Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
I don't recall anyone here ever suggesting that was what they thought.
This piece of film was the culmination of years of work by Roger Patterson ..
Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film
- Thread starter Skeptical Greg
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bigfoot film patterson gimlin
- Status
I don't recall anyone here ever suggesting that was what they thought.
This piece of film was the culmination of years of work by Roger Patterson ..
Crowlogic
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,147
Years of work, by someone. As for the quality of those years of work let's for comparison have a peek at our saviour Bob H decked out in his very own brand new Bigfoot suit. Here it is with all the bells and whistles of modern technology. Just another baggy also ran (or compliant gait as it were). I understand that the production where this still comes from has yet to be released and I'm not surprised. Could it be for more costume tweaking? Now one poster was kind enough to throw Star Trek into this party so while they're at let's see if anyone can find the Muguru (sp) you know the big white poisionous Ape that bites Kirk.
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Your point ?
And how it relates to whether or not the Patterson film shows a non-human North American primate ?
Logic,
1. You might want to get the scale a bit closer.
2. The camera elevation and angle are not the same.
3. The subject is not walking the same heading relative to the cameras.
4. The subject is not striding-out in one of the clips which would put it's arms and legs in different positions.
5. It's not the same costume.
6. They are trying to compare a mans gait and stride when he is 36-38 years older.
7. One should never try to compare these bad pieces of film.
8. Why do I even bother with this?
m
1. You might want to get the scale a bit closer.
2. The camera elevation and angle are not the same.
3. The subject is not walking the same heading relative to the cameras.
4. The subject is not striding-out in one of the clips which would put it's arms and legs in different positions.
5. It's not the same costume.
6. They are trying to compare a mans gait and stride when he is 36-38 years older.
7. One should never try to compare these bad pieces of film.
8. Why do I even bother with this?
m
Spektator
Is that right?
I know someone who found at least a partial bear skeleton. We have friends who are commercial artists and who live in the Appalachians at the end of a dirt road. They do have electricity and plumbing, but they're pretty far off the beaten path. A few years back they were hiking out to a waterfall and found the desiccated remains of a medium-sized bear. They took the skull, cleaned it, and have used it as a prop in some of their paintings. They also have an alligator skull that a friend of theirs found in Florida--I'd imagine a 'gator skull would be an even rarer find than a bear's.
Crowlogic
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,147
I was taking my lead from how magic tricks/trickery are exposed. Which is by duplicating the trick/effect. In the case of comparing these two objects A does not imply B any more than C implys B. Now I wonder if Randi himself could be prevailed upon himself to fund a real bulletproof cinamatic recreation of this film. Whoever is making the thing that put Bob H into or back into a Bigfoot suit needs a better costume person. If there are excellent pics of the Bob H in the new suit lets see them, we have after all seen the bad one. I do feel it is a rather pathetic thing to ask a man so many years older to recreate a physical feat accomplished in youth. But anybody could be in that suit and it still wouldn't look like PGF. We live in a world where there are 6 billion people, there isn't a shotage of potential suit wearers but make the suit first, with all of the little nitpicky details that are debated on both side of the issue. Find an actor fit enough to wear the suit and and on some sunny October afternoon send it across a forest creek bank with a preferably Kodak 16 mm camera rolling. If for no other reason than to understand an enigma of 40 years. Now that would be an act of pure science!
Again it seems harder to prove its fake than it is to prove its real.
Again it seems harder to prove its fake than it is to prove its real.
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
It's simple..
The people who could do it, don't care, and certainly don't want to spend the money ..
Surely you realize, relatively few people care about this at all ..
The people who could do it, don't care, and certainly don't want to spend the money ..
Surely you realize, relatively few people care about this at all ..
RayG
Master Poster
I don't see either side coming out ahead. Personally, I think this 40-year-old film is next to useless.
Where is the recent non-anecdotal evidence of bigfoot?
RayG
tube
Muse
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 917
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
Thank goodness only one of those choices requires any proof.
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
Well, you can see Bob H in the suit anytime you want, according to quite a few people! Just watch the PGF.
Late October temperatures at Bluff Creek probably don't get above 60F, actually. You might sweat in the suit, but it's not like it would be 80 or 90 degrees.
As far as duplicating the event, as Diogenes said the people who can couldn't possibly care less about bigfoot, and the believers are afraid they'll actually do it if they really try. The skeptics see little need to prove it's fake, and rightly so, imo.
Now if you ask me, I don't know if the film is genuine or not.
Late October temperatures at Bluff Creek probably don't get above 60F, actually. You might sweat in the suit, but it's not like it would be 80 or 90 degrees.
As far as duplicating the event, as Diogenes said the people who can couldn't possibly care less about bigfoot, and the believers are afraid they'll actually do it if they really try. The skeptics see little need to prove it's fake, and rightly so, imo.
Now if you ask me, I don't know if the film is genuine or not.
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
I... I... I'm waaay ahead of you.
Mad Hom
Loose Cannon
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2006
- Messages
- 475
This thread is like the energizer bunny...it just keeps going and going and...
I wholeheartedly agree with RayG and also would like to know where the recent non anecdotal evidence is. To my askew way of thinking every day that has passed since the CMF (Con Man's Flick) with no Bigfeetsus is just another nail in the Coffin of the Unusual Size for Stinky Bipedal North American Ape Men.
Everything and I do mean......Evvvvvvvvvverything since the CMF has been proven useless...The buttcast...the bison hair...the Memorial Day Footage...everything Freeman and Biscardi ever brought forth...all of it usesless and obvious BS...isn't it odd that as technology has advanced Bigfeetsus footage has gotten worse? We have gone from the CMF to...to what?? Bobby Clarke's pathetic excuse for a blobsquatch?!?! The Memorial Day Footage?!?! C'mon...this is pretty much a stone cold lead pipe lock...
Bigfeetsus is Bullscheize.
Melissa feel free to get over it already...oh....and for all that's right with democracy...
..move on with your life would ya!?!
The Mad Man
Starthinker
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2005
- Messages
- 5,011
Here is the simplified version:
"The PG film may or may not show a bigfoot."
"It does."
"It does not."
"Yes, it does."
"No, it does not."
"Does so."
"No, it doesn't."
"Yes, it does."
"No, it doesn't."
"Yes, it does."
"No, it doesn't."
"Yes, it does."
"No, it doesn't."
"You suck."
"No, you do."
"Yes, it does."
"No, it doesn't."
"Yes, it does."
"No, it doesn't."
"Yes, it does, infinity."
"No, it doesn't, infinity plus one."
"Yes, it does, infinity times two."
"No, it doesn't, infinity times infinity."
And so on and on.
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
Bigfoot, spam, and eggs...
Spam, Spam, Spam, bigfoot, and eggs...
Spam, Spam, Spam, bigfoot, and eggs...
Crowlogic
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2007
- Messages
- 1,147
I hope that Flying Suacer Avitar you have is just poking fun at those poor souls that believe in THAT nonsense. By that clown in Scandanavia no less. Maybe use it to cook up some of that spam and eggs Sgt Shultz has been kind enough to furnish us with!
Correa Neto
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2003
- Messages
- 8,548
Yep, and the evidence backing your claim is reliable.
Great minds think alike...
Or:
Cowboy 1: Dammit, three weeks looking for bigfoot and we found nothing... I'm drowning in debts!
Cowboy 2: Yeah, the closest thing we got were those test shots with the gorilla suit...
Cowboy 1: Hmm... I think I jus had a great idea...
Or:
Cowboy 1: OK, we're set. Lets go make a million dollars!
Cowboy 2: But do we have to stay there for three weeks?
Cowboy 1: C'mon, we've talked about this before... We need to find suitable places, make several shots to make sure we got things right and no one would believe we caught a bigfoot on film after three days in the wild!
Cowboy 2: Well... Maybe we could just say we were there for three weeks...
Cowboy 1: Nah, they may talk with our neighbours and find the truth. Don't worry, it'll be fun! We can hunt, fish, ride our horses...
Mad hom said:
I did, apparently you did not (how many pages later did you post this?). *snicker*
Nice to see your still thinking about me though
You take care and have a nice life yourself.. I have lots of fun reading this thread - you all seriously crack me up. I do thank you for that. Glass houses, glass houses
- Status