Continuation - The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

[kitakaze]

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti

You wouldn't.

Perhaps you're not really here for the purpose of analyzing the Patterson Film.

Let me be specific: Why should I? Why should I be interested in your art?

You make scribbles on 2D images in ransom note posts that are unanimously considered here to be visual garbage. Wolftrax spelled it out very clearly to you...

Originally Posted by wolftrax

I cannot account for them because, for the life of me, I cannot see where you have made any legitimate measurements at all. You have no similar points of reference between any two figures you compare, there is no set landmark you are measuring from, you alter images to try to make them fit your points, you ignore any images that would show a similar angle to measure from....

Every single thing you have posted has been absolutely meaningless, I hate to be so blunt, but there is just no other way to say it. You are obsessed with "nothing". There is nothing there. Just random lines and distorted images. There's no point in arguing it, it'd be like me trying to argue some sort of mathematical anatomical correctness/incorrectness in a Picasso painting.

You do understand that the vast majority of people pay no attention to your posts at all, don't you? Do you realize you're a scroll inducer? Does it ever sink in that you make crazy person posts? I'm sorry to be the one to break this to you, Sweaty, but for people who don't live in Bigfoot/UFO La La Land, your posts look like something that came out of The Shining typewriter. All work and no scribbles makes Sweaty a dull boy. I feel like I have to set the mood when I read a Sweaty post and turn out the lights and clutch my tennis racquet (because I don't have a baseball bat).

Listen, 12 Monkeys, I'm not the least bit concerned with what you call "analysis" of the PGF or your numbers. I've said it a thousand times - if you're not going to address the problems in making the numbers in the first place, doing anything with those foo foo digits is nothing to me. Scribbling on 2D images and making up arguments about padding that was never said to be there is nothing to me. Do the board a favour and stop the visual spamming. I personally will not spend another minute in my life with Sweaty scribbles. Physically show me that Bob could not have been in Patty and we'll talk. Show me that the normal human in post #1313 could not fit in Patty.

I know that will never happen anytime soon so until hell freezes over, just ask the next time you're leaning on the period key and deciding which random word to put some bonkers on, Do I really need to make myself appear to be so unhinged?

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by Hitch

Will you be following that up with images of a physical model that show that the earth is for the most part flat?

I have a lot of books that show flat pictures of the earth.
therefore it is flat.

I can also make sucking noises with my hand in my armpit, which, I think, would be similar to what Sweaty is doing in that space.

[HarryHenderson]

Originally Posted by kitakaze

...just ask the next time you're leaning on the period key and deciding which random word to put some bonkers on, Do I really need to make myself appear to be so unhinged?

You do if you are and he is. This is no longer just about childhood Bigfoot dreams going down the *******. It couldn't be, as a good, honest, intelligent, possibly Prozac™ enhanced BF enthusiast would have properly (and publicly) acknowledged such wishful thinking by now. As many, including Kitakaze himself, did long ago. The literal gobbledygook Sweaty posts proves he's in the There Is A Bigfoot™ at any cost. Definitely without regard to the actual cost to his own (and the cause's) integrity and credibility. He certainly doesn't see that being a raving lunatic isn't really that cool.

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Quote:

All work and no scribbles makes Sweaty a dull boy.

All TALK....and nothing else.....kitakaze.


You'll never be able to account for the huge difference in those Humerus Triangle numbers...which should be exactly equal.


And I do mean never.

[The Shrike]

Congratulations Sweaty, you've done it! I used to be a bigfoot skeptic, but your brilliant, irrefutable, elbow triangles analysis has convinced me that that bigfoot is real. Now what?

[SweatyYeti]

A physical model.

[The Shrike]

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti

A physical model.

Of what and for what purpose? You've already proven there was a real bigfoot at Bluff Creek in 1967. What do you hope to do with that information, publish a paper on it?

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by The Shrike

Of what and for what purpose?

A physical model of a padded upper-body suit, replicating Patty's (extreme) upper-body dimensions...






It'll show that when an 'average human's' chest and shoulders are padded-out to equal Patty's dimensions...

1) The elbow-joint cannot be moved further outwards from the center of the body, or up and down along the arm....


2) Adding width to the chest takes away open-space from between the inside of the upper-arm and the side of the body.....and...


3) That there is no angle-of-view, or arm-angle that can create the illusion that there is (significantly) more open-space between the upper-body and the arm, than there actually is.....meaning....Patty's 'Humerus Triangle' measurement, of approx. 50 square-inches is correct...for the most part...







Bobby-Boo's 'Humerus Triangle' measurement is only about 30 sq. inches....at it's maximum, based (solely) on a humerus 11" long.....before padding.
Add some padding, and it reduces from there...down to the 15-20 square inch range.



Never...in a bazillion.....SKEPTICAL......years will anyone ever be able to make it appear to be in the 50 square-inch range.....(especially kitakaze ).

[Skeptical Greg]

I was just wondering, if maybe we stopped posting in this thread, would it go away, or would Sweaty just keep posting to himself ...

Of course he would probably just pop up in any other thread where the word ' Bigfoot ' happened to be mentioned ..

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg

I was just wondering, if maybe we stopped posting in this thread, would it go away, or would Sweaty just keep posting to himself ...

I'll just keep on posting. It's a free world....do what you want....and, enjoy it!

[Vortigern99]

GT has convinced me, and I have agreed with his conviction, that there is no point in "debating" with Sweaty Yeti.

No amount of legitimate error analysis, of pointing out problems in his methodology, of the mistakes inherent in measuring screencaps of blurry film and video footage, will ever elicit a cogent response.

He will simply ignore all indications of flaws in his efforts to bolster a pre-existing and unshakable belief in bigfoot's existence.

Any attempts at a genuine exchange of ideas only generate more non-sensical posts.

So, may I recommend to you all, as GT has politely done with me, that we simply ignore SY' posts, unless and until he delivers something that merits a response?

The flow of these threads will go much easier without the constant, distracting sidebar of these ludicrous, uncalibrated scribbles and "nuh-uh!" rebuttals from Doctor Yeti.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by The Shrike

Of what and for what purpose? You've already proven there was a real bigfoot at Bluff Creek in 1967. What do you hope to do with that information, publish a paper on it?

Some say paper, some say coloring book.

[parnassus]

Jack Davis has previously done CAD analysis of the PG movie. Some additional comparisions are shown here. He has apparently done some new stuff, which is mentioned in the current issue of Daniel Perez' newsletter, as posted at the Bigfootbooks site. Davis' seems to be using two different methods, both of which yield approximately the same result. On his website, he uses the footlength as a yardstick, and comes up with 6'2". In an apparent new analysis, in the Perez newsletter, he uses the McLarin/Green footage, with the log as a common measuring stick. His latest conclusion is that Patty was "shorter than McLarin," avoiding an exact estimate because of the uncertainties of distance from the camera of the two subjects. Bill Munns chimes in with some of usual condescending disparaging remarks, overwhelming my irony meter...Bill Munns, who found that Patty was 4'6", has the stones to criticize anyone else.

[kitakaze]

So, the last couple weeks I've been taking a sort of mental vacation from all things PGF, Bigfoot, etc and let myself get busy with music work, tennis, and other things such as a bizarre interest in watching videos of Young Earth Creationist/common criminal/federal convict Kent Hovind get demolished by people who have a functional grasp of evolution and actual science. I think Kent would be all over Bigfoot. He loves to talk about giant bones found in North America and all sorts of gobbledy-gook.

Anyway, last week I received a monster package I've been waiting for from Phil Morris. It contained some catalogues of Morris Costumes, some copies of Long's book for me and one I'm going to send Bill Munns, and a big stack of various copied materials from over the last 40+ years. I was a bit bummed to find that Phil had forgotten the DVD copies of the Lie Detector episode with BH, and outakes from the TV Land special and the NatGeo Is It Real? shows on Bigfoot and BH. That turns out to be no problem however as Phil just called to me to arrange the details of his visit to me in Victoria tomorrow, Saturday June 12th. He also just sent me a file that was greatly appreciated. I now have the best and most detailed images of Bob Heironimus in the Phil Morris Patty reconstruction suit for the 2005 NatGeo show. They are fantastic after being limited to stuff like this in the years since...



I am taking to heart the advice that I don't post all of my material in favour of keeping things for my documentary project but you know I'm obviously going to share a little and share it first with the JREF. The images Phil sent me are in a zip file that doesn't allow me to copy them to my photo gallery and therefore be able to post them, but I asked Phil to send them again so I can copy them, after which I'll post a couple. We will be shooting the interview tomorrow and I welcome people to post or PM suggestions for questions they think will trip up Morris if they think he was lying about his involvement with Patterson. I don't think he reads the JREF but it's possible, so if you're worried about him seeing the question before going on camera, go ahead and PM them, but be warned, my inbox is at 98% and I'm having a hard time getting it down.

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Quote:

I welcome people to post or PM suggestions for questions they think will trip up Morris if they think he was lying...

What would make more sense than giving your "trip up/expose Morris" questions to someone who's on Morris' side of the fence... ( )

Yeah, I'll send my questions right over....right away, kitakaze.

[SweatyYeti]

Just got a great gift from "Big Laugh" Blevins....on Youtube......a physical model of a padded upper-body suit...

With Patty scaled to half the size of Blevins....she still has as much, or more, open-space between the inside of the upper arm and the side of the body, than ol' "Big Laugh" does...





There's certainly more open space in the vertical direction....(even at half-scale)...and, it looks as though there's more area, overall...if measured with a triangle. (Which I will be doing, soon enough.)

Link to the wonderful video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcSdGg3pTRY


"Where has all the 'Arm Gap' gone...
Long time passing...."...

[kitakaze]

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti

What would make more sense than giving your "trip up/expose Morris" questions to someone who's on Morris' side of the fence?

Yeah, I'll send my questions right over....right away, kitakaze.

Please give a coherent explanation of how my opinion that Morris did actually sell Roger Patterson a suit as he claims he did would make it senseless for me to ask him questions on camera that could expose him as a liar.

BTW, after talking with Phil last night, we arranged to meet either this weekend or early next week as he is attending his grandson's graduation in Seattle.

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by kitakaze

Please give a coherent explanation of how my opinion that Morris did actually sell Roger Patterson a suit as he claims he did would make it senseless for me to ask him questions on camera that could expose him as a liar.

Questions intended to expose Morris as being dishonest...are best asked him by someone who is on the "other side of the fence" from Morris....not from someone who's on the same side.


That's how it works in court trials.....prosecutors don't give all of their questions to the defense lawyers, to... A) discuss them with the defendant, in private....and then... B) actually ask the defendant the questions in court.


BTW......where has aaaaaaaaaaaaaall the 'Arm Gap' gone???.....have you a clue.........at all???

Any idea, there, kitakaze? Do you see the huge difference??

How can Heironimus have this amount of body width added to him...





.....and have any open-space left, between the inside of his upper arm, and his padded-body.....when Old Man Blevins' 'Arm Gap' is reduced to practically nothing, with his padded suit??






How is this possible??? Have any suggestions, there, kitakaze??? How about a BOB-shell??? Got any of those???

[kitakaze]

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti

Questions intended to expose Morris as being dishonest...are best asked him by someone who is on the "other side of the fence" from Morris....not from someone who's on the same side.

Not when that person is an idiot. I can not pretend to not have the opinion Phil Morris sold Roger Patterson a suit. I have multiple sources from different time periods attesting to Roger Patterson buying a gorilla suit who have had no good reason to lie about it. Even if you argue that Morris lied for profit for his company, you still have to deal with Duane and Harvey Anderson. Also, you have to deal with the fact that while we can demonstrate that Morris has lost money and spent money in regards to the PGF, you've never demonstrated that his company profited from his claim. That is something I can falsify. I can ask Phil to see the figures on Morris Costumes prior to 2004 and after it.

Also, please remember, until I looked deeply into the facts concerning Phil Morris, I was on your side in terms of thinking Phil was lying. So while I must admit that I have changed from a long held position that Phil was lying, my commitment to knowing the truth has been unwavering. What I have done is sought out the best skeptics of Phil to give me the ammo to bust him down if he is lying. If Phil is lying, I want to catch him. I'm not going to prep him on my questions. I'm going to meet him in downtown Victoria with a person taking footage of the whole thing. I'm going to turn on a camera, walk up to Phil, and tell him that I'm going to try to tear him down as a liar if that is indeed the case. I'm going to ask him hard questions and push them if he appears to be dodging them or trying to change the subject. What I am not going to do is try and A-ha! him with crayon stupidity on different 2D images.

Quote:

That's how it works in court trials.....prosecutors don't give all of their questions to the defense lawyers, to... A) discuss them with the defendant, in private....and then... B) actually ask the defendant the questions in court.

Except I'm not giving Phil my questions first and discussing them. I'm turning on a camera, meeting him, asking him the questions, and putting out to the public unedited. Being interested in getting the truth, that seems the right thing to do.

Quote:

BTW......where has aaaaaaaaaaaaaall the 'Arm Gap' gone???.....have you a clue.........at all???

I don't know, 12 Monkeys, has it gone somewhere? Why am I looking at a photo of Leroy Blevins or somebody he knows? That guy is almost as kooky as you. Have you seen the video where he thinks Gimlin is in the bushes. He suffers from the same pareidolia insanity that you do with your Mars civilization craziness.

Quote:

How can Heironimus have this amount of body width added to him...

You mean the amount between him with no suit on and what we see in the PGF when compared together? Nothing that cant be accounted for by the use of football shoulder pads and a head piece. I keep telling you this and you're like the creationist who keeps asking for an example of one animal giving birth to a different animal. You simply refuse to listen to and deal with something that isn't your invention. It's like you have a fetish for this guy...

http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w...otWidened2.jpg

Quote:

How is this possible??? Have any suggestions, there, kitakaze??? How about a BOB-shell??? Got any of those???

I've answered that first question many times already, as for the second, as I said, I have some great shots from Phil of him and BH in his suit at Cow Camp in Yakima. Would you like to get your crayons on them?

[River]

Sweaty, heres a suggestion you may want to consider. Youre comparing Pattersons PGF suit with Blevins home made suit. Why should they be the same? Why would it be relevent unless you truly believe that Blevins effort at the suit is a good recreation. I dont think I've seen anyone saying it is, or saying that Blevins is the man in the PGF suit. I posted an image a while back of an actor wearing shoulder pads that were designed for his ape suit that would make your "numbers" on previous illustrations very inaccurate. Yet again, you present something that is basically worthless. Sorry to be a hater sweaty.... I'm sure if we werent talking about some old film of an actor in a fur suit our conversation might be toned differently.


Great effort at trying to toss up a smoke screen though, but your comparisons are quite invalid.

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by River

Sweaty, heres a suggestion you may want to consider. Youre comparing Pattersons PGF suit with Blevins home made suit.

Why would it be relevent unless you truly believe that Blevins effort at the suit is a good recreation.

Blevins' suit is relevant....(even if it's not exactly the same as Patty's look/dimensions)....because it demonstrates the simple principle I illustrated in this graphic...





It demonstrates the fact that, when padding is added to either the arm, or the upper-body....(or both)...the space between the upper-arm and the upper-body reduces.......rather quickly.

I will be demonstrating this, with my own physical model.....with lots of images, taken from lots of angles, with lots of measurements.




kitakaze wrote:

Quote:

SweatyYeti wrote:

Quote:

How can Heironimus have this amount of body width added to him...

You mean the amount between him with no suit on and what we see in the PGF when compared together?

Nothing that cant be accounted for by the use of football shoulder pads...

The question was.....and remains....how can the ARM GAP...(not the "chest width").....be accounted for, in light of the amount of padding required to make Heironimus' chest and shoulder-widths equal to Patty's.....approx. 3" on each side??


That was the question I asked.....and the one that nobody can answer.


Another kitakaze distortion. Typical garbage.


You can't deal with reality....can you, pal?

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti


Questions intended to expose Morris as being dishonest...are best asked him by someone who is on the "other side of the fence" from Morris....not from someone who's on the same side.

Not when that person is an idiot.

So, in the case of intelligent people....you agree with the principle.

This means you think that those questions you've asked for would best be asked by some-one on the 'other side of the fence' from Morris........rather than by YOU.

Thanks for the support, chuckles...



Desperate kitakaze......grasping at (inflammatory) straws....trying to save his sinking ship......

Quote:

Not when that person is an idiot.

you're like the creationist who...

the same pareidolia insanity that you do with your Mars civilization craziness.

kitakaze....you will NEVER produce an image of Heironimus which replicates Patty's 'elbow-reach', 'arm gap', and 'humerus triangle' measurements.

NEVER.

[AtomicMysteryMonster]

Originally Posted by kitakaze

Not when that person is an idiot. I can not pretend to not have the opinion Phil Morris sold Roger Patterson a suit. I have multiple sources from different time periods attesting to Roger Patterson buying a gorilla suit who have had no good reason to lie about it.

Um...he apparently only rented it and had to return it. This doesn't match up with Morris' claim of outright selling it.

Quote:

Also, you have to deal with the fact that while we can demonstrate that Morris has lost money and spent money in regards to the PGF, you've never demonstrated that his company profited from his claim. That is something I can falsify. I can ask Phil to see the figures on Morris Costumes prior to 2004 and after it.

Technically that wouldn't prove anything. Correlation is not causation.

[River]

Sweaty, I'm starting to doubt if you will ever get it. All youve managed to prove is, Pattersons suit is different than Blevins suit. Congrats on that though.

le sigh. I'm going to have to go back to ignoring your posts because you fail to see the errors in your "beliefs" and or your illustrations, and demonstrations lol


anyways, have fun with that.

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by River

Sweaty, I'm starting to doubt if you will ever get it. All youve managed to prove is, Pattersons suit is different than Blevins suit. Congrats on that though.

le sigh. I'm going to have to go back to ignoring your posts because you fail to see the errors in your "beliefs" and or your illustrations, and demonstrations lol

Only because you've failed to SHOW where, and to what extent, those errors are.

I appreciate your input....(while it lasted)....nonetheless, River.

[River]

Well, several folks here have tried to show where your errors are but you seemed resistant to accept. Showing the exact extent of error would require a few things we dont have, and in fact.... showing exact anything (including your numbers) is at best an estimation that has a wide range for error.

What we can see is that it is possible for this to have been a man in a suit within the range of normal human porportions. (wearing padded suit) To say this film represents anything more, has yet to have been proven, shown or otherwise confirmed. If you have a valid argument one day, I'll be happy to give my opinion on it. I do appreciate opposing views to my own as well, but not for the sake of an opposing view. For the sake of keeping it real and not making selective/biased claims that are not firmly based with some evidence that is tangible.

The "leg" of the PGF being a film of a real animal is.... and always has been weak at best, and there has never been any proof that it represents more than a man in a costume. If you want to believe bigfoot is real, and the pgf is real than you might be able to find more elbow reach arguments that are never going to be considered viable evidence of this representing a real animal, because you choose to not address important points and or facts that are made that disprove your theories. Its like Bill Munns insisting the film was made with a 15mm lens. Hes probably going to backstep on that eventually, whenever it suits him to do so. (because, obviously he must know by now something that basic after this much study on the dang thing right? sorry bill, but keep it real man)

Anyhooo, I dont hold any ill will from your spam lol, I just wish youd make your points a little more well grounded, and based reliable and solid data.

It seems that much of the so called bigfoot evidence shares the same stigma, Unfortunately.

[RayG]

Originally Posted by kitakaze

...12 Monkeys...

Oh Lordy, whenever I think of Sweaty now I'll think of the Brad Pitt character...



RayG

[HarryHenderson]

Originally Posted by RayG

Oh Lordy, whenever I think of Sweaty now I'll think of the Brad Pitt character...

Mister, you just fed the ******* ***** by telling him you think of him...as Brad Pitt NO LESS! Great, just ******* great.

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by River

Well, several folks here have tried to show where your errors are but you seemed resistant to accept.

I don't recall seeing anybody show....demonstrate....where there are any significant errors in my graphics/numbers.

If you know where those posts are, feel free to provide links to them.

Quote:

Showing the exact extent of error would require a few things we dont have,

If you're lacking key information....then how do you know that my numbers ARE in error???

Quote:

....and in fact.... showing exact anything (including your numbers) is at best an estimation that has a wide range for error.

These simple measurements are not an "all or nothing"....( "exact" or "wide range of error")...situation.

There certainly is some 'degree of error' in them....but that doesn't equate, necessarily, to them having such a wide range...(or, 'high degree')...of error that they're meaningless.

If you can show where, and to what extent, there are any errors in the numbers, River....go right ahead and do so.

[River]

Ok Sweaty, I'll bite this time.

In order to establish some realm of realism here, lets start with some basic information about the subject seen on film in order to establish things like the margin for error on measurements, or elbow reaches arounds, or whatever it is you want to measure in the film. So lets establish first what you think the size of the subject is, since you seem to have on several occasions produced numbers representing the size of an "elbow reach".

What size is the subject seen on the film in your opinion? Height? Thickness? Weight? What you got? I want to understand how you establish your measurements for those numbers you seem to cherish. And... how did you come to those conclusions? (how did you decide the scale of the subject? based on what measurements etc)

Lets start with some basics like this, before we go any further.

[kitakaze]

The following is an important report regarding my documentary efforts regarding the PGF:

As I earlier reported, Phil Morris is coming to see me in Victoria, BC for the purpose of an interview. This worked out under the circumstances that Phil is attending the graduation of his grandson in Seattle, WA. Phil has arranged at his own personal expense to come to Victoria from Seattle on an overnight trip. He will be staying at a major hotel in downtown Victoria. He arrives on a ferry from Seattle around 6:00 pm on the evening of Wednesday, June 16th, three days from now. He leaves the following morning at 11:00 am. He is now in Seattle.

Over the last couple weeks at least, both Phil and I have been calling each other regarding the upcoming trip. We have often missed connecting due to our schedules and the time difference. Nevertheless, we have been able to work out the details. This is a trip that is completely on Phil's time and money. My original idea was that Phil could arrive at Victoria in the afternoon, and that I could meet him at the ferry terminal or close to it with my cameraman. My goal essentially was to show that any question I asked Phil had no prior discussion and thusly that I was not assisting Phil in any way if he was being deceitful about his claim of selling Roger Patterson a suit in 1967.

This is how the plan has worked out after speaking with Phil on Sunday night...

1) I will meet Phil and his wife at the hotel where they are staying roughly around 7:00 pm. We may possibly have dinner together. The only person accompanying me will be my cameraman.

2) I explained to Phil that we have daylight until 9:30 pm and that I want to shoot and introduction shot at the Royal BC Museum. The museum has a significant place in PGF history. RBCM curator Donald Abbott was one of the first academics involved with the PGF. You can learn more about him here...

http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo...n-abbott-obit/

My plan is to shoot the intro scene in Thunderbird Park where there is a totem by Kwakwaka'wakw chief Mungo Martin said by Bigfoot proponents to depict Bigfoot.

3) After the intro scene is shot, we will return to the hotel where Phil has reserved a production room to film the interview in which I will ask him all the questions that are meant to expose him as a liar.

I spoke with Phil tonight and told him that I am going to put him on camera and ask him questions submitted by informed people that do not believe he is telling the truth, which would probably last about an hour. It is very important that people understand the short shooting schedule that I have with Phil. I must be absolutely clear - Phil has asked me if he can be forwarded the questions prior to the interview. He said in a short phone conversation that he doesn't want to be stumped on camera not knowing what I am talking about.

As Phil is now in Seattle, he asked me to forward the questions to his daughter's cell phone so he could review them. It took his wife several minutes to get the address. I agreed to this. I asked Phil if I could email the questions to his email address, and he said that it would not work as he didn't think he could access his email while being in Seattle or Victoria in a hotel. I accept this simply because I know that Phil is an elderly man on a family trip and has little to no time to get on the internet and study the barrage of questions I have for him. I personally introduced Phil to Youtube and how to use it. I had him on the phone the very first time he saw himself on Youtube. Phil Morris was born on January 8th, 1935. He is an 80 year old Internet retard. Many of the questions for him I have are obviously my own, but some of the best come from AtomicMysteryMonster. Wolftrax had some very good ones as well, but, wolf, I am terrible - I can't seem to find them right now. I'll keep looking.

Please bear in mind, Phil has received no questions from me as of the time of this post, nor will he have any significant time to research them if he is in fact coming to Victoria to lie to me.

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Quote:

Phil has received no questions from me as of the time of this post, nor will he have any significant time to research them

But he will have time.

There is no 'surprise factor' involved here...in Morris being confronted with questions allegedly intended to expose him...(though those questions are coming from skeptics on the 'same side of the fence' as Morris)......and the amount of time Morris will have to prepare his answers is being told to us by kitakaze, who is sitting on the same side of the fence as the person being....."confronted"...."grilled"..."Investigated"... ..what a joke.


Go get him, Tiger!!!

[dafydd]

Why does Sweaty Yeti keep drawing lines on photographs? Is there a name for this hobby?

[SweatyYeti]

It's called "analysis".

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by River

Ok Sweaty, I'll bite this time.

In order to establish some realm of realism here, lets start with some basic information about the subject seen on film in order to establish things like the margin for error on measurements, or elbow reaches arounds, or whatever it is you want to measure in the film. So lets establish first what you think the size of the subject is, since you seem to have on several occasions produced numbers representing the size of an "elbow reach".

What size is the subject seen on the film in your opinion? Height? Thickness? Weight? What you got? I want to understand how you establish your measurements for those numbers you seem to cherish. And... how did you come to those conclusions? (how did you decide the scale of the subject? based on what measurements etc)

Lets start with some basics like this, before we go any further.

Thanks for the questions, River....I'll respond to them later tonight.

[dafydd]

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti

It's called "analysis".

In the UK we call it "colouring in".

[kitakaze]

Originally Posted by kitakaze

Phil Morris was born on January 8th, 1935. He is an 80 year old Internet retard.

I hope Phil will find it in his heart to forgive me for shaving five years off his life.

[tsig]

Originally Posted by dafydd

Why does Sweaty Yeti keep drawing lines on photographs? Is there a name for this hobby?

I think he's diagramming plays for flea football.

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by dafydd

In the UK we call it "colouring in".

Whatever you call it...it's still analysis.

[kitakaze]

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti

But he will have time.

Yes, he will. If I get the questions to his daughter's cellphone tomorrow evening, he will have about a day to review them. I am anticipating about an hour filming time in the production room to ask Phil the questions. Let me ask you, is it unreasonable for Phil to ask to have a look at the questions the day before his filmed interview?

Quote:

There is no 'surprise factor' involved here...in Morris being confronted with questions allegedly intended to expose him...(though those questions are coming from skeptics on the 'same side of the fence' as Morris)......and the amount of time Morris will have to prepare his answers is being told to us by kitakaze, who is sitting on the same side of the fence as the person being.."confronted"...."grilled"..."Investigated". ....what a joke.

1) Are questions from a person who thinks Phil is lying that of someone one the same side of the fence?

2) What purpose do I have to lie about the time Phil has to look at the questions I give him?