I think that anyone who sees the comparison of a doll's stiff hand with Patty's hand, and says they think Patty's hand is a rigid hand, and the finger-bending is an illusion...is either just plain stupid, or they're being dishonest.
I'll be happy to change my opinion as far as that goes, if someone can show that a rigid doll hand can replicate that degree of bending, at two joints, with an edge-on view of the hand.
That was nothing but an example of backpeddaling... Rewording your initial claims won't make the fact that you could not back your accusations disappear or be forgotten. Making more ad homs will not help your cause.
You know, your last move, saying "Bye bye skeptics", may be interpreted as a cowardly act... So, what about making a post saying something like "I'm sorry, it was the heat of the moment" to avoid this?
But if I put on this welder's glove, bend my knees, and allow the tips of the glove to stick out about an inch and a half from the tips of my fingers, it looks like this:
Even with this rather soft and flexible glove, I can still bend the glove quite a ways inward even though my fingertips are an inch and a half away from the ends of the glove:
I just don't buy the notion that the apparent finger-bend seen on the film is beyond what a guy-in-a-suit could do.
Interestingly, I didn't notice an additional feature until I looked at the photos; note how the long glove bulges out to the side when I clench my fingers inward. This might account for the characteristic that Diogenes has pointed out, namely the strange bulge seen above the wrist.
Well, as I had foreseen, Tube found an easy way to make moving fingers. Easier and cheaper than the robot hand toy I proposed... Can I have my 1000000 dollars now?
But actually I think the pics are evidence you are a shape-shifter bigfoot disguised as human. I am now currently working to prove a human skull won't fit inside your head. Work is going on very slowly, but it is progressing... Stay tunned...
Your research is incomplete without the second half.
I can't provide names of confessors because Green doesn't give them, but he's said someone would pop up every couple of years. People confess to murders they didn't commit, too.
According to Bob, he needed to keep hush in order to get paid. He thought he would eventually get paid. Gimlin sued Patty Patterson for money, right? Numerous people in Yakima knew about BH being Patty right after the incident. Many of Bob's relatives saw the suit in his trunk before Patterson & Gimlin came to retrieve it. It was never seen, or at least accounted for, again.
Or that he didn't know where the film site was, or that he named three different creators of the suit?
You mean he couldn't remember certain specifics of the site. He knew where they went to film him. Three different creators of the suit? I thought he always said that Patterson made it. I would expect Patterson to tell BH that he had made the entire suit himself, even if he had started with a purchased gorilla costume.
Or that his account isn't born out by Titmus' investigation of the site?
Those aren't entirely compelling anyway. BH has passed two lie detector tests. Murphy said that RP passed one. Has Bob Gimlin done one of those tests?
If you want to believe this self-agrandizing liar, that's your choice, but it's mine to believe the Disney and Universal experts of the time, the Russian biomechanics experts, Roger Patterson, Bob Gimlin and my own eyes.
I believe that Patterson was a liar, and that Gimlin still is. Heironimus is willing to go on a live radio broadcast and face critics (Pattycakes) and answer questions. Gimlin was invited to that show but refused. We almost had BH & BG on the same live show. No such luck. Patty Patterson was invited. No go.
You are quite welcome to your little Pattycake Club. It suits your way of thinking.
Actually it does....but just how much is debatable.
But considering how long it took...on this sewer of a discussion board...to show something as simple and obvious as Patty's fingers bending...attempting that would simply be another HUGE waste of my time.
I enjoyed watching the skeptics here cough-up anything and everything they could to explain the OBVIOUS finger-bending as something else.....it was a true pleasure.
(It was as if they had a NEED to....for some strange reason.)
LTC's interview for the "Skeptical Scientist" magazine was one of the highlights!
But, fortunately...there are much more pleasant boards to discuss things on than this pit.
Bye bye.....you skeptical idiots!
SweatyYeti, stop insulting people.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic Posted By: Patricio Elicer
Spectacular implosion, though certainly expected. It's been quite entertaining to listen Stiffy's ranting about finger bending over so many pages and tellingly avoiding for as long as possible coming to the point of it. Stiffy's always known his ramblings to be bereft of a point but it's always been a hoot to see him pretend as though it wasn't painfully obvious.
Stiffy: 'The fingers bend, it's obvious.'
Skeptic: 'OK, and...?'
Stiffy: 'You're all brain-dead idiots, the fingers bend.'
Skeptic: 'Very clever. If the fingers bend...?'
Stiffy: 'If the fingers bend, you must pretend.'
Skeptic: 'Pretend what?'
Stiffy: '....'
Stiffy: 'The fingers bend, you're all dishonest.'
Skeptic: 'Do you have some semblance of a point?'
Stiffy: 'I don't have time for that right now.'
Yes, this is Stiffy's specialty- avoiding making any substantial point whilst engaging in all manner of games and accusing people of everything he does right before your eyes.
So there we have it then, Stiffy? Being pressed to come to a point about finger bending is what has you storming out the door? Somehow, I just don't think we're so easily deprived of you. It's funny you mentioning other more pleasant boards to discuss bigfoot on considering they haven't found you so pleasant. Indeed, I'd be very surprised if we don't see you very soon. You see, Melissa's board doesn't tolerate the tactics you employ and it seems a very tall order for you to follow the simplest of guidelines there.
Yes, with all the CT'ers and many other irrational belief holders with long wind and short tempers running around here you've no doubt noticed not long after you came here that skins are thicker and the board tolerates your silliness much more. It's just in the time since you haven't seemed to quite figure out the reason why- it's simply because your bigfoot rants or the substantially similar 9/11 was an inside job claims are so obviously silliness and their proponents unable to discuss the subject at hand without resorting to ad homs and other such games that things are so comparatively tolerant here.
So, since it does not seem within your abilities to resist the urge to mock those who counter your bigfoot silliness, you are banned from the BFF, and are being warned not to continue such behaviour at Melissa's board I think I'll say 'see you soon'.
Thanks very much for the first hand account on the Ape Canyon publicity still I recall Dfoot referring to that incident but never knew the origins and for that inhuman gate unearthly arm length demo, nothing like testing a hypothesis!
Here’s my PGF top ten list, all from memory most unverifiable/anecdotal/subject of vast volumes of scrutiny:
1. Well it was similar to Ape canyon
2. Faithful Indian Companion wig (BG)
3. BH in the Bigfoot Hunters Publicity Still clearly he’s not involved?
3.1 RP borrowing BH horse for a few days, clearly he’s not involved.
4. RP making practice casts for the camera shop owner (only once)
5. “Bigfoot Central” office photo staged at the local high school or was the High School using “Bigfoot Central” as a “no evidence left behind” program?
6. RP being filmed casting fake prints for the 90 second “documentary” as told by Leonardo de Krantz
7. I fell, I jumped, I fell off the horse
8. Calling British Columbia for tracking dogs because Saskatchewan line was busy.
9. No late fees on all camera rentals
10. When you absolutely positively have to get a film developed overnight in the middle of the densest darkest forest in 1969
I waited a few days believing Sweaty’s goodbye was more like a James Brown encore than an actual swan song, but so much for my intuition. I was hoping to go over all my points one more time.
Was it me our where the last few pages a case study for “how to apply all known logical fallacies in one sitting”?
Just a general question to all scoftics, has anyone considered putting together a repository of all the images, tests and general rebuttals to many of the PGF & general BF claims? I have a folder or two packed with word docs comparing RP & BG testimonies on the day of the filming, general quotes an info and I have tons of images. ape canyon campfire, staged casting. Thoughts?
Rick
*eta I believe/feel/intuit all this to true, if you define believe/feel/intuit as i have no proof
Damn foiled again, (maybe it was the mayan calendar i was using?)
I actually see "no proof" as a clever tactic one that lulls scoftics into an over confident malaise, which is followed by a nice dose of Appeal to Authority, Appeal to Belief and Biased Sampling.
As a lurker on this thread, what really struck me about Sweaty's posts was not so much the ad homs as the avoidance of direct questions. Frequently he would simply ignore the question, if he was asked often enough, why, he was simply too busy, and would certainily answer it tomorrow. When tomorrow came, he had time for another rambling post, but somehow never found the time to answer the offending question.
The Malaysian officials of global conservation organization WWF said the two-minute video, recorded in February by a camera hidden in the jungle, was the first to capture the behavior of the elusive two-horned Borneo rhino in the wild.
There are only between 25 and 50 of the rhinos left alive in the dense jungles deep in the heart of the Malaysian state of Sabah on Borneo, and the animals are so secretive that the first still picture of one was taken only last year, the WWF said.
Of course, PNW's forests must be much harder to work than Borneo's jungles... And the thousands of bigfeet claimed to exist in continental USA much harder to find than a few tens of rhinos...
As a lurker on this thread, what really struck me about Sweaty's posts was not so much the ad homs as the avoidance of direct questions. Frequently he would simply ignore the question, if he was asked often enough, why, he was simply too busy, and would certainily answer it tomorrow. When tomorrow came, he had time for another rambling post, but somehow never found the time to answer the offending question.
While saying that he'll never ignore a question (unless it's not directly pertinent to bigfoot or pertinent but asked by me) and then saying that skeptics are dodging his simple bigfoot truth revealing questions.
I saw a spectacularily rare and exotic animal and I had reservations about killing it... nah, I just shot it through the tailbone and started clubbing it on the head. Unfortunately idiots with guns are abundant and then some.
I saw a spectacularily rare and exotic animal and I had reservations about killing it... nah, I just shot it through the tailbone and started clubbing it on the head. Unfortunately idiots with guns are abundant and then some.
Unfortunately the "kill it" reaction is much more common than the "let it live". Some people have it deeply entrenched in their culture. Animals are seen as an endless resource, created to be used by mankind the way it suits better or as pests that must be killed. Quite often its shoot first see what it was later.
That's exactly why I doubt the reason for a bigfoot specimen has not been shot down is its supposed resemblance to humans, small numbers, elusiveness, etc.
I know many people will oppose to the above and say most hunters will not behave like this. But how representative is this behavior? I think that nowdays, educated sportsmen/women in the USA are carefull and trigger-selective... But what about the trigger-happy ones? Even if we think just on those who are not trigger-happy hunters, how many of these would hesitate before shooting a giant ape? Remember, if it exists, its probably an ape, not a human being. And how was it in the past? Or how is it even nowdays, in areas where similar unknown hominids are supposed to roam and humans hunt and kill everything -apes included?
Hunters have not bagged a bigfoot specimen by the same reason no bigfoot ever became became roadkill. Which is the very reason why there are no reliable evidence for its existence.
Quite often its shoot first see what it was later.
That's exactly why I doubt the reason for a bigfoot specimen has not been shot down is its supposed resemblance to humans, small numbers, elusiveness, etc.
Hunters have not bagged a bigfoot specimen by the same reason no bigfoot ever became became roadkill. Which is the very reason why there are no reliable evidence for its existence.
If one takes the example of alledged finger bending in the PGF and skeptics offering mundane possibilities to account for this claim we see something rather amusing. In this case the proponent who challenges skeptics to account for this alledgedly obvious feature then proceeds to mock what is suggested yet seems to miss the myriad of ridiculous speculations put forth by footers to account for all the ways which bigfoot eludes identification. They do this with obvious delight which seems to cause them to forget that on the one hand they're talking about a rather irrelevant suggestion concerning the PGF and the fact there is no reliable evidence for bigfoot on the other. In such desperation to grasp at anything to quibble about with skeptics they just lose perspective completely.
So sasquatches are just to human looking to get shot by a hunter, huh? To bad this doesn't always work with other humans (drapier beat me to it). Oh no, wait. They have been shot but they just didn't go down. They live across the continent and are known to approach farms and the like but no harrassed landowner has managed to dirt-nap one such intruder. So people shoot other people in such situations but 8ft hairy monsters are too iffy? But wait, you scoftics! We have a panicked 911 call, so there.
What's more telling as to the nature of bigfoot- suggestions accounting for possible finger movement in the PGF or suggestions accounting for the lack of gamecam pics?
I often wonder if the subject really doesn’t matter, meaning we could be talking about any fringe subject and someone that’s a proponent would behave very similar.
There does at times seem be a fundamental barrier in discussing these topics. It’s as though a private rule set of logic is being used, most of the time I see it infuriating a lot of people, for me it can be quite sad, knowing that this perspective probably makes for a difficult life almost a guaranteed method to stay insulated from others and/or hold an authoritarian dogmatic position over others, it truly doesn’t matter what the facts are. It really does appear that how one feels about a subject is given extraordinary weight regardless of validity. There seems to be a paradox, not knowing that you don’t know which can only be remedied by learning about what you don’t know.
I’ve posted this link a few times, not sure if anyone has read this study or not but to me it’s relevant
“Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments”
For me I almost wish that before a subject is even discussed that an agreed upon methodology could be adopted. Some agreed upon standard for evidence, not just cite sources, but can someone clearly see that if an argument is structured using common logical fallacies, regardless if the conclusion is true or not that one must restructure your position logically before anyone is required to accept it. The “extraordinary claims” mantra really seems to not register, if the premise is highly unlikely, you may hope that it’s true but no one else is required to without “extraordinary evidence”. Standards that apply to one argument must apply to another.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
