Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film

[LTC8K6]

The clearer and more detailed still should be used. That'd be the bottom one.

 

[Luminous]

WP, I think we'll have to help Luminous out with his own argument here.

I think the "heel" of what Luminous sees as a footprint is mostly cut off in the still you posted.

I think the "toe" and the "midtarsal break" bulge are visible.

IOW, if you could pan southeast a little in your still, the whole "footprint" would be visible in the corner.

Not that it's a footprint mind you.

Not that you don't realize this already, either.

There wouldn't be much of a heel if this was a climb up a small mound.

Here's a still from the National Geographic version:

 

[Luminous]

I'll try to post this again. This is the National Geographic version.

Also the link is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu86AC92ElU&mode=related&search=

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/images/davis_animation.htm

Best shot for your argument is here, Luminous. IMO, of course.

Your still is worse than mine, imo.

 

[Luminous]

Sorry, it's not posting for some reason. I must be doing this wrong. I'll try again once I figure this out.

 

[Luminous]

Can you see my posts LTC? I can't for some reason.

 

[LTC8K6]

There wouldn't be much of a heel if this was a climb up a small mound.

We've been through this before, though. MK Davis:

It is here that the camera picks up a barefoot track, complete with mid tarsal pressure ridge that is sunk deeply into the sand.

No mention of a mound and only toes. A complete track including MTB ridge. That has always been the claim.

 

[LTC8K6]

I can see your still when I click on it. It's very poor quality and only shows part of the object in question, imo.

 

[Luminous]

Yeah, but it shows more clearly that it's in dirt.

 

[LTC8K6]

Davis is claiming that Patterson backed up quite a bit so that his own boot prints are visible out in front of him.

Yet another version of events...

 

[Luminous]

By the way LTC, what is the source of your image, and has it been filtered in any way?

 

[LTC8K6]

I don't think anyone is arguing that it's not in dirt, Luminous.

 

[Luminous]

The film lines up with the claim. Stills show possible boot prints, Roger's thumb and one definite boot print.

Check out the gifs I made here: http://www.mid-americabigfoot.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=67&t=1975&start=30 At the bottom of the page...

 

[Luminous]

Yeah, someone was implying it was a stick.

 

[LTC8K6]

By the way LTC, what is the source of your image, and has it been filtered in any way?

MK Davis, and I'm certain it's enhanced to help the appearance of a track.

No image, still or clip, of the PGF currently available is an original, as far as I know.

 

[kitakaze]

If this is not a big piece of dead wood slightly elevated in certain places then why is there a shadow cast by just to the left of what's being claimed as a bigfoot print?

It reminds me of the two closely spaced trees bit (58 feet apart).

 

[Luminous]

Even in that animated version it appears that there is an incline of sorts. There also appears to be a possible mid-foot pressure ridge.

Again, is your version digitally filtered in any way?

 

[LTC8K6]

Why didn't Roger shoot stills of the tracks, Luminous?

He had still cameras with him.

 

[Luminous]

Why didn't Roger shoot stills of the tracks, Luminous?

He had still cameras with him.

Maybe he did. There are shots of him casting tracks. Also a row of tracks was shot.

 

[kitakaze]

The film lines up with the claim. Stills show possible boot prints, Roger's thumb and one definite boot print.

Check out the gifs I made here: http://www.mid-americabigfoot.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=67&t=1975&start=30 At the bottom of the page...

Just checked your link. Sure looks like dead wood.