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

Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
kitakaze has relocated to Japan.
The relocating was sudden, took a lot of preparation and has occupied all of my time since I've been off the forum. What can be done is something I will discuss with Bill in private. I'm sure Bill has pointed out more things to sustain your belief in the film which is fine. This is what his efforts are built around. At the same time he knows the suit exists and where it is, he just has not been able to see it yet for himself to confirm it is the actual suit.
Click to expand...
 
And Munns figured out a way around the discovery of the suit.


"I have also acknowledged that I do remain very open to the idea Roger got a suit and put Bob H in it and filmed him, but equally adament that if that occurred, it's not the PGF we know and Bob H. is not Patty. The recent work I've done more or less destroys Bob H's story as far as i'm concerned, and I'm working on the assembly of test evidence to show why."

Post 2371
http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/30016-kitakazes-patty-suit-bombshell/page__st__2370
 
Well it stands to reason that after filming Bob Heironimus in a bigfoot suit at Bluff Creek that Roger would set that aside once he got a real bigfoot on film.

So I don't see a problem here.
 
I'm looking forward to this, "The recent work I've done more or less destroys Bob H's story as far as i'm concerned, and I'm working on the assembly of test evidence to show why."

It'll finally give us something interesting to discuss, unless it's as lame as the lens analysis, but considering he used "more-or-less", and "as far as I'm concerned" it looks like he's already hedging his bets.
 
Last edited:
And KK earlier is this thread went to great pains to tell us Bill "Patty is a Real BF" Munns was an upright guy and would tell the world the truth. That just went down in flames.

I'm leaning now more than ever that this whole thing was an KK hoax on the bleevers.
 
tube said:
I see Boing Boing is promoting old, debunked nonsense today:

http://boingboing.net/2012/11/13/unhoaxing-the-famous-bigfoot-m.html
Click to expand...

Some of the comments are kinda funny:

The people who dismiss the Patterson video as a "hoax" would also have us believe that there is a human being inside the Mickey Mouse "costume" at Disneyland. But I ask you this: do human beings habitually stand around with their left feet angled up 30 degrees!?! WE ARE THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS, PEOPLE.
 
GT/CS said:
And Munns figured out a way around the discovery of the suit.


"I have also acknowledged that I do remain very open to the idea Roger got a suit and put Bob H in it and filmed him, but equally adament that if that occurred, it's not the PGF we know and Bob H. is not Patty. The recent work I've done more or less destroys Bob H's story as far as i'm concerned, and I'm working on the assembly of test evidence to show why."

Post 2371
http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/30016-kitakazes-patty-suit-bombshell/page__st__2370
Click to expand...
I have to give Bill Munns credit; he was (apparently) spot-on when he indicated he didn't know how to replicate the "bigfoot" suit. A less honest do-it-yourselfer would have said, "heck, I can do that!" and then failed.
Not Bill. He knew he couldn't do it, then tried anyway, and then failed. I love that certain "ne plus savoir ce qu'on dit" about the man.

I give him his due.
 
Hmmm...you don't suppose a lot of this BF nonsense is Jack Links trying to secretly promote their jerky? Like paying people to post on blogs about their encounters, that sort of thing, to keep the ball rolling.

When you think of Bigfoot, do you start craving jerky?
 
You're right. I hear the word Bigfoot and I have a compulsion to go watch an Idaho State football game and eat Zagnuts and jerky.
 
jerrywayne said:
What does the verticle face of the Patterson subject imply?
Click to expand...

The way I understand it, any improbable feature found on the Patterson subject can be attributed to our lack of knowledge regarding Bigfoot physiology.

It's entirely possible that Bigfoots just happen to look like they grew up sleeping on their faces, and that their lower body looks like fur covered waders that have been stuffed with bubble wrap...

Until we snag one, anything goes..
 
Last edited:
Skeptical Greg said:
The way I understand it, any improbable feature found on the Patterson subject can be attributed to our lack of knowledge regarding Bigfoot physiology.

It's entirely possible that Bigfoots just happen to look like they grew up sleeping on their faces, and that their lower body looks like fur covered waders that have been stuffed with bubble wrap...

Until we snag one, anything goes..
Click to expand...

The initial scientific reaction to the Patterson film highlighted the incongruous attributes seen in the film: female walking like a male; upper-half ape, lower- half human, hair-covered human-like pendulous breasts on an ape, etc.

But that vertical face intrigues me. It means, at least, we are looking at something more human than ape. Homo erectus had a vertical face, for instance.

Other depictions of sasquatch, Roe or Ostman, for example, have a slightly advancing face. Other depictions have an ape's protruding face.

But Patterson's film subject had a vertical face; a vertical face just like he imagined it would have. His Ostman's Bigfoot, as he drew them for his book, have vertical faces. What a coincidence, huh?
 
jerrywayne said:
But Patterson's film subject had a vertical face; a vertical face just like he imagined it would have. His Ostman's Bigfoot, as he drew them for his book, have vertical faces. What a coincidence, huh?
Click to expand...

It would be an interesting, though extensive, study if someone were to take all the prominant accounts starting as far back as they can and correlate each BF feature and when it came into the literature. If you did a cartoon time-lapse of it all, it would show things like early BF with (for example) no saggital crest or pointy head and progress slowly until all accounts have these features. It would be fun to watch the BF phenom morph through time and with the spread of communications, especially the internet. Woila - Bigfoot lives!

Maybe I can get an RA-ship to do this at Idaho State.
 
Last edited:
jerrywayne said:
Are Kit's documentary and discovery of the suit now off the table?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what "on the table" even means as a practical matter. I don't know anything about producing documentaries and don't know how far he got with whatever he was doing. I understand he did some interviews.

But a person either has to attract a producer or do the production work themselves. If it isn't "put in a can" as they say, it exists as a collection of notes and maybe tape recordings and never becomes available to anyone in a format that is useful.

I'm guessing that's where things stand. I don't know him personally nor even from posting so much. But I didn't have the impression there was any actual production of a documentary taking place. It's definitely further along than my re-creation of Patterson's Thailand trip though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

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