Bigfoot - serious, not follies

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

How come we're the childish ones all of a sudden, you're the one who still believes in monsters and fairy stories when all the rest of us can see there's no evidence that they exist.

[William Parcher]

Originally posted by Kenny 10 Bellys
How come we're the childish ones all of a sudden, you're the one who still believes in monsters and fairy stories when all the rest of us can see there's no evidence that they exist.

When one is engaged in perpetuating a myth (as if it were a reality), one is forced to typecast skeptics as being childish or generally ignorant. It's just part of the big game. Bigfoot is a game, not a real creature.

Bigfoot is supposed to have been thriving in the lower 48 states for centuries (primarily in the PNW). Where is Bigfoot? Why can we never ever get our hands on Bigfoot biological material?

I repeat... Where the hell is Bigfoot?

[LTC8K6]

It's my time and effort, and if I wish to play the game it's my business.

I perpetuate nothing, I combat it.

Others who come along and want more info need to hear both sides of the issue. In order for them to get that info, someone has to present it, and support it.

Some young folks undoubtedly recently saw the NG special on Bigfoot. Likely they went on the internet and ended up at BFRO, BFF, etc.. Hopefully some of them ended up here and read some of our points.

Bigfoot is supposed to have been thriving in the lower 48 states for centuries (primarily in the PNW). Where is Bigfoot? Why can we never ever get our hands on Bigfoot biological material?

I repeat... Where the hell is Bigfoot?

Your questions are good ones, and the believers have no real answers to them.

However, the believers do have what they consider to be answers to them, and people may not realize that the answers are not valid without someone else pointing it out.

When I was a child, I was given that damn Von Daniken book without anyone around to show me the other side. I had no internet back then, so I couldn't go to a cool forum like JREF and see the other side, either.

I actually do believe that trying to combat Bigfoot believers is futile in the large picture. I think it is extremely important in the small picture though. A few people have read what I have said and they have started to think.....

I'm certain of it.

[LTC8K6]

Patterson was strongly influenced by the earlier 1955 William Roe case in eastern British Columbia involving a female Bigfoot.

Roe's description of the creature that he saw is very similar to the subject of the Patterson film, as are numerous aspects of the encounter. Consider the following from Roe: "...as it came closer I saw by its breasts that it was a female...Its broad frame was straight from shoulder to tip...its arms were much thicker than a man's arms and longer reaching almost to its knees..[T]he nose was broad and flat..the hair that covered it (the face), leaving bare only the parts of the face around the mouth nose and ears...its neck also was unhuman, thicker and shorter than any man's I have ever seen...It looked directly at me through an opening in the brush. A look of amazement crossed its face... [It] straightened up to its full height and started to walk rapidly back the way it had come...again turning its head to look in my direction."

In his book, Patterson illustrates a scene from the Roe case that might as well be the design for what would later be the Patterson film. The resemblance is striking: the position and stance of the creature in the frame, the much-discussed hairy breasts, the general form of the creature, etc. suggest that this illustration was the storyboard for what would later become known as the Patterson film.

Indeed, when we peruse Patterson's book we find one illustration in particular that could explain one aspect of the Patterson Bigfoot: its large hirsute breasts. How many of us would have designed a Bigfoot with breasts like the one in the Patterson film? Some have suggested that the female nature of the Bigfoot in the Patterson film mitigates in favor of its reality in that it is unlikely that a hoaxer would have created such a Bigfoot. Patterson has drawings of two female Bigfoots in his book.



http://www.strangemag.com/pattersonfilm30th.html

Bah! I meant this for the P/G film thread but I'll leave it here.

[bruto]

Originally posted by LTC8K6
http://www.strangemag.com/pattersonfilm30th.html

... The resemblance is striking:...

Bah! I meant this for the P/G film thread but I'll leave it here.

I'm inclined to believe that the P/G film is of a bloke in a suit, and that the resemblance is contrived, but of course, to be fair, we have to acknowledge that IF there really were a bigfoot, and IF both sightings were true, then it would be surprising if the resemblance were not striking.

[LTC8K6]

I think it would be Patterson's drawing of the pose as Patty looked back that would be striking.

The Roe case was 12 years earlier and far away from Bluff Creek.

This is sort of like the argument that Wallace copied the Bluff Creek tracks rather than making them.

[LAL]

Originally posted by MoonDragn
You know they found the couple who originated the whole big foot hoax, they used to go out in the woods with these carved wooden feet and walk around making footprints. They did a whole documentary on it. The photos of big foot were all of the woman in a costume.

Even notice in those pictures or footages, big foot's fur is always nice and neat... If you were trampling around the forest, you'd have alot of stuff caught in your fur. I don't think they carry around the comb just for the camera.

You're wrong. Sightings were going on long before the Wallaces and they only faked souveniers. Footprints were found in the Sierras in April by a PhD. Ray Wallace is dead

In fact most wild animals do look rather neat, at least from a distance. In one sighting the witness noticed a burr; they probably groom each other, like other primates, but lone males might have more "stuff caught in the fur". There were two others near Bluff Creek when the PGF was shot. Patty was the middle-sized one. As part of a group, she probably had help in grooming.

Compare itty, bitty Mrs. Wallace to the creature in the Patterson film. Does she look like someone who could bound across a clearing in Northeastern Washing in 1996? Was she the hulking male in the Freeman 1994 footage? Was she in Manitoba this spring appearing to be 9' tall?

[LAL]

Originally posted by LTC8K6
http://www.strangemag.com/pattersonfilm30th.html

Bah! I meant this for the P/G film thread but I'll leave it here.

Yeah. All female Bigfeet look alike.

[LAL]

Originally posted by Kenny 10 Bellys
How come we're the childish ones all of a sudden, you're the one who still believes in monsters and fairy stories when all the rest of us can see there's no evidence that they exist.

I've never seen an atom, either, but I accept that they exist.

I find the ridicule childish. I haven't believed in monsters and fairy stories since I was four.

There's plenty of evidence. Your refusal to see it is not my problem.

[LTC8K6]

Yeah. All female Bigfeet look alike.

So far.... :D

I wonder why you didn't tell us that the P/G footage on the LMS dvd is from a zoomed in copy of the film rather than showing the full frames?

That is, the copy of the film used to make LMS was zoomed in when it was made.

I won't comment on the reasons behind this but I will say it sure makes for confusion when you compare stills and you don't realize that this was done when the film was copied.

http://www.intergate.com/~gregorygatz/images/FOOT1.GIF

http://www.texasbigfoot.net/patty3.jpg

[RayG]

Originally posted by LAL
You're wrong. Sightings were going on long before the Wallaces and they only faked souveniers.

Ahem... only faked souveniers? Like the tape sent to John Green with supposed bigfoot screams on it? (reported on the BFRO website)

The sample of Wallace mischief on the BFRO page spans a period of at least 22 years (1967-89).
http://www.bfro.net/news/Wallace.asp#achievements

Sounds like a little more than a one-time incident.

Footprints were found in the Sierras in April by a PhD. Ray Wallace is dead.

That's like saying Doug Bower and David Chorley have to be responsible for ALL crop circles because they confessed to hoaxing a couple hundred. Not sure I understand the logic. I don't see any evidence crop circles are made by anything other than humans.

Compare itty, bitty Mrs. Wallace to the creature in the Patterson film. Does she look like someone who could bound across a clearing in Northeastern Washing in 1996? Was she the hulking male in the Freeman 1994 footage? Was she in Manitoba this spring appearing to be 9' tall?

Did someone claim Mrs. Wallace was the Patterson, Freeman, or Manitoba subject? If you're trying to say she was NEVER involved in any faked bigfoot film, you've clearly not read all the available information.

Lu, all the belief or wishful-thinking in the world ain't gonna make bigfoot real. Irrefutable evidence is required -- like a body. Footprints and fuzzy films just don't cut it.

RayG

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally posted by LAL
I've never seen an atom, either, but I accept that they exist.

I find the ridicule childish. I haven't believed in monsters and fairy stories since I was four.

There's plenty of evidence. Your refusal to see it is not my problem. You still don't get it do you?

Yes, Because YOU haven't seen an atom, it doesn't mean they don't exist.

But if no one had ever seen one, it would be a different story.

Psssss, Lu, don't tell anyone, but we can look at atoms...



I wonder if Kranze or Meldrum has explained the ' donut ' muscles on Patty? I would like to see a drawing of how such a muscle attaches to the bone, and what role it plays in arm movement...


Of course , since no actual Bigfoot has ever been examined, whose to say that her musculature is unlike anything else on earth.. Surely some of the experts over at BFF, who just ooh and ahhh over Pattys bulging muscles and effortless stride, could offer an opinion.

[LTC8K6]

long before the Wallaces and they only faked souveniers.

Now why in the world would Lu bother to try to get that line past anyone? That line would be howled at even at BFF.....

[Correa Neto]

I suppose this could be a "Class A" sighting report in BFRO database...:p
http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/features/suspects/61295
:teacher:

[casebro]

Originally posted by Correa Neto
I suppose this could be a "Class A" sighting report in BFRO database...:p
http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/features/suspects/61295
:teacher:

Not the whole article, but the stats in the last paragraph will:

"Bigfoot sex assaults on humans are up 62 percent. "

Hmmm, did the genetic tests from the semen samples come back yeti? The tests were probably complicated by the presence of synthetic pubic hairs ? You know the ones, they look very similar to Buffalo hairs?

[bruto]

Originally posted by Correa Neto
I suppose this could be a "Class A" sighting report in BFRO database...:p
http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/features/suspects/61295
:teacher:

Well, you never know. Using Lu's criteria, you shouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater and all. Just because they sometimes make up stories doesn't mean we should disbelieve a good looking one. And even if they did make this one up they might have based it on a real bigfoot sighting so it ought to count for something, right?

Actually, I doubt even Lu would go for this one. The dwarf is just so unlikely.

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

Hey, I visited the BFRO website to check out their A-class reports and I'm now a believer. How about that!

When you read through the website of a group of dedicated bleevers you certainly get your eyes opened for you. There was me thinking they had nothing but myths, poor circumstantial evidence and a film of a guy in a suit, when in actual fact they have tons of crap, hair, foot and butt prints, and no one has ever successfully completely disproved that the film shows a squatch absolutely. I also need to see Sasquatch: Legend meets Science because according to the site...

"If you want to stun and humble a skeptic, sit him down in front of this program"

Apparently the DVD shows the 3 films and you can plainly see in them that although they walk like guys in suits you cant prove conclusively that they're guys in suits, and indeed it's tough to walk like a human like that. They also show you life-sized models of long extinct animals from other lands and tell you bigfoot legends and show several scientists finding nothing conclusive and, oh, everything. Isn't it exciting? It's just a shame they haven't found one of the creatures ever anywhere in the world, because there's thousands of 'em all over the place.

[Thurkon]

Originally posted by casebro

"Bigfoot sex assaults on humans are up 62 percent. "


Dang! Now we really know the secret of the Sasquatch!

Bigfeet want our women.

Now we know where the BFRO obtained all their data on mating habits...

[Thurkon]

Originally posted by Kenny 10 Bellys
Hey, I visited the BFRO website to check out their A-class reports and I'm now a believer. How about that!

When you read through the website of a group of dedicated bleevers you certainly get your eyes opened for you. There was me thinking they had nothing but myths, poor circumstantial evidence and a film of a guy in a suit, when in actual fact they have tons of crap, hair, foot and butt prints, and no one has ever successfully completely disproved that the film shows a squatch absolutely. I also need to see Sasquatch: Legend meets Science because according to the site...

"If you want to stun and humble a skeptic, sit him down in front of this program"

Apparently the DVD shows the 3 films and you can plainly see in them that although they walk like guys in suits you cant prove conclusively that they're guys in suits, and indeed it's tough to walk like a human like that. They also show you life-sized models of long extinct animals from other lands and tell you bigfoot legends and show several scientists finding nothing conclusive and, oh, everything. Isn't it exciting? It's just a shame they haven't found one of the creatures ever anywhere in the world, because there's thousands of 'em all over the place.

Approximately 2000-6000, according to those in the know.

That's right, my friend.

Welcome to the World of Bigfoot! You've taken your first step into the exciting universe of footprint pontification, Patterson/Gimlin worship and fruit-baiting Bigfeet for ass prints.

Because you need to be exposed to The Best Evidence Available (tm), even if that includes the plaster cast of a squatch bum and gnarglies.

First off, read Krantz.

Second, remember that once a hoaxer does not mean always a hoaxer. Here at the Church of Bigfoot, we allow past sinners to repent of their former ways.

Steer clear of the temptations of the dark one, the evil Heironimous-Wallace, Lord of Deception.

Finally, if you have a PhD and believe in Bigfoot, you are one of the chosen ones...here to light the way and show the world the reality of the all elusive Bigfoot. Hail Meldrum, Hail Green, Hail Dahinden!

[Correa Neto]

hehehehe

What about these "bigfoot pictures"? Any further comments?

http://www.lorencoleman.com/myakka.html
Someone got pics from an orang-utang and had fun with footers, I guess.

And talking about bigfoot sexuall assaults, what about this:

Excerpt from
http://www.lorencoleman.com/bigfoot_iraq.html

"Cryptozoologist Loren Coleman says the legend of Bigfoot dates back 5000 years to ancient Mesopotamia -- now modern Iraq -- and a hairy creature named "Enkidu."

Enkidu plays a major role in the Epic of King Gilgamesh, and Coleman claims Gilgamesh and Enkidu engaged in a lot of cross-species gay sex, with an occasional threesome."

:cs:

Where´s the baby?

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

That baby IS King of the Bigfeet tribe, he's the one who has them all hiding from everyone everywhere, until the time is right for him to strike!

Tune in next week when we make some more stuff up about mythical animals and people take it as gospel.

[Correa Neto]

Originally posted by casebro
...snip...Hmmm, did the genetic tests from the semen samples come back yeti? ...snip...

"come back yeti"? LMAO!!!
Talking about Freudian lapes, I mean lapses:D...

Originally posted by Kenny 10 Bellys
That baby IS King of the Bigfeet tribe, he's the one who has them all hiding from everyone everywhere, until the time is right for him to strike!
...snip...

:DWell, I was asking about the baby within all the bathwater that we are throwing away, LOL. Still haven´t found any baby, I mean reliable evidence within all the water, I mean bigfeet "evidence"...:D

But I´m sure Gilgamesh and Enkidu must have had beautifull hairy children... We can´t prove they hadn´t ,after all...

[William Parcher]

Lu, your steadfast belief in Bigfoot is far more mysterious than the Bigfoot myth itself. It is your kind of faulty rationality and reason that also leads people to believe that creationism is the proper explanation of earthly life.

The 2500+ postings about Bigfoot in this forum have far more to do with you and your way of thinking, than they have to do with Bigfoot. Really, these postings can't have any true relevance to Bigfoot, since Bigfoot isn't real in the very first place.

Why not just enjoy this great American myth, instead of pasting, sputtering and flailing like a possessed gerbil?

Did you know that it would require biological material to show that Bigfoot isn't a myth? Do you realize that such evidence does not exist?

[Yeah_Right]

All this talk, and still no bigfoot? Well I am disappointed.

[MoonDragn]

Didn't I see a show where patterson's wife came forward and said that the footage was faked? She was the one in the costume and they even showed the props and the costume they used. The woman on this show was over 6' and said she wore these fake shoes to make her look taller.

[Skeptical Greg]

Didn't I see a show where patterson's wife came forward and said that the footage was faked? She was the one in the costume and they even showed the props and the costume they used. The woman on this show was over 6' and said she wore these fake shoes to make her look taller.I missed that.. Doesn't sound like Patterson's wife.. I understand she is very reclusive, and guards the copyright to the film with an iron hand..

There is a book that claims to expose it as a hoax..

The Making of Bigfoot: The Inside Story (Hardcover)

by Greg Long

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1591021391/qid=1128375818/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-7614657-7598262?v=glance&s=books

A man named Bob Heironimus, claims to be the bloke in the suit..

[LTC8K6]

Sounds like Ray Wallace's wife, MoonDragn.

[MoonDragn]

Hmmm I forget the names. I just remember it was just after the husband died and she came forward and revealed that the film was all faked. In the documentary though she said that they did not use their real name etc.

[LTC8K6]

Yep, that would be Wallace's wife. He was the guy with sets of wooden bigfoot feet. There is a NG Special where you can see a couple of sets of fake feet in the back of a pickup truck.

He filmed his wife in a bigfoot suit. That would be what the admission was about, not the P/G film.

He may or may not have had anything to do with the P/G film. Patterson knew and talked to Ray Wallace.

[William Parcher]

I wonder what it would cost and if anyone could perfectly replicate the footage of Wallace's wife in the Bigfoot costume.

[Skeptical Greg]

I wonder what it would cost and if anyone could perfectly replicate the footage of Wallace's wife in the Bigfoot costume. No way.. I hear it was actually a Bigfoot in a Mrs. Wallace costume in a Bigfoot Costume.

And we no longer have the technology to duplicate this..

[LTC8K6]

I wonder what it would cost and if anyone could perfectly replicate the footage of Wallace's wife in the Bigfoot costume.

A guy I know at Disney World said it would raise the national debt just to try....

[Kenny 10 Bellys]

....or we could save the cash and go do something worthwhile with our time whilst we wait another 10,000 years for this mythical animal to actually leave some real evidence behind.

[William Parcher]

Many decades of the idea of Bigfoot with no real physical evidence. Bigfoot is a big joke right? I mean, this is a weird joke that people play on each other, right?

How can this possibly be a real and large animal living in American forests with nothing to show?

[Correa Neto]

Many decades of the idea of Bigfoot with no real physical evidence. Bigfoot is a big joke right? I mean, this is a weird joke that people play on each other, right?

How can this possibly be a real and large animal living in American forests with nothing to show?

Read Krantz!

Sorry, it was just too strong, I could not resist...:mdance: :duck:

[William Parcher]

Oklahoma Bigfooters testify! It's all on video. Ivory Tower science ain't got nothin' on Okie hillbillies.

A female Sasquatch came to this camera with a juvenile, and uh, I've got a picture of something...

Well, I'm gonna tell you somethin'... he's there. I've seen him twice.

I've been a Pastor for 45 years and what I'm about to tell ya... my church members think I'm...

I had my headlight on him...low beam...and I seen this critter standing right on the yellow line.

...and there was two big ones and one small one...kinda like a family.

Here, I'll show you where it happened at... now follow us...

...now we sees, you know, the outline of hair all the way around it... where whatever it was had a, you know, a humanlike face... and stuck it's face to the window...

Best quote on the video preview comes from the singer in the band...

Tell me why haven't I heard from you?

Where is Bigfoot? Why, he's bustin' a move right there in the backwoods of Oklahoma!

Watch the preview to the Honobia Bigfoot Festival Video (http://http://www.okvideoguy.com/bigfoot/?v=4')

[erikbeckjord]

Many decades of the idea of Bigfoot with no real physical evidence. Bigfoot is a big joke right? I mean, this is a weird joke that people play on each other, right?

How can this possibly be a real and large animal living in American forests with nothing to show?


reply: correct - there is no real zoological animal, but I've seen them, and they do paranormal things.

Call this "choice c"

very hard for people who cannot think outside the box to swallow.

Blobby

[erikbeckjord]

Do you mean Ray Wallace or Bob Heironimus?

Neither originated any hoax and both have been thoroughly debunked.

I find it amusing there are still people who know so little about this they can make statements like yours above.

[B]

Erik does not speak for serious researchers. He is, to put it mildly, a kook.

Reply:

Lu wants to think "serious researchers" only look for f&b.

But what if serious researchers did so, and found para info instead?

Are they supposed to hide their heads in the sand?

Lu - think outside the box.

Blobby