Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[kitakaze]

I admit however, that I clearly saw what Diogenes was pointing out, and I do not see Count Scapula.

OK, LTC. I'll get to the rest in a bit, but for now I hold you directly responsible dampening of my PC that resulted from that statement.

 

[kitakaze]

I think Diogenes is just pointing out the double standard here.

Which is an inference that is not consistent with Diogenes/Skeptical Greg's continuing input at the BFF.

I clearly see a massive calf bulge in Patty's right leg when there should be none, and I see the thigh flap.

Uh-huh. Why do you think that is?

 

[kitakaze]

Massive calf bulge visible here as well. The circled item is just an interesting something.

Yes, very interesting... YA HWAH!? I look at these stills you've posted and my assertation in another thread that the PGF isn't blurry seems pretty... But then I remember that you posted crappy stills.

 

[LTC8K6]

The PGF you are allowed to see has been enhanced, so don't be too sure that the PGF isn't blurry. If we are ever allowed to see the original, we can judge better.

Same frame from the MK Davis enhanced PGF.

 

[LTC8K6]

What is the thigh flap? I dunno, lots of ideas have been tossed around. The calf bulge? I dunno either. The arm doughnuts? Who knows?

Taken together, the anomalies look like they could be suit joint problems.

I have found Diogenes to be quite fair at both boards. There should be two sides to each story.

Bob Heronimus' story inconsistencies are no more or less interesting than P & G's, for example.

 

[kitakaze]

The PGF you are allowed to see has been enhanced, so don't be too sure that it isn't blurry. If we are ever allowed to see the original, we can judge better.

Mmmmm. Deep conspiracy. Yum. I'm still sure the word 'blurry' isn't apt.

Same frame from the MK Davis enhanced PGF.

In which, of course, the massive leg bulge and interesting something are also striking?

 

[LTC8K6]

The image restorations involved motion and focal blur removal which was performed using FIR and IIR filters. Image enhancement included Wallis enhancements, homomorphic equalization, histogram equalization and curve adjustments.

That's from the NASI report.

The LMS dvd uses an enlarged and cropped version of the PGF.
Looking at this, you would think it's the full frame.

The full PGF frame is a much wider shot though. It's fuzzier, too. Note the absent scratches.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally Posted by LTC8K6
I think Diogenes is just pointing out the double standard here.

Which is an inference that is not consistent with Diogenes/Skeptical Greg's continuing input at the BFF.

I don't understand this... ???


My continued input at BFF is not consistant with pointing out a double standard with regard to the clarity of the film ?

Could you elaborate ?

It's one of the few things, if not the only thing, I have going for me over there ..

 

[kitakaze]

What is the thigh flap? I dunno, lots of ideas have been tossed around. The calf bulge? I dunno either. The arm doughnuts? Who knows?

Taken together, the anomalies look like they could be suit joint problems.

Which we might both agree to be another useless (but appreciated to me) opinion?

I have found Diogenes to be quite fair at both boards. There should be two sides to each story.

100% yes. With far more patience then you or I.

Bob Heronimus' story inconsistencies are no more or less interesting than P & G's, for example.

Yes. Nor the other guys stories who claimed to be in the suit.

 

[LTC8K6]

Being a skeptic, I then immediately wonder what has been cropped out of other frames.

 

[LTC8K6]

Why would a calf bulge at that point?

That's the question.

Would it bulge that much with no weight on it?

Maybe Patty's calves work strangely?

Maybe the boot came loose?

Who knows?

 

[LTC8K6]

Yes. Nor the other guys stories who claimed to be in the suit.

Well, BH is usually hammered for his inconsistencies, while P & G get a pass.

 

[kitakaze]

I don't understand this... ???


My continued input at BFF is not consistant with pointing out a double standard with regard to the clarity of the film ?

Could you elaborate ?

Really??? Elaborate? Sure. I don't think arguments against the possible validity of the PGF are an accurate sumation of your input at the BFF. Is the PGF the only thing you comment on there? The only thing you find pertinent to comment on?

It's one of the few things, if not the only thing, I have going for me over there ..

Given the majority of opinions there, I disagree.

 

[kitakaze]

Well, BH is usually hammered for his inconsistencies, while P & G get a pass.

By creduloids, you mean?

 

[LTC8K6]

Not just the creduloids.

 

[Seb1]

I haven't read all the posts on this thread, but here's my opinion:
If the existence of Bigfoot really could be verified, what's the paranormal about that? It would be just another discovered species. There should be a lot of them to keep up the population. It shouldn't be impossible, but in a relatively densely populated country as America, there should be sufficient evidence of such a big animal if there was one.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Being a skeptic, I then immediately wonder what has been cropped out of other frames.

Cropped ? How about missing? Like, another 75 feet or so .. And that's just one roll..

Are we to believe Roger just read the instructions and fiddled with the controls, all those months he had the camera ?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

I haven't read all the posts on this thread, but here's my opinion:
If the existence of Bigfoot really could be verified, what's the paranormal about that? It would be just another discovered species. There should be a lot of them to keep up the population. It shouldn't be impossible, but in a relatively densely populated country as America, there should be sufficient evidence of such a big animal if there was one.

Sorry.. Come back when you have read it all.. You shouldn have any questions that haven't been asked already..

Just kidding..


If you are wondering what this discussion is doing in the

General Skepticism and The Paranormal

forum...

Just go with the " General Skepticism " part ...

There are a couple of exceptions, well one really, who contends that Bigfoot is an alien shape shifter; but he's been banned..
Though he manages to get in from time to time with new aliases ...

 

[kitakaze]

And what a hoot when he does!

 

[kitakaze]

I haven't read all the posts on this thread, but here's my opinion:
If the existence of Bigfoot really could be verified, what's the paranormal about that? It would be just another discovered species. There should be a lot of them to keep up the population. It shouldn't be impossible, but in a relatively densely populated country as America, there should be sufficient evidence of such a big animal if there was one.

Yeah, what? You gotta problem with 94 pages? PFFF, baby. (JK) (edited for idiot punctuation.)