the total site, or didn't you notice? Did Noll have anything to do with reports of mating or birthing? Were these direct observations? By whom? Or is it a safe assumtion they mate and have young like any other mammal?

Come on, LAL, be a bit more scientific if you expect us to take you seriously.

These aren’t safe assumptions about mating and such…the site gives detailed, authoritative data on mating and birthing habits, life cycles, and other very explicit data that would take a scientist years of embedded fieldwork to know.

How could you possibly defend this?

 

[Thurkon]

The documentary was made and shown in theaters in the Northwest after science more or less scoffed it off.

He finished the documentary? Why isn't this available anywhere?

Did he really finish it? I know he showed the Bigfoot footage in theatres, but I thought that was a couple of clips put together? Was it really a fully finished documentary?

 

[LTC8K6]

Where in the world did anyone get the idea that the waterfall was secret, hidden, or unknown?

How silly can you get?

The waterfall is none of those, and that is clear in the article. It was even marked on an old map, for crying out loud.

What it has to do with unknown NA primates is beyond me, anyway.....

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Jesus.

I’d heard so much about the freakin’ Skookum cast, I was actually expecting something other than a bunch of blobs in the mud. Are you kidding me with this? This is some of the best evidence Footers have?

How many buttocks does Bigfoot have?!? Is this Monty Python or something?

Seriously…is this for real?

You don't understand. Foot was repositioning himself ( we know it's a ' him ' now.. )

This was a stealth fruit snatching operation where Mr. Foot managed to get the fruit without leaving any foot prints..

Oh, and don't forget, this milestone discovery in Bigfootology, took place in 2000.. There is no indication of any serious follow up work at this location.. Sound familiar ?

 

[LTC8K6]

Friction ridges running the length of the sole wouldn't be useful in helping to prevent side slippage in rough, often wet, slick terrain? Not all adaptations have to have a use in the first place. They tend to spread though a population if they're neutral or confer some advantage. Dermal ridges in primates are likely a leftover arboreal adaptation persisting in primates that spend most of their time on the ground.

As far as I know, dermal ridges are for grip and traction. having them run up and down the length of the foot still strikes me as silly.

Jimmy Chilcutt is hardly the only one to study animal fingerprints. Below are a human, chimp, and koala print.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Friction ridges running the length of the sole wouldn't be useful in helping to prevent side slippage in rough, often wet, slick terrain?

Dou you have evidence that any known primate has friction ridges running the length of the sole ?

 

[LAL]

No idea what you’re talking about. I got the picture online. I liked his disco Sasquatch bell-bottom look. He’s also looking mean, like he’s ready to throw down some serious stinky justice on some Bigfoot non-believers. His Squatch chick is backin’ him up, too.

The avatar is used by a poster on BFF. The proportions are wrong on it, too.

Yeah, okay. See, if this was his take…he doesn’t realize how unscientific he’s really being. To state an informed opinion is one thing, but for a serious scientist to definitively state that there’s no way a prosthesis could produce this effect after viewing a sixty second grainy film is absolutely ludicrous.

He was given an old hand crank machine to view the film frame by frame. He took measurements and did a detailed analysis. You might want to read his book before you criticize his work. He explained the problems in detail.

BTW, he's dead.

The shoulder joints are too far apart for the width to be achieved with something as simplistic as football pads.

Again, they look pretty close to me. Am I blind?

Apparently. Compare the legs.

They’re not identical, but they wouldn’t be if Bob H. is wearing a suit in one picture. Especially when said suits are designed to exaggerate proportions, as Chris Walas has told us.

Chris Walas didn't address the problem of the shoulder joints or the IM index, did he? His arguments got torn to shreds on BFF. Did you read that far?

Morris himself, as quoted in Long’s book. Patterson phoned him several times regarding the modification of the suit.

He says.

You seem overly eager to denounce everything Long researched as lies. Why is that, when you evidently haven’t read the book…or if you did, you weren’t paying attention? Why is Long a liar? You seem to be implying money is his motivation, but remember Patterson didn’t exactly donate his film for the benefit of science.

I've mentioned several times I've read the book. I used it in the Making of Bigfoot thread on BFF concerning De Atley's interview. See the thread on it on BFF for specific rebuttal on some of Long's most glaring errors.

Science didn't exactly want the film, donated or not.

From Skeptical News:

"The major counterclaim is that Long fell victim to one or more hoaxes when interviewing witnesses. Particular ire is reserved for the two most damaging witnesses: the man who claims to have built Patterson's Bigfoot suit (costume designer Phillip Morris), and "the Man in the Suit," as he has been called (a high school friend of Patterson, Bob Heironimus). Unfortunately, these two witnesses disagree on key details regarding the suit--something Long spends far too little time examining. Furthermore, after 37 years, there is no known physical evidence to back up the claims of either man.

I met with author John Kirk, President of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, and asked for his impressions. According to Kirk, "the trouble is that Bob Heironimus isn't telling the truth in any way, shape, or form here." Like many cryptozoologists, he believes that Heironimus is himself perpetrating a hoax. Kirk claims that his organization discovered the identity of Heironimus (then an anonymous source claiming to have worn a suit in the film) back in 1999. He also alleges that their investigation into his background uncovered "a woman who was present when Heironimus and two other individuals concocted this scheme [to falsely claim Heironimus wore the suit] in her living room so we were aware five years ago that this was a hoax, and we do not know how it was allowed to grow to this level."

Leaving aside this woman's specific allegation, Kirk's primary gripe with the book is shared by many cryptozoologists: Heironimus claims that he wore a horsehide suit built by Patterson himself, which he describes in modest detail, while Morris claims that Patterson bought and used one of his commercial gorilla suits--which he describes in precise detail. Surely, say critics, one or both of these claims must therefore be false. Since neither is clearly supported or debunked by the available evidence, both must be suspect."

http://www.ntskeptics.org/news/news2004-04-25.htm

And by the way, Barnum never did say it:

http://www.historybuff.com/library/refbarnum.html

I didn't know that. It shows up enough in lists of quotes. Okay, As Hull said.......I do know Marie Antoinette didn't say "Let them eat cake."

You sure do like to propagate myths… [/B][/QUOTE]

That was rather uncalled for, don't you think?

 

[LTC8K6]

Keep in mind that this is what they saw when they decided to pour the Skookum cast.


http://www.bfro.net/NEWS/pnw_newsletter003/images/SkookumImpressionBig.jpg

Edit: changed to a link due to margin disintegration.

 

[Hitch]

Well, there it is. Clear as mud.

 

[LAL]

Dou you have evidence that any known primate has friction ridges running the length of the sole ?

They don't. That was one of Chilcutt's findings from his study of primate prints.

Of course we don't have dermals from Laetoli or any Gigantopithecus tracks, so who's to say this might not have been a characteristic of other early hominids and their relatives?

Krantz' arguments for Giganto being bipedal are pretty interesting. He argues from the dentition as well as the structure of the jaws.

 

[LAL]

Not to mention that it seems, at least to me, a little fishy that the best avaliable footage of a bigfoot was obtained decades ago by people who went to the field specifically to shoot a documentary on the issue.

Why no one else got lucky later?

Sheer chance?
Bigfeet are extinct?
Bigfeet became smarter?
Skeptical influence, just as alleged on the countless psi experiments?
It was a hoax?

Noll:

"........'ambulance chasing' has gotten nothing in return so far and I really wouldn't waste my time with it. It just might work if you are in to relying on luck though. There are many reasons for an animal to be in a particular place at a particular moment, not all of which indicates a repeatable experience. Time and date, track or sighting plotted on a map will indicate the proper habitat, route or periphery of a core niche. Chasing a seen animal into the woods will just scare them off never to return and imprint on them your behavior as unsavory. Establishing a long term benign, but interesting presence with lures not normally available to most of us is the method I prefer. Methods must vary in different regions. Weather, altitude, population density, human influence, food and water sources are all factors needing to be taken into account.

I do not consider the P/G filming to be such... the area had more than enough activity to warrant such a venture even for the dyed in the wool non-believer. I believe that Roger really did his home work and was ahead of his time, setting the tone for modern Sasquatch research to this day. I respect him for that and wish I had met him and understood him more. "

 

[LTC8K6]

Just to be clear, from what I have read Chilcutt is claiming the ridges run north and south on the feet, along the sides. Not over the whole sole of the foot.

This is why I am saying it is silly.

The stuff below looks like what you get from the suction effect.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Noll:
...............
Establishing a long term benign, but interesting presence with lures not normally available to most of us is the method I prefer.
....................

So Noll is saying that he prefers a method that hasn't yielded anything so far ?


' Ambulance chasing ' works all the time, with animals that actually exist ....


Oh, and the method Noll prefers, works with actual animals as well..

 

[Thurkon]

You don't understand. Foot was repositioning himself ( we know it's a ' him ' now.. )

This was a stealth fruit snatching operation where Mr. Foot managed to get the fruit without leaving any foot prints..

Oh, and don't forget, this milestone discovery in Bigfootology, took place in 2000.. There is no indication of any serious follow up work at this location.. Sound familiar ?

Was Moneymaker or the BFRO mixed up in this?

Why would Mr. Foot roll in the muck to grab an apple?

Are there experts now in deciphering animal ass prints? How do we know what a Squatch ass impression looks like anyway?

Christ, why am I even asking?

"Elk tracks nearby...no Bigfoot...so we'll go with the Bigfoot theory."

That about right? Why do I feel these people need to be institutionalized?

 

[LTC8K6]

The BFRO just makes up whatever facts it needs to support bigfoot.

Gigantos looked strikingly simiar to sasquatches -- the large, upright, ape-like animals seen in recent times in forests of North America.

Ancient gigantos had a very distinct appearance. They were more than twice the height of early humans. Fossil remains show gigantos stood over nine feet tall. The tallest, strongest human atheletes today would appear small standing next to one.

http://www.bfro.net/news/roundup/exped_whydo.asp

 

[Thurkon]

As far as I know, dermal ridges are for grip and traction. having them run up and down the length of the foot still strikes me as silly.

Well, it’s pretty obvious now these dermal ridgelings developed out of necessity. They wouldn’t be helpful for normal walking and gripping…but for awkward, spasmodic fruit-snatching seizures in the mud? Just the thing.