Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3 - Page 210

wheunis · 28th April 2012, 09:55 PM

Seemingly offtopic, but I do have a point... I think...

What is the general concensus on the credibility of the magazine National Wildlife?

Is it even worth using something from them in any way?

RayG · 28th April 2012, 10:03 PM

Originally Posted by GT/CS

1986?
I'm sure there haven't been any improvements since then.

I haven't heard of any.

Just as pseudoscientific today as it was back in 1986.

RayG

tsig · 29th April 2012, 07:39 AM

Originally Posted by wheunis

Seemingly offtopic, but I do have a point... I think...

What is the general concensus on the credibility of the magazine National Wildlife?

Is it even worth using something from them in any way?

Then make your point.

Correa Neto · 29th April 2012, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by wheunis

(*) My position(s) having been similarly twisted ad absurdum, out of context numerous times, and ridiculed in this short span of time, I hold no value to the statement.

I expect you to not distort or cherry-pick what I say, regardless of what you feel others did to you.

Originally Posted by wheunis

To answer you, regardless of you believing, or even sparing as much a quarter breath to give a scrat;
Yes I have considered exactly that. Criminals very often open their mouths.
And for a lack of statistics at hand, what percentage of them snitched a bunch of lies? Is that information known to me? Factually? No it is not.

The very fact thay a % of criminals and politicians open their mouths when they feel they have not got their hands in their cuts is enough to show your argument is flawed.

Its like the "Bob walks like Patty therefore Bob is Patty" line. Its not good evidence because other people can also walk like Patty. Its not exclusive.

Originally Posted by wheunis

I welcome yet again, for your consideration, that nothing but circumstantial coincidences and a "confession" stands as "evidence" for Bob being truthful.

I must plead that you ask yourself the pertinent questions, regarding Bob's confessions.
He said himself that he never confessed, for fear of prosecution. To his own claim he only pursued the matter after legal advice assured him that repercussions would not be forthcoming.
That matter is rather important. And I have brought it up previously.
Where is the courts in all this?

If you get done out of a "contract" by the others on your team, do you run to the media, or the court?
So then, I ask (of you, Bob, anybody) - why was his first stop P. Morris and a media reveal?

How does that behavior not smell odd to anyone?

Nope.
It is exactly what I would have to happened if someone who took part in a fraud and had not received his/hers cut, someone whom initially had no intentions of being identified as taking part of the scam, after some time thought "to the hell with it all, they are profiting with the scam and I haven't got my deserved share".

Its not unusual for politicians and criminals to search for the media to expose and blow a scheme they want busted for some reason.

wheunis · 29th April 2012, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by tsig

Then make your point.

Well I am not about to make a point, when that point is based on something from said source, if said source is a publication of ill repute...

So again... I only ask, before I try to make such a point, that I get some small sample of general consensus of whether or not that publication has merit in these necks of the woods...

Correa Neto · 29th April 2012, 01:12 PM

What would Admiral Ackbar say?

Deacondark · 29th April 2012, 03:04 PM

Polygraph detectors don't work properly on me. They say I'm lying about nearly everything, including my name. I worked for a company that had some thefts once, and everyone had to take a polygraph exam. I ended up taking 3 of them, from 3 different examiners. They even said I was lying about my name, date of birth, and hometown. So we set up questions that they knew I would not be lying about (what is the address of this office, what color are my assistants eyes, etc. but in yes or no form) and it said I was lying about them. The examiners said about 2 % of the population has that problem.

Deacondark · 29th April 2012, 03:07 PM

To make my above post fit with the OP: they also said that polyrapht tend to fail on the side of saying someone is lying when they're not, as opposed to being truthful when they are actually lying.

This was in about 1987, so things might have changed since then.

Skeptical Greg · 29th April 2012, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by wheunis

Well I am not about to make a point, when that point is based on something from said source, if said source is a publication of ill repute...

So again... I only ask, before I try to make such a point, that I get some small sample of general consensus of whether or not that publication has merit in these necks of the woods...

I don't think that publication has ever been mentioned here before ..

Since you don't seem to have much respect for any of the other opinions here, why would you look to us for an opinion about this publication ?

wheunis · 29th April 2012, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

I don't think that publication has ever been mentioned here before ..

Since you don't seem to have much respect for any of the other opinions here, why would you look to us for an opinion about this publication ?

Parcher actually has made reference to it, albeit in such a way that I am unable to determine whether it was considered ridicule or otherwise.

Wrt respect for opinions: I have showed the same respect given.
In that, I respect your right to have your opinion, but that does not include any clause where I must agree with it, nor abandon my own for any reason other than evidence presented to the contrary.
Same as my opinion has no evidence (yet), neither does any other differing opinion on the same matter have such evidence (yet).

AttorneyTom · 29th April 2012, 04:48 PM

I had a quick question(s):

Has anyone on the Forum been to the Bluff Creek site and is it accessible by road etc..? Is access any different now than it was 44 years ago ? Tried to google it but just a bunch of BFF silliness. Thanks !

William Parcher · 29th April 2012, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by wheunis

Well I am not about to make a point, when that point is based on something from said source, if said source is a publication of ill repute...

So again... I only ask, before I try to make such a point, that I get some small sample of general consensus of whether or not that publication has merit in these necks of the woods...

Originally Posted by wheunis

Parcher actually has made reference to it, albeit in such a way that I am unable to determine whether it was considered ridicule or otherwise.

Well...

Originally Posted by National Wildlife Magazine - Dick Kirkpatrick, Executive Director, April-May 1968

...It could be a man in an ape suit, too, though if it is a hoax, I can't understand why anyone would go to all that time and trouble and expense to perpetuate it, because nobody seems to be getting anything back from it. Even Roger Patterson has gone into the hole financially to make and show his pictures...

When National Wildlife tells you that marmots hibernate in the winter they are being reputable. When they tell you that Patterson made no money from the PGF they are being disreputable.

Here...

Quote:

..It could all be bogus, too, though if it is bogus, I can't understand why any reputable magazine would go to all that time and trouble and expense to feature it, because nobody seems to be getting anything back from it. Even National Wildlife Magazine has gone into the hole financially to write about and publish Patterson's story and pictures...

wheunis · 29th April 2012, 05:32 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

Well...

When National Wildlife tells you that marmots hibernate in the winter they are being reputable. When they tell you that Patterson made no money from the PGF they are being disreputable.

Here...

Thanks Parcher.
I shall then proceed to use their information as it is, and let discussion be the judge.

I will start on it - might just end up being nonsensical wall of text, but I feel something might arise from it, even if it is my own realization in some way.

William Parcher · 29th April 2012, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by wheunis

might just end up being nonsensical wall of text

Please, no. Don't post it unless it makes sense and is rational. Show it to somebody in your house and ask them if it makes any sense before posting it. Please.

William Parcher · 29th April 2012, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by parnassus on BFF

1) Patterson certainly believed in Bigfoot.

How do you know? How do you know that his belief wasn't also a hoax?

Skeptical Greg · 29th April 2012, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by wheunis

Wrt respect for opinions: I have showed the same respect given.
.....

So, is that what this is all about?

If we rub yours, you'll rub ours?

GT/CS · 29th April 2012, 06:11 PM

Little Mak?

No, never mind.

AttorneyTom · 29th April 2012, 06:42 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

So, is that what this is all about?

If we rub yours, you'll rub ours?

No rubbing here.. just wondered about the access to the site ? If anyone knows.. I will take my answer off the air.. thanks.

wheunis · 29th April 2012, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by AttorneyTom

No rubbing here.. just wondered about the access to the site ? If anyone knows.. I will take my answer off the air.. thanks.

At one point, I was looking at an angle on the story over cars, horses, etc.

Did have an informal discussion over it with my friend's dad, as he worked for a logging company at that time.

Would that information be useful?

AttorneyTom · 29th April 2012, 06:59 PM

Originally Posted by wheunis

At one point, I was looking at an angle on the story over cars, horses, etc.

Did have an informal discussion over it with my friend's dad, as he worked for a logging company at that time.

Would that information be useful?

I was just wondering what the access to the site is now. and how it compares with 1967 ? Roads etc.. ? That was all. Thought maybe someone on the Forum might have actually visited it ?

Skeptical Greg · 29th April 2012, 07:14 PM

There has been considerable discussion in the past.. I don't think any of the JREF regulars have been to the area.

Munns was involved in a planned expedition that was featured on one of the Discovery channel shows, which included the use of a helicopter..
I don't think there is road access today ..

There is no indication the exact location of the site can be identified today.

wheunis · 29th April 2012, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by AttorneyTom

I was just wondering what the access to the site is now. and how it compares with 1967 ? Roads etc.. ? That was all. Thought maybe someone on the Forum might have actually visited it ?

Not me.
Neither friend's dad.
I just took a topographic map and googleEarth snaps to him.
Didn't tell him why, just asked him how hard would it be to get to "more or less this area on the map", and such.

Pretty much comes to you can get around 4-14 miles within the site, depending on conditions, with a "town car".
He said it SHOULD be possible to get right onsite with a proper 4x4 and good driver, depending again on conditions.

His biggest comment was about soil solidity (or something like that), during heavy rain; coupled with clearance height of the car in question.

And the only other thing he noted was that access was difficult to ascertain as there is no telling about ongoing logging, flooding, or other such activities taking place in such a location.
It might be EXTREMELY easy after a flood, or it could just as well become "downright impossible no matter what you drive".

Regarding how it was back then... no knowing for 100% sure. Logging and such might have made it extremely easy, or even near impossible.
Ask a log-truck-driver to tell you about getting stuck in the mud where the machines have been busy...

So unless someone has complete records of such events for that area, it would be impossible to know.
Even with those records, it might still not be conclusive.

GT/CS · 29th April 2012, 07:15 PM

Here is a recent thread at the BFF about the site.
http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/...-rediscovered/

AttorneyTom · 29th April 2012, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

There has been considerable discussion in the past.. I don't think any of the JREF regulars have been to the area.

There is no indication the exact location of the site can be identified today.

I thought I saw where Mr. G took the FB peeps to the exact site ?. What I remember or maybe not .. was that it was just a short walk off the road ?

Edit: Sorry, I missed the prior posts. and will look at that. Thanks.

Skeptical Greg · 29th April 2012, 07:24 PM

As far as ' how accessable it was in 1967 '; P & G, Titmus, Dahinden, Greene and others were getting in and out of the area with no mention of any particular problems..
There was a logging road, right by the site.. One of the reasons why it is clear the horses were props ...

mustbeso · 29th April 2012, 07:35 PM

Didn't Bigfoot Bookman do a series of videos on P&G site recently? Don't know if it will help or hinder but it might be worth a look. They should be on YouTube.

wheunis · 29th April 2012, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

As far as ' how accessable it was in 1967 '; P & G, Titmus, Dahinden, Greene and others were getting in and out of the area with no mention of any particular problems..
There was a logging road, right by the site.. One of the reasons why it is clear the horses were props ...

That was one of my initial conclusions as well.
Another question it raises however, and the reason I sought info from my friend's dad, was Bob H's claim that he "drove there" in his mother's car.
Now I never did nail it down to what he meant by "there".
Another unknown variable is that its never stated if he just drove to nearby (how near? /shrug) and got picked up by P-G on horseback or in the truck; Or if he drove right into camp/site/forest-as-far-as-he-could.

But yes, based on what we see, it should have been more than possible for them to have ignored horses and just used Gimlin's truck.
Part of Green's interview shook me to this as well, where Gimlin recounts their processes as "riding the horses" until after the machines left, and then "take the one-ton pickup when the equipment was off the road, so we could drive the roads".

As far as that statement goes, however, I could only conclude that it may have not been possible to drive the truck while the machines were around.
I have tried to find a hole in that statement, but come up short due to lack of information on the topic.

At best, one must ask "Did all the machines just run away for the week while Titmus, Dahinden, Greene and others were there?".

River · 29th April 2012, 07:55 PM

wheunis: If you're interested in the PGF film you might find this post I made interesting.

http://pgfhoax.blogspot.com/

wheunis · 29th April 2012, 08:14 PM

Originally Posted by River

wheunis: If you're interested in the PGF film you might find this post I made interesting.

http://pgfhoax.blogspot.com/

That your own work, River?

It's a decent bit of work, but as I have always known to be the case, the footers took your work and ridiculed it.
Something about the photo clearly showing the edge of the next print in front of his face, by the brow/nasal bridge.

I believe what is needed is no longer just the subtle nuances of "oddities" or anomalies, but a full-on planetary collision.
The sledgehammer of evidence, as it were.

Something as irrefutable as the Sun.

RayG · 29th April 2012, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

As far as ' how accessable it was in 1967 '; P & G, Titmus, Dahinden, Greene and others were getting in and out of the area with no mention of any particular problems..
There was a logging road, right by the site.. One of the reasons why it is clear the horses were props ...

Dahinden made the Patterson film site sound fairly isolated when he said Patterson and Gimlin "were in rugged country, twenty-five miles from the nearest blacktop." (Sasquatch/Bigfoot: The Search for North America's Incredible Creature, page 114)

Though he's talking blacktop/paved roads, and not logging/dirt roads.

Byrne however, made the area sound like a typical weekend getaway, or camping area, with a dirt road running alongside the bed of Bluff Creek. He wrote that "a hoax party could too easily be surprised by a car coming up this creek bed road...", and, "any weekend one was liable to encounter small groups of people from Hoopa, or from Willow Creek, or even further, driving up there in their cars...". (The Search for Bigfoot, pages 148-149)

RayG

bigred · 29th April 2012, 09:31 PM

Anyone else think it's hilarious that here on this site which prides itself on debunking "woo" blah etc that this thread has gone on for 168 pages about a video of a total "woo" topic, to say nothing of the glaringly bad fakey video of some fat guy wearing a B movie cheap monkey suit? lol

LTC8K6 · 29th April 2012, 09:39 PM

Originally Posted by bigred

Anyone else think it's hilarious that here on this site which prides itself on debunking "woo" blah etc that this thread has gone on for 168 pages about a video of a total "woo" topic, to say nothing of the glaringly bad fakey video of some fat guy wearing a B movie cheap monkey suit? lol

You must have missed the 411 page/16,431 reply thread.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=42523

River · 29th April 2012, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by wheunis

That your own work, River?

It's a decent bit of work, but as I have always known to be the case, the footers took your work and ridiculed it.
Something about the photo clearly showing the edge of the next print in front of his face, by the brow/nasal bridge.

I believe what is needed is no longer just the subtle nuances of "oddities" or anomalies, but a full-on planetary collision.
The sledgehammer of evidence, as it were.

Something as irrefutable as the Sun.

Care to red circle that for me please?

http://themunnsreport.com/patterson%...ng%20track.jpg

Vortigern99 · 29th April 2012, 09:53 PM

River, in the photo of the single print being cast, there's a rock formation that juts up out of the ground a bit, casting a sliver of shadow. That rock formation is not present in the overhead shots of the track path.

I don't think it's the same location.

wheunis · 29th April 2012, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by River

Care to red circle that for me please?

http://themunnsreport.com/patterson%...ng%20track.jpg

EEEEK!
DONT SHOOT! IM JUST THE MESSENGER!!!!!!

Not my words bro. Was just relaying what happened to that work around the footer-tents.

River · 29th April 2012, 10:49 PM

Originally Posted by Vortigern99

River, in the photo of the single print being cast, there's a rock formation that juts up out of the ground a bit, casting a sliver of shadow. That rock formation is not present in the overhead shots of the track path.

I don't think it's the same location.

Pink. Many other identifiable features in both scenes are there too.

wheunis · 29th April 2012, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by River

Pink. Many other identifiable features in both scenes are there too.

I went to re-check what it was they were claiming...

The red circles in image linked below, show the "object in front of his face, so obviously the foot is behind his head in that shot! DUH DEY SO STOOPID!"

http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t...dcastthing.jpg

ETA: Dammit, please hold while I experience technical difficulties with edit on photobucket...
ETA2: Technical difficulties resolved.

LTC8K6 · 29th April 2012, 11:27 PM

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...postcount=4967

wheunis · 30th April 2012, 12:14 AM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...postcount=4967

Reference in the case, as I circled, was not about that stick being a print.
It was made by footer's to a further object, that indicated the print would be behind his head in that shot.

River · 30th April 2012, 12:33 AM

If the imprint were to be behind his head as "footers claimed" then it would be aligned differently with the prior imprint. (see green and yellow lines for reference) Not to mention the distance that would put the next imprint at would be more than double. (than the following imprint is on the footage showing the trackway) Not saying you're making that claim -- just making it clear.

28th April 2012, 09:55 PM	#8361
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Seemingly offtopic, but I do have a point... I think... What is the general concensus on the credibility of the magazine National Wildlife? Is it even worth using something from them in any way?
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157

28th April 2012, 10:03 PM	#8362
RayG Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada Posts: 2,326	Originally Posted by GT/CS 1986? I'm sure there haven't been any improvements since then. I haven't heard of any. Just as pseudoscientific today as it was back in 1986. RayG
	__________________ Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts. -------------------- Scrutatio Et Quaestio

29th April 2012, 09:52 AM	#8364
Correa Neto Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Hunting rocks somewhere in Brazil Posts: 7,176	Originally Posted by wheunis () My position(s) having been similarly twisted ad absurdum, out of context numerous times, and ridiculed in this short span of time, I hold no value to the statement. I expect you to not distort or cherry-pick what I say, regardless of what you feel others did to you. Originally Posted by wheunis* To answer you, regardless of you believing, or even sparing as much a quarter breath to give a scrat; Yes I have considered exactly that. Criminals very often open their mouths. And for a lack of statistics at hand, what percentage of them snitched a bunch of lies? Is that information known to me? Factually? No it is not. The very fact thay a % of criminals and politicians open their mouths when they feel they have not got their hands in their cuts is enough to show your argument is flawed. Its like the "Bob walks like Patty therefore Bob is Patty" line. Its not good evidence because other people can also walk like Patty. Its not exclusive. Originally Posted by wheunis I welcome yet again, for your consideration, that nothing but circumstantial coincidences and a "confession" stands as "evidence" for Bob being truthful. I must plead that you ask yourself the pertinent questions, regarding Bob's confessions. He said himself that he never confessed, for fear of prosecution. To his own claim he only pursued the matter after legal advice assured him that repercussions would not be forthcoming. That matter is rather important. And I have brought it up previously. Where is the courts in all this? If you get done out of a "contract" by the others on your team, do you run to the media, or the court? So then, I ask (of you, Bob, anybody) - why was his first stop P. Morris and a media reveal? How does that behavior not smell odd to anyone? Nope. It is exactly what I would have to happened if someone who took part in a fraud and had not received his/hers cut, someone whom initially had no intentions of being identified as taking part of the scam, after some time thought "to the hell with it all, they are profiting with the scam and I haven't got my deserved share". Its not unusual for politicians and criminals to search for the media to expose and blow a scheme they want busted for some reason.
	__________________ Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me: Together we can find the cure Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…

29th April 2012, 12:46 PM	#8365
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Originally Posted by tsig Then make your point. Well I am not about to make a point, when that point is based on something from said source, if said source is a publication of ill repute... So again... I only ask, before I try to make such a point, that I get some small sample of general consensus of whether or not that publication has merit in these necks of the woods...
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157

29th April 2012, 01:12 PM	#8366
Correa Neto Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Hunting rocks somewhere in Brazil Posts: 7,176	What would Admiral Ackbar say?
	__________________ Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me: Together we can find the cure Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…

29th April 2012, 07:39 AM	#8363
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,779	Originally Posted by wheunis Seemingly offtopic, but I do have a point... I think... What is the general concensus on the credibility of the magazine National Wildlife? Is it even worth using something from them in any way? Then make your point.

29th April 2012, 03:04 PM	#8367
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	Polygraph detectors don't work properly on me. They say I'm lying about nearly everything, including my name. I worked for a company that had some thefts once, and everyone had to take a polygraph exam. I ended up taking 3 of them, from 3 different examiners. They even said I was lying about my name, date of birth, and hometown. So we set up questions that they knew I would not be lying about (what is the address of this office, what color are my assistants eyes, etc. but in yes or no form) and it said I was lying about them. The examiners said about 2 % of the population has that problem.

29th April 2012, 03:07 PM	#8368
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	To make my above post fit with the OP: they also said that polyrapht tend to fail on the side of saying someone is lying when they're not, as opposed to being truthful when they are actually lying. This was in about 1987, so things might have changed since then.

29th April 2012, 04:11 PM	#8369
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by wheunis Well I am not about to make a point, when that point is based on something from said source, if said source is a publication of ill repute... So again... I only ask, before I try to make such a point, that I get some small sample of general consensus of whether or not that publication has merit in these necks of the woods... I don't think that publication has ever been mentioned here before .. Since you don't seem to have much respect for any of the other opinions here, why would you look to us for an opinion about this publication ?
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232

29th April 2012, 04:31 PM	#8370
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg I don't think that publication has ever been mentioned here before .. Since you don't seem to have much respect for any of the other opinions here, why would you look to us for an opinion about this publication ? Parcher actually has made reference to it, albeit in such a way that I am unable to determine whether it was considered ridicule or otherwise. Wrt respect for opinions: I have showed the same respect given. In that, I respect your right to have your opinion, but that does not include any clause where I must agree with it, nor abandon my own for any reason other than evidence presented to the contrary. Same as my opinion has no evidence (yet), neither does any other differing opinion on the same matter have such evidence (yet).
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157

29th April 2012, 04:48 PM	#8371
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	I had a quick question(s): Has anyone on the Forum been to the Bluff Creek site and is it accessible by road etc..? Is access any different now than it was 44 years ago ? Tried to google it but just a bunch of BFF silliness. Thanks !
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

29th April 2012, 05:29 PM	#8372
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,508	Originally Posted by wheunis Well I am not about to make a point, when that point is based on something from said source, if said source is a publication of ill repute... So again... I only ask, before I try to make such a point, that I get some small sample of general consensus of whether or not that publication has merit in these necks of the woods... Originally Posted by wheunis Parcher actually has made reference to it, albeit in such a way that I am unable to determine whether it was considered ridicule or otherwise. Well... Originally Posted by National Wildlife Magazine - Dick Kirkpatrick, Executive Director, April-May 1968 ...It could be a man in an ape suit, too, though if it is a hoax, I can't understand why anyone would go to all that time and trouble and expense to perpetuate it, because nobody seems to be getting anything back from it. Even Roger Patterson has gone into the hole financially to make and show his pictures... When National Wildlife tells you that marmots hibernate in the winter they are being reputable. When they tell you that Patterson made no money from the PGF they are being disreputable. Here... Quote: ..It could all be bogus, too, though if it is bogus, I can't understand why any reputable magazine would go to all that time and trouble and expense to feature it, because nobody seems to be getting anything back from it. Even National Wildlife Magazine has gone into the hole financially to write about and publish Patterson's story and pictures...
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

29th April 2012, 05:32 PM	#8373
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Originally Posted by William Parcher Well... When National Wildlife tells you that marmots hibernate in the winter they are being reputable. When they tell you that Patterson made no money from the PGF they are being disreputable. Here... Thanks Parcher. I shall then proceed to use their information as it is, and let discussion be the judge. I will start on it - might just end up being nonsensical wall of text, but I feel something might arise from it, even if it is my own realization in some way.
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157

29th April 2012, 05:38 PM	#8374
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,508	Originally Posted by wheunis might just end up being nonsensical wall of text Please, no. Don't post it unless it makes sense and is rational. Show it to somebody in your house and ask them if it makes any sense before posting it. Please.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

29th April 2012, 05:50 PM	#8375
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,508	Originally Posted by parnassus on BFF 1) Patterson certainly believed in Bigfoot. How do you know? How do you know that his belief wasn't also a hoax?
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

29th April 2012, 05:51 PM	#8376
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	Originally Posted by wheunis Wrt respect for opinions: I have showed the same respect given. ..... So, is that what this is all about? If we rub yours, you'll rub ours?
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Last edited by Skeptical Greg; 29th April 2012 at 05:52 PM.

29th April 2012, 06:11 PM	#8377
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,592	Little Mak? No, never mind.
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,592	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986

29th April 2012, 06:42 PM	#8378
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg So, is that what this is all about? If we rub yours, you'll rub ours? No rubbing here.. just wondered about the access to the site ? If anyone knows.. I will take my answer off the air.. thanks.
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

29th April 2012, 06:55 PM	#8379
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Originally Posted by AttorneyTom No rubbing here.. just wondered about the access to the site ? If anyone knows.. I will take my answer off the air.. thanks. At one point, I was looking at an angle on the story over cars, horses, etc. Did have an informal discussion over it with my friend's dad, as he worked for a logging company at that time. Would that information be useful?
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157

29th April 2012, 06:59 PM	#8380
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by wheunis At one point, I was looking at an angle on the story over cars, horses, etc. Did have an informal discussion over it with my friend's dad, as he worked for a logging company at that time. Would that information be useful? I was just wondering what the access to the site is now. and how it compares with 1967 ? Roads etc.. ? That was all. Thought maybe someone on the Forum might have actually visited it ?
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883

29th April 2012, 07:14 PM	#8381
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	There has been considerable discussion in the past.. I don't think any of the JREF regulars have been to the area. Munns was involved in a planned expedition that was featured on one of the Discovery channel shows, which included the use of a helicopter.. I don't think there is road access today .. There is no indication the exact location of the site can be identified today.
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Last edited by Skeptical Greg; 29th April 2012 at 07:16 PM.

29th April 2012, 07:15 PM	#8382
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Originally Posted by AttorneyTom I was just wondering what the access to the site is now. and how it compares with 1967 ? Roads etc.. ? That was all. Thought maybe someone on the Forum might have actually visited it ? Not me. Neither friend's dad. I just took a topographic map and googleEarth snaps to him. Didn't tell him why, just asked him how hard would it be to get to "more or less this area on the map", and such. Pretty much comes to you can get around 4-14 miles within the site, depending on conditions, with a "town car". He said it SHOULD be possible to get right onsite with a proper 4x4 and good driver, depending again on conditions. His biggest comment was about soil solidity (or something like that), during heavy rain; coupled with clearance height of the car in question. And the only other thing he noted was that access was difficult to ascertain as there is no telling about ongoing logging, flooding, or other such activities taking place in such a location. It might be EXTREMELY easy after a flood, or it could just as well become "downright impossible no matter what you drive". Regarding how it was back then... no knowing for 100% sure. Logging and such might have made it extremely easy, or even near impossible. Ask a log-truck-driver to tell you about getting stuck in the mud where the machines have been busy... So unless someone has complete records of such events for that area, it would be impossible to know. Even with those records, it might still not be conclusive.
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Last edited by wheunis; 29th April 2012 at 07:21 PM.

29th April 2012, 07:15 PM	#8383
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,592	Here is a recent thread at the BFF about the site. http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/...-rediscovered/
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,592	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986

29th April 2012, 07:18 PM	#8384
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg There has been considerable discussion in the past.. I don't think any of the JREF regulars have been to the area. There is no indication the exact location of the site can be identified today. I thought I saw where Mr. G took the FB peeps to the exact site ?. What I remember or maybe not .. was that it was just a short walk off the road ? Edit: Sorry, I missed the prior posts. and will look at that. Thanks.
AttorneyTom Muse Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 883	Last edited by AttorneyTom; 29th April 2012 at 07:20 PM.

29th April 2012, 07:24 PM	#8385
Skeptical Greg Agave Wine Connoisseur Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past 'Resume Speed' Posts: 12,873	As far as ' how accessable it was in 1967 '; P & G, Titmus, Dahinden, Greene and others were getting in and out of the area with no mention of any particular problems.. There was a logging road, right by the site.. One of the reasons why it is clear the horses were props ...
	__________________ " Somewhere between Jesus dying on the cross, and a giant bunny hiding eggs,there seems to be a gap in information. " Stan - Southpark Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232 Last edited by Skeptical Greg; 29th April 2012 at 07:26 PM.

29th April 2012, 07:35 PM	#8386
mustbeso Thinker Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 126	Didn't Bigfoot Bookman do a series of videos on P&G site recently? Don't know if it will help or hinder but it might be worth a look. They should be on YouTube.
mustbeso Thinker Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 126

29th April 2012, 07:44 PM	#8387
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg As far as ' how accessable it was in 1967 '; P & G, Titmus, Dahinden, Greene and others were getting in and out of the area with no mention of any particular problems.. There was a logging road, right by the site.. One of the reasons why it is clear the horses were props ... That was one of my initial conclusions as well. Another question it raises however, and the reason I sought info from my friend's dad, was Bob H's claim that he "drove there" in his mother's car. Now I never did nail it down to what he meant by "there". Another unknown variable is that its never stated if he just drove to nearby (how near? /shrug) and got picked up by P-G on horseback or in the truck; Or if he drove right into camp/site/forest-as-far-as-he-could. But yes, based on what we see, it should have been more than possible for them to have ignored horses and just used Gimlin's truck. Part of Green's interview shook me to this as well, where Gimlin recounts their processes as "riding the horses" until after the machines left, and then "take the one-ton pickup when the equipment was off the road, so we could drive the roads". As far as that statement goes, however, I could only conclude that it may have not been possible to drive the truck while the machines were around. I have tried to find a hole in that statement, but come up short due to lack of information on the topic. At best, one must ask "Did all the machines just run away for the week while Titmus, Dahinden, Greene and others were there?".
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Last edited by wheunis; 29th April 2012 at 07:47 PM.

29th April 2012, 07:55 PM	#8388
River Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,660	wheunis: If you're interested in the PGF film you might find this post I made interesting. http://pgfhoax.blogspot.com/
River Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,660

29th April 2012, 08:14 PM	#8389
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Originally Posted by River wheunis: If you're interested in the PGF film you might find this post I made interesting. http://pgfhoax.blogspot.com/ That your own work, River? It's a decent bit of work, but as I have always known to be the case, the footers took your work and ridiculed it. Something about the photo clearly showing the edge of the next print in front of his face, by the brow/nasal bridge. I believe what is needed is no longer just the subtle nuances of "oddities" or anomalies, but a full-on planetary collision. The sledgehammer of evidence, as it were. Something as irrefutable as the Sun.
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Last edited by wheunis; 29th April 2012 at 08:15 PM.

29th April 2012, 08:52 PM	#8390
RayG Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada Posts: 2,326	Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg As far as ' how accessable it was in 1967 '; P & G, Titmus, Dahinden, Greene and others were getting in and out of the area with no mention of any particular problems.. There was a logging road, right by the site.. One of the reasons why it is clear the horses were props ... Dahinden made the Patterson film site sound fairly isolated when he said Patterson and Gimlin "were in rugged country, twenty-five miles from the nearest blacktop." (Sasquatch/Bigfoot: The Search for North America's Incredible Creature, page 114) Though he's talking blacktop/paved roads, and not logging/dirt roads. Byrne however, made the area sound like a typical weekend getaway, or camping area, with a dirt road running alongside the bed of Bluff Creek. He wrote that "a hoax party could too easily be surprised by a car coming up this creek bed road...", and, "any weekend one was liable to encounter small groups of people from Hoopa, or from Willow Creek, or even further, driving up there in their cars...". (The Search for Bigfoot, pages 148-149) RayG
	__________________ Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts. -------------------- Scrutatio Et Quaestio

29th April 2012, 09:31 PM	#8391
bigred Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: USA Posts: 12,538	Anyone else think it's hilarious that here on this site which prides itself on debunking "woo" blah etc that this thread has gone on for 168 pages about a video of a total "woo" topic, to say nothing of the glaringly bad fakey video of some fat guy wearing a B movie cheap monkey suit? lol

29th April 2012, 09:39 PM	#8392
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,666	Originally Posted by bigred Anyone else think it's hilarious that here on this site which prides itself on debunking "woo" blah etc that this thread has gone on for 168 pages about a video of a total "woo" topic, to say nothing of the glaringly bad fakey video of some fat guy wearing a B movie cheap monkey suit? lol You must have missed the 411 page/16,431 reply thread. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=42523
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break? Last edited by LTC8K6; 29th April 2012 at 09:40 PM.

29th April 2012, 09:47 PM	#8393
River Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,660	Originally Posted by wheunis That your own work, River? It's a decent bit of work, but as I have always known to be the case, the footers took your work and ridiculed it. Something about the photo clearly showing the edge of the next print in front of his face, by the brow/nasal bridge. I believe what is needed is no longer just the subtle nuances of "oddities" or anomalies, but a full-on planetary collision. The sledgehammer of evidence, as it were. Something as irrefutable as the Sun. Care to red circle that for me please? http://themunnsreport.com/patterson%...ng%20track.jpg
River Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 2,660

29th April 2012, 09:53 PM	#8394
Vortigern99 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,020	River, in the photo of the single print being cast, there's a rock formation that juts up out of the ground a bit, casting a sliver of shadow. That rock formation is not present in the overhead shots of the track path. I don't think it's the same location.
	__________________ "I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 / Noah D. Henson "One thing we've learned (and the Internet confirms this) is that humans will screw just about anything." -- Theagenes Last edited by Vortigern99; 29th April 2012 at 09:59 PM.

29th April 2012, 10:14 PM	#8395
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157	Originally Posted by River Care to red circle that for me please? http://themunnsreport.com/patterson%...ng%20track.jpg EEEEK! DONT SHOOT! IM JUST THE MESSENGER!!!!!! Not my words bro. Was just relaying what happened to that work around the footer-tents.
wheunis Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 157