Continuation - The PG Film - Bob Heironimus and Patty

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by Óðinn

Sheriff, I agree that BH knows no one else will come forward. But I'm confident that Patterson & Gimlin were too short to be Patty.

and evidently he knew that immediately after the filming. Hmmm.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by Óðinn

I don't want to lay the whole thing out here, but it starts with my opinion that Patty's feet made the tracks. If Morris could supply us with the exact dimensions of his costume gorilla feet circa 1967 we could at least see if the feet were his. IMO, the feet on the suit are the only part that can be traced. Who made the feet?

I don't see how can simultaneously hold in one's mind the two ideas that Bob H. was in the suit, and that he made the deep footprints as represented by Patterson and Gimlin's interviews and casts. Either the footprints were made by an enormously heavy animal, or the animal was jumping from a substantial height (not walking as in the film), or they were faked by digging/imprinting/something. A human being in a suit could not have made the "footprints."
Do you disagree?

[kitakaze]

I spent about an hour and a half on the phone with Glenda Heironimus last night. For the most part I spoke just with her, but at the end Bob joined the conversation. Here are the highlights...

- Glenda came to Yakima from Wyoming in 1969.

- Glenda was a secretary for St. Elizabeth Hospital when she met Bob.

- She met Bob at the Caravan Inn lounge in Wiley City in 1969, a place where people would dance to country music.

- Glenda and Bob married in September 1970. They honeymooned in Victoria, BC, my hometown. (Interesting coincidence: Phil and Amy Morris last visited Victoria around the same time 40 years ago before coming to see me.)

- Glenda first found out about Bob being Bigfoot in 1969 when he brought it up in conversation. She did not believe him at the time. She later saw it on TV and realized that was what he was talking about. She was disinterested and did not care about the film.

- Glenda was at the Saddle Tree in 1970 with Bob when Bob approached Al DeAtley to get paid the $1000 Roger promised Bob. They were with Glenda'a sister, Diane, and her husband, Bob (it's raining Bobs), along with Gary Record and his wife. Glenda said that Bob pointed out Al DeAtley, whom she recognized, and spoke with her about if he should try talking to him. He decided it couldn't hurt to try. Al shut Bob down and told him to take it up with Roger. I asked Glenda if Bob seemed mad about it and she didn't think so.

- Glenda has never personally met either Roger or Patty Patterson.

- Glenda sees Bob Gimlin on occasion, who always says hello to her and is not hostile or cold in any way. Glenda has a cordial relationship with Judy Gimlin and they see each other and idly chat from time to time. Glenda says they have lived together on the same street for 27 years.

- Glenda has never seen Bob with any kind of suit and said he has never since being involved with Roger had any interest in Bigfoot or wearing Bigfoot costumes.

- Glenda has seen Al DeAtley many times but never met him personally or his wife, Iva (Roger's sister).

- Glenda said that when Bob decided to come out in 1999 that they did discuss it as a family and she stood by her husband's decision. She said they feared retaliation from Bigfoot fanatics as well as legal action from PGF principles. She said Bob has been harrassed by some weirdos but never herself personally.

- Glenda reiterated the fact that Bob has not made any money from his claim other than a few minor payments for brief interviews. Glenda was unhappy that she allowed the NatGeo crew into her home, fed them, and showed them around Yakima for two days and they allowed Kal Korff to take off to Czech with Bob's pay.

- Glenda said the PGF film was essentially nothing to her and that it rarely came up in conversation with her husband. She said that Yakima was a very small community and that they carried on with their lives and their families. Glenda characterizes Bob as always having been a loving family man. When I asked what she would say to all those people that would say that Bob, her, Opal, Willa, Howard, Gary, Bernard, John, Diane and Bob, etc have lied to help Bob defraud the PGF principles and make money, she said she didn't care what they think because they are only Bigfoot believers who will never change their beliefs no matter what happens.

Glenda stressed that everyone in town knew that Bob was in tha Bigfoot film and it simply isn't a big deal in their community. She brought up the fact that twice Bob had passed a polygraph in defence of himself and I spoke with her about my efforts to get Gimlin to take a polygraph.

- Glenda was very friendly and accommodating. She was level-headed and had little concern for anyone who would call them liars. She said that she knew her family and that they were good people who just tried to live their lives. Glenda said she was looking forward to meeting me and thanked me for the effort I was going to for her husband.

[River]

Originally Posted by Óðinn

I don't want to lay the whole thing out here

Why not? Looks a lot like a dodge to me.

Quote:

but it starts with my opinion that Patty's feet made the tracks.

Nope. No way. What do you base that on exactly?

Quote:

If Morris could supply us with the exact dimensions of his costume gorilla feet circa 1967 we could at least see if the feet were his. IMO, the feet on the suit are the only part that can be traced. Who made the feet?

I agree that if Morris could supply (or if anyone has some laying around) one of his feet from that time period, and it matched would be a great find.... However, even if it did not match it does not prove anything about the hoax. (rumors of modified slippers?) Also, I think youre trying to base that on the whole idea that the subject seen on film left those tracks. I completely disagree. (for many reasons) If you let go of the theory of "patty" leaving those tracks, your height estimate may have to be slightly different unless you're wanting to take a guess at some numbers.

What reason do you have to believe that those tracks were left by the subject in the film?

[Óðinn]

Originally Posted by River

Why not? Looks a lot like a dodge to me.

River, it's because it's more effort than I care to expend and a waste of time debating with you. I know where you stand and you ain't budging, so what's the point?

Quote:

Nope. No way. What do you base that on exactly?

Yep. Yes way. I base it on far more than Gimlin's testimony that the tracks were "deeper" than his horse's. I mean come on. If you think Gimlin's lying about the PGF, then why would you believe the "deep" track nonsense. Got a photo of Gimlin's horse beside a Patty track? Waiting..

Quote:

I agree that if Morris could supply (or if anyone has some laying around) one of his feet from that time period, and it matched would be a great find.... However, even if it did not match it does not prove anything about the hoax. (rumors of modified slippers?)

Come one, you're citing rumours? So how would you go about modifying the Morris gorilla feet, that we know nothing about? And who said anything about proof? Let's employ Occam's razor. Simplest is best.

Quote:

Also, I think youre trying to base that on the whole idea that the subject seen on film left those tracks. I completely disagree. (for many reasons) If you let go of the theory of "patty" leaving those tracks, your height estimate may have to be slightly different unless you're wanting to take a guess at some numbers.

You completely disagree (for many reasons) that are left unstated. Sounds like a dodge.

Quote:

What reason do you have to believe that those tracks were left by the subject in the film?

You're trying to suck me into your "the tracks were faked because they are so deep" hypothesis which I ain't buying. There is absolutely NOTHING to base that on except Gimlin's word. Why would you trust that?

In a nutshell:

* Patty's foot in the PGF looks EXACTLY like the tracks
* Making a convincing trackway is much more complicated than casting the actor's tracks
* If Patty's foot was 14.5", she's ~6 feet tall
* If Patty's foot was 12", she's under 5 feet tall
* DesertYeti thinks Patty laid down the tracks

There's more but like I say, I don't want to lay it all out here, at this time. Interpret that any way you'd like. I don't really care.

[parnassus]

k:
you might ask Bob H. if he went to Davis High School.
Also you might ask him if he can look at a high school yearbook and possibly refer to other people. I would also suggest you find out where Gimlin went to HS and get ahold of some of his classmates.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by Óðinn

River, it's because it's more effort than I care to expend and a waste of time debating with you. I know where you stand and you ain't budging, so what's the point?


Yep. Yes way. I base it on far more than Gimlin's testimony that the tracks were "deeper" than his horse's. I mean come on. If you think Gimlin's lying about the PGF, then why would you believe the "deep" track nonsense. Got a photo of Gimlin's horse beside a Patty track? Waiting..


Come one, you're citing rumours? So how would you go about modifying the Morris gorilla feet, that we know nothing about? And who said anything about proof? Let's employ Occam's razor. Simplest is best.


You completely disagree (for many reasons) that are left unstated. Sounds like a dodge.


You're trying to suck me into your "the tracks were faked because they are so deep" hypothesis which I ain't buying. There is absolutely NOTHING to base that on except Gimlin's word. Why would you trust that?

In a nutshell:

* Patty's foot in the PGF looks EXACTLY like the tracks
* Making a convincing trackway is much more complicated than casting the actor's tracks
* If Patty's foot was 14.5", she's ~6 feet tall
* If Patty's foot was 12", she's under 5 feet tall
* DesertYeti thinks Patty laid down the tracks

There's more but like I say, I don't want to lay it all out here, at this time. Interpret that any way you'd like. I don't really care.

Gimlin's word? not any good? hmmm. '

The floppy toes in the PGF are one of the strongest arguments that this is a suit, though goofball Meldrum, inexplicably, tries to wrap it into his flexible foot theory. Those extensions/"toes" could not have made any significant impression. I don't find the contention of similarity between foot and print to be very persuasive; the resolution of the film simply isn't good enough to show us detail. I don't doubt that they were similar; Patterson had made several stomper casts previously and could easily have done it again using the costume feet as models. I do think he may have used the faint trackway made by Bob H., and simply enhanced the prints. That would have been the smart thing to do, as the measured stride length etc would have then fit the film evidence.

[William Parcher]

Bob Gimlin speaking about Bob Heironimus at 5:02.

Q: Is it true that you and Bob Heironimus are still friends?...
Gimlin: ...I don't consider him a friend. (this was followed by audience applause)

Gimlin says he never knew it was a female until folks started looking at the film. Yet in the first newspaper article Roger talks about it being female before anybody was supposed to have seen the film.

[tube]

Originally Posted by parnassus

Gimlin's word? not any good? hmmm. '

The floppy toes in the PGF are one of the strongest arguments that this is a suit, though goofball Meldrum, inexplicably, tries to wrap it into his flexible foot theory. Those extensions/"toes" could not have made any significant impression. I don't find the contention of similarity between foot and print to be very persuasive; the resolution of the film simply isn't good enough to show us detail. I don't doubt that they were similar; Patterson had made several stomper casts previously and could easily have done it again using the costume feet as models. I do think he may have used the faint trackway made by Bob H., and simply enhanced the prints. That would have been the smart thing to do, as the measured stride length etc would have then fit the film evidence.

Please forgive me for posting something you may have seen before, I know others here have already seen this.

Clearly a great deal of this has to do with the substrate. My own suspicion is that the alleged rigidity of the Bluff Creek substrate has been exaggerated. It's possible that the tracks were laid down when the ground was wet, and therefore more compliant.

While it's possible that the tracks were made with rigid prosthetics, I also think it's possible that they were made by the film subject, which is most likely a guy-in-a-suit. My own analysis of the "mid-tarsal break" is essentially the same as DesertYeti's:

http://orgoneresearch.com/2009/10/19...-tarsal-break/

[William Parcher]

The feet of the costume may have been used after the filming to get better impressions for inspection and casting. Roger may have decided that the only tracks worth doing a second impression were those in moist areas. If those left by the filmed actor were smudgy he could place a new precise track on top of any indistinct one.

Bill Munns has every frame from the walk scene. We could ask him to post the one we call "Perfectfoot" and ask that it be from the Pat Patterson copy. Maybe the frames surrounding it also show foot details.

[GT/CS]

Originally Posted by tube

Please forgive me for posting something you may have seen before, I know others here have already seen this.

Clearly a great deal of this has to do with the substrate. My own suspicion is that the alleged rigidity of the Bluff Creek substrate has been exaggerated. It's possible that the tracks were laid down when the ground was wet, and therefore more compliant.

While it's possible that the tracks were made with rigid prosthetics, I also think it's possible that they were made by the film subject, which is most likely a guy-in-a-suit. My own analysis of the "mid-tarsal break" is essentially the same as DesertYeti's:

http://orgoneresearch.com/2009/10/19...-tarsal-break/

No way.

The left and right prints are in a straight line. Whoever pressed the molds into the ground didn't think about how bipeds really walk.

[Óðinn]

Originally Posted by GT/CS

No way.

The left and right prints are in a straight line. Whoever pressed the molds into the ground didn't think about how bipeds really walk.

[Óðinn]

Originally Posted by parnassus

Gimlin's word? not any good? hmmm. '

Focus on the logic, not the poster. Who cares what I think?

Quote:

The floppy toes in the PGF are one of the strongest arguments that this is a suit, though goofball Meldrum, inexplicably, tries to wrap it into his flexible foot theory. Those extensions/"toes" could not have made any significant impression.

Then you obviously haven't done any experimentation. This one's a biggie. If the toes are floppin' then they wouldn't leave appreciable impressions. If they were rigid, then we wouldn't see what we see in the film. So they must have been rigid enough to leave the tracks, yet floppy enough to see them bending in the film. The feet are still an enigma, IMO.

Quote:

I don't find the contention of similarity between foot and print to be very persuasive; the resolution of the film simply isn't good enough to show us detail. I don't doubt that they were similar; Patterson had made several stomper casts previously and could easily have done it again using the costume feet as models.

Again you imply that it would be easy to create a fake trackway that would pass muster. Anything to back that up?

Quote:

I do think he may have used the faint trackway made by Bob H., and simply enhanced the prints. That would have been the smart thing to do, as the measured stride length etc would have then fit the film evidence.

Why would the trackway be faint? It was supposedly only a couple weeks later, without rain I believe. Are you implying that Bob H took 41" steps?

[tube]

There are multiple possibilities. If the film subject stepped into a particularly soft patch of soil and made the "Laverty photo" print, then why mess with it?

It's possible that rigid prosthetics were employed to create other tracks in harder soil, and those prosthetics were flat-bottomed, which is why we see a number of flat-bottomed casts from that trackway.

If rigid prosthetics were employed, they would presumably be used over the already existing film subject tracks.

[GT/CS]

Originally Posted by Óðinn

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y16.../stepangle.gif

Thanks for proving my point. Do you not see how close the prints are laterally?

[kitakaze]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

Bob Gimlin speaking about Bob Heironimus at 5:02.

Q: Is it true that you and Bob Heironimus are still friends?...
Gimlin: ...I don't consider him a friend. (this was followed by audience applause)

Gimlin says he never knew it was a female until folks started looking at the film. Yet in the first newspaper article Roger talks about it being female before anybody was supposed to have seen the film.

This is a riot. No, he is not my friend. Only Roger and I were there. OK, next question. What's that? Yes, your welcome for not shooting the Bigfoot.

Wow, that was rough. How ever did he sweat through that?

[WGBH]

Originally Posted by kitakaze

This is a riot. No, he is not my friend. Only Roger and I were there. OK, next question. What's that? Yes, your welcome for not shooting the Bigfoot.

Wow, that was rough. How ever did he sweat through that?

Regardless of if you believe Mr. Gimlin, Why do you feel a need to see him sweat? You claimed if you were permitted to interview him you would be civil and not insulting. Yet most times on these forums your behavoir (or the appearence of it) seems to indicate otherwise. Perhaps this is the reason you are not able to talk to some of the people in Bigfootry you desire to talk with for your film? You mistake fear for loathing.

[tube]

Originally Posted by GT/CS

Thanks for proving my point. Do you not see how close the prints are laterally?

I'm afraid the photo I'm linking to was taken more than 4 years ago, and I didn't record additional information about the event. But if my memory is correct, the heavy trackway you see in the middle of the picture was made by me using the plastic prosthetics I've shown previously.

My point being that I discovered for myself that a compliant gait, like we see in the film subject, tends to create a more straight-line set of tracks than a normal striding gait.

Being that I'm relying on a four year old photo and my memory, I would have a stronger case if I repeated the test.

Both advocates and skeptics seem to agree that the film subject is walking with a compliant gait. So it's not surprising that the tracks, (if made by the film subject) are more linear than those of a walking man.

It's my OPINION that the film is fake and that the tracks that were made in soft soil were simply left alone, and those that were made in harder soil were enhanced with flat, rigid prosthetics.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/matthetube/4818454642/

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by Óðinn

Munns also stitched together a composite of the trackway. See below...



In his new report he says that there may be errors made in trying to use this. He doesn't outright say that Meldrum's stride measurement may be wrong - but that is what he is talking about.

Originally Posted by Munns Report

The problem of this technique is that of the 202 frames, one can choose different frames to make the composite and skew the dimensional accuracy of the resulting trackway (because of some distortion in the sides of each frame image, caused by the camera lens), so any one trackway composite actually cannot be used for a dimensional measurement of one footprint to the next (the step measurement). Even scaling the plaster poured print to the reported 14.5" length cannot assure this composite is dimensionally accurate. However, some researchers do use the composite for analysis work, as it provides some fair approximation of the trackway.

[tube]

I think I posted this image years ago, but at the time I was using Photobucket, which compresses the image. These days I use Flickr exclusively, as you can upload very large files without compression.

Here is what a Wallace style flat bottomed fake foot can produce if pushed statically into the substrate:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/matthetube/4818196349/

So at least it's proof that one can mash a rigid prosthetic into the ground to provide the illusion of a great force having made the track.

[kitakaze]

Idiocy and Lies by the BFRO:

Starting with the title...

All the Costume Confessions, Now Obsolete

Nice deceiving plural. There has only ever been one person publicly confess to being Patty. That man is Bob Heironimus. The BFRO is lying to you and they know it. Honesty means nothing to that boonswoggle organization. Perpetuating the belief in Bigfoot and cashing in on it means everything.

Between the beginning of 1996 and the end of 1999, a new crop of PGF debunking rumors blossomed, as large segments of the North American population were connecting to the Internet for the first time. Some of those claims were promoted by clever opportunists. A handful of these rumors received regional press attention. A few received national press attention.

The stories did not corroborate each other. They were all contradictory in their details, but they all claimed to debunk the Patterson footage. After a while it became increasingly ludicrous to hear more stories claiming to be the "final resolution of the mystery."

And not a single confession in there outside of BH. All the costume confessions? BFRO lies.

Ironically, the most influential rumor floating around today is the one inadvertently promoted by the National Geographic Channel a few years back, in 2005 ... The series title was "Is it Real?". The episode title was "Bigfoot." Youtubery of this old episode can be accessed below.

The episode featured a new liar "confessing" to be "the man in the costume." His name is Bob Hieronimous. Millions of people apparently saw that episode, or heard about it from others, because people often bring it up with us. His "confession" has even found its way into foreign publications describing nature mysteries around the world.

Inadvertantly promoted? New liar? What are these fools talking about? Make that "fool". Money is the one writing these lies. I know far more about that show tham Money ever will. The show sought to address BH's claims. Patty Patterson and Bob Gimlin refused to take part or give any comment. They did take money, though. If it is true that Bob Gimlin received $5000 for use of the stills, he took money that did not belong to him, but rather Erik and Martin Dahinden. Money wants you to believe in the PGF and thus Bigfoot. Money wants countless people all over the country dropping heavy cash to go on "expeditions" in which you may get a pinecone tossed your way or hear a wail off in the distance. Give me $20 and I will do that for you. Money is a modern day Patterson. Man seeking to live off Bigfoot complete with sugardaddy. Wally Hersom is his DeAtley. I think the BFRO is in the business of lying to people about Bigfoot. I think if half the garbage that Money writes was true, the BFRO has had literally countless times to prove Bigfoot's existence in the last 15 years. I think Money knows quite well Bigfoot does not exist but people with money who believe in it do. Do you believe in Bigfoot? Hey, that's no problem. Bigfoot is awesome. Do your thing and have fun, but don't get sideswiped by Money's snowjob routine.

At least this confessor lived in Yakima (where Patterson was from). Hieronimous claims he was friends with Roger Patterson, and accompanied Patterson and Gimlin to Nor Cal with his costume.

This confessor is the only confessor, lying fool. He was a friend of Bob Gimlin and Roger Patterson. Gimlin admits this. His brother lived with Patty Patterson before she married Roger. Her father, Willis Mondor, bought Roger and Patty's house from Bob Heironimus' grandfather.

Patterson's widow says he's lying. Bob Gimlin says he's lying. No one can corroborate Hieronimous' claim that he accompanied Patterson and Gimlin.

Wow. Two people who receive money for use of the PGF and adoration from its fans say Bob is lying. No one can corroborate Heironimus' claim? Money, you lying swindler, you're going to have to go the nefarious collusion route if you want to even get in this ball game. Try Opal H, Willa H, Glenda H, John M, Diane and Bob C, Gary R, Howard H, Les J, Bernard H, Russ B, etc.

Various living witnesses near Bluff Creek say Patterson and Gimlin were not accompanied by anyone.

Al Hodgson and Syl McCoy. They did not accompany Roger and Bob to Bluff Creek, did they? So, that really doesn't mean anything, does it? They also said Roger showed them a bent stirrup from when the horse fell on him and crushed his foot. What happened to that little detail? Nevermind, it's one of those things a Bigfoot pirate isn't interested in.

Hieronimous doesn't know where they went exactly, or which route they too.

Except for the fact that he describes the trip to Bluff Creek consistently and with details only someone who was there when they said they were would know. It's OK to misremember the name Weitchpec as Willow Creek 37 years after the fact.

Indeed, there is every reason to believe Hieronimous is trying to attach himself to the Patterson story with his own fiction.

Except for all those people who confirm Bob's testimony. Indeed, there is every reason to believe Patterson was a huckster and a hoaxer with a strong motivation to make a fake Bigfoot film.

Roger Patterson apparently knew Bob Hieronimous before he obtained the footage in 1967. Patterson had been wanting to film a low budget documentary about the subject. He organzied some people in Yakima for some stock scenes on horseback for his film. Bob Hieronimous was apparently one of those people, but that appears to be the extend of his assocation with Roger.

It's not apparently, Money. It's a fact. Roger was not making a documentary, he was making a fictional film about an old miner and a wise Indian tracker that lead a group of cowboys on the hunt for Bigfoot. One of those cowboys, Howard Heironimus, told me that Roger came to him and asked him to be in a Bigfoot movie he was doing to make some money. He asked Howard at the outset if his brother Bob would be interested in playing Bigfoot. The extent of BH's association with Gimlin and Patterson is far greater than you will dare to admit to the people you are telling these lies to.

Patterson was, apparently, the only one among them who was willing and capable of leading extended horsepacking trips in the mountains where tracks were being found most often -- down around Bluff Creek, California.

Yes, Roger was at Bluff Creek in '67 before October. And yes, tracks were being found. Fake tracks. Ray Wallace tracks. John Green and others promoted them as real for decades until skeptics showed them to be Wallace tracks. Doh!

Hieronimous Patterson was aware of the widespread interest in the topic. Based on his own statements, it is obvious that he only looked upon the mystery as a opportunity for cashing in somehow. He may have acquired his own cheap gorilla costume before in 1961 and 1967 in preparation for hoaxing his own footage.

Fixed it.

There are statements from people around Yakima who recall Hieronimous having some kind of furry costume in his trunk during that period, and remember his claims that he would try to fool some people with it. So there may have been a costume in his possession in the mid-1960's, but he didn't hang on to it, nor did anyone take a photo of him wearing it.

One man, Money. Please don't lie. It was Roger's friend and fellow actor in his movie, John Ballard. He clearly mixed up memories of a grey Bigfoot creature being sighted around Yakima in '66 when Patterson was plastering the town with Bigfoot posters and serendipitously having book signings right after such events with Bob H showing Gary, Bernard, Howard, and one or two others the suit from Bluff Creek in his mother's trunk. That same man also thought the PGF was a hoax based on what he knew of Roger and didn't mind if he hoaxed the film for money.

Hieronimous is, in fact, one of Bob Gimlin's neighbors, but Gimlin had little social contact with him over the years.

Gimlin has boarded and trained horses for decades. It was not uncommon to for him to board horses of neighbors. During the late 1960's one of the horses he boarded was owned by Hieronimous. It was, in fact, Hieronimous' horse that Bob brought down to Bluff Creek in 1967.

If Hieronimous had felt left out of Patterson's project by 1967, it would have added insult to injury to learn that his own horse was used by Gimlin on the horse trip that made them both famous.

Yes, Chico was there. It's a little detail Gimlin likes to leave out when he's doing his song and dance at the Bigfoot enthusiast conferences getting money and love. Little problem - Gimlin had Chico for only eight days, only for the trip to Bluff Creek, and had already been trained by Bob Heironimus. He and all his brothers were accomplished horsemen.

Bob Gimlin (right) is an authentic horse-whisperer, straight out of an old Disney film. He was a champion in his day (champion boxer, rodeo contender, etc.). He worked in a variety of jobs and eventually became a full-time horse trainer, his true passion in life.

You forgot to call him an American Legend, Money. You also forgot to add that he worked at Noel Pepsi Corporation with Bob Heironimus after the film came out.

The reason Gimlin was involved with the Patterson footage to begin with was because of his reputation as a talented horseman. Patterson needed the toughest, most dependable horseman he could find for that 1967 trip in the mountains of Nor Cal. Everyone knew Gimlin was the best of the best in the region when it came to the sort of venture Patterson was proposing.

Wait a minute, don't you mean gifted Indian tracker? That was the crap they kept telling the media. Money is hilarious making up this crap.

Yakima folks say Bob Hieronimous (left), by contrast, was always an under-achiever, since he was young. His bare-minimum work ethic won him no admirers in the community. He didn't have many friends, compared to Gimlin. Gimlin had a rather large circle of friends in the Yakima Valley.

Hieronimous lives right down the street from Bob and Judy Gimlin.

Compared to the Hieronimous property, the Gimlins seem to have done nicely for themselves. The Gimlins' home has always been well maintained, and nicely painted, and the landscaping nicely manicured. The Gimlins always had nicer, newer vehicles in their driveway too. The Hieronimous family could never keep up with those Joneses.



What lying scum. Name them. Name one. Money is describing Patterson to a T. Is being the manager of not one but two major ranches and handling hundreds of thousands of dollars an under-achiever? Is working hard since you were a teenager and raising a family a bare-minimum work ethic? Money lies.

But Gimlin never made any money off the PGF,



I must remember not to have a beverage when I read Money lies. Never made any money. That's a fact, huh? I guess all the thousands of dollars and taking Patty to court to get money was nothing.

When Hieronimous was asked, during an in-depth, on-camera interview why he was coming forward 40 years after the fact ... his reply confused the interviewer a bit. Hieronimous said, "All these people have been making money off that footage for years. It's my turn now." See that interview below.

He was referring to all the other people who had claimed to be involved with the footage, who Hieronimous assumed made money from their claims. It was time for him to get a piece of that action.

Sweet Fancy Moses, this guy is giving me a bullkaka overdose. He was referring to all the other people who had claimed to be involved with the footage? Man, Money has this boonswoggling thing down. He was referring to people like Patty Patterson, Bob Gimlin, and Al DeAtley. You know, that guy that took Roger and made hundreds of thousands of dollars in 60's money promoting a film he knew was fake across America.

Gimlin's association with the famous footage, and the common assumption that it was a hoax, became such an annoyance to him and his wife by the end of the 1970's that he eventually refused to speak about the matter publicly, for nearly three decades ... until he learned of his envious neighbor's phony story about wearing the costume. That's when Gimlin finally broke his long silence.

Newsflash, Money. Gimlin's silence is only unbroken with adoring fans at Bigfoot enthusiast conventions where he'll charge you cash for his autograph. To people with legitimate and difficult questions, the silence continues.

Roger was an unsophisticated cowboy, but a highly motivated, multi-skilled cowboy with big aspirations. Only a few years after obtaining the footage he was diagnosed with terminal cancer. He died in 1972, at the age of 46. Apparently (and not surprisingly) Roger had not repaid all his personal debts, or completed all his planned projects, or returned all his borrowed items, before his cancer put him into the bed where he eventually died.

46? Money, you can't even get your basic PGF facts straight. Try 37, cheap a simp. Yes, Roger had lots of unpaid debts. Some of them, like that to Vilma Radford or Bod Swanson, he could have made go away immediately when he was given $75,000 by DeAtley.

When the two men came into view of the creature, Roger's normally unspookable mountain horse reared up in panic and fell over on him. Roger's leg was pinned to the ground. With a thrashing horse pinning him to the ground, he pulled himself out from underneath it, and whipped out a 16mm camera from a saddle bag, and then dashed toward the fleeing figure, finally steadying his aim as it walked away.

Money has the version he likes. He's going with pinned by his horse.

Patterson was not a hoaxer. Patterson was an authentic cowboy, on an authentic cowboy mission. He accomplished that mission on the afternoon of October 20, 1967... and then died from cancer a few years later (probably due to his cowboy lifestyle ...).

Funny how that authentic cowboy on his authentic cowboy mission split out of Bluff Creek without getting his sugardaddy to help him get local tracking dogs to track down the giant, stinking creature that apparently left giant tracks and proceeded directly to set up Bigfoot Enterprises in Hollywood to facilitate making the buckets of money he would pour on himself.

Ugh. Enough of this. This is about as much Money lies I can handle in one day. I'll get to the rest of that pile of swindler lies later.

[HarryHenderson]

So what yer saying is, Bob Heironimus is the guy?

[Skeptical Greg]

Quote:

Patterson was not a hoaxer. Patterson was an authentic cowboy, on an authentic cowboy mission. He accomplished that mission on the afternoon of October 20, 1967... and then died from cancer a few years later (probably due to his cowboy lifestyle ...).

'Ceptin, he didn't have his rope with him on that day ...
What kind of cowboy is that ?

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by Bill Munns on BFF

If we assume for the moment that Bob H. is really wearing a costume and is what we see in the PGF, and he weighs more than Patterson or Gimlin (being a larger, taller) man), and Bob Titmus found evidence of a single "BF" trackway plus some footprints of Roger and/or Bob Gimlin, so he could claim to determine where Roger was when he filmed, what happened to Bob H's footprint trackway?

What happened to Lyle Laverty's footprint trackway and others too? You see Bill, Titmus' report must be regarded as incomplete or selective. It cannot be trusted to give a complete mental picture of what was and was not visible on that sandbar.

We must also remember that Bob Titmus had castings of tracks that were created by Ray Wallace's rigid feet which were carved from Alderwood. Titmus regarded those fakes as being authentic. Therefore, Titmus cannot be relied upon to identify any track or trackway as being hoaxed.

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Quote:

Newsflash, Money.

Gimlin's silence is only unbroken with adoring fans at Bigfoot enthusiast conventions where he'll charge you cash for his autograph. To people with legitimate and difficult questions, the silence continues

Newsflash, Monkey....Bob Gimlin's silence, with skeptics, continues for good reason...from Gimlin's point-of-view.


Moneymaker hinted at the reason, in his article...

"Gimlin's association with the famous footage, and the common assumption that it was a hoax, became such an annoyance to him and his wife by the end of the 1970's that he eventually refused to speak about the matter publicly,..."


Bob Gimlin saw the general public's, and scientists' reactions to the film, many years ago...and, came to the realization that the film wasn't going to be accepted, by the masses.

So....pardon him if he doesn't feel like trying to 'twist a skeptic's arm', at this point in his life.

[kitakaze]

If I was an old Yakima dude and I knew I lied about an old Bigfoot film and my wife was sick of the whole thing, I would be saying, "No comment," a lot.

If I was an old Yakima dude telling the truth about some old Bigfoot film and people everywhere thought I was lying, I'd jump at the chance to take a polygraph...

Bob Heironimus - 2 (one on national television)

Bob Gimlin - *crickets*

[WGBH]

OK Joshua,

If Bob Gimlin did take a polygraph test and passed it with flying colors, how would that effect your opinions on the PGF, Patterson, Gimlin and Bob H.?

Would you use the old " polygraphs can be fooled", these tests are flawed answer?

Would it peek your interest enough to investigate this mystery further?

We all know if he failed it, you would scream from the rooftops that it proves he is lying, even though it does not.

[dafydd]

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti

Bob Gimlin saw the general public's, and scientists' reactions to the film, many years ago...and, came to the realization that the film wasn't going to be accepted, by the masses.

.

For a very good reason.

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by WGBH

OK Joshua,

If Bob Gimlin did take a polygraph test and passed it with flying colors, how would that effect your opinions on the PGF, Patterson, Gimlin and Bob H.?

kitakaze's opinion of the PG Film doesn't matter. And neither does anybody else's opinion of the PG Film matter....as far as what is really important, in dealing with this issue.


The Film needs to be 'solved'.....proven....to be one thing or the other...it doesn't need a continuing "Opinion War" to be fought over it.

Quote:

Would you use the old " polygraphs can be fooled", these tests are flawed answer?

OF COURSE he would, John.....any "Good Skeptic" would.


Important Update......

TO DATE.....Not ONE 'Good Skeptic' of Jref has given ONE piece of evidence for Bigfoot ONE OUNCE of weight....(any significant 'degree of probability' of being true, or real).

And that includes your sighting, John.


If you don't think that's true....just ask if any of the "Skeptics" here give your sighting any significant 'degree of probability' of being true.



A 'case in point'.....relating to polygraph tests, and kitakaze's response to their results...

In the Monsterquest 'Close Encounters' episode...Part 5...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mQWs8IdnQ4

....two people, who say they saw/encountered a Bigfoot...(Aaron Wheeler and David Griffin)...took polygraph tests.
Aaron failed his, and David passed his.


In another thread, kitz 'went-off'....joyously...proclaiming "Victory" about Aaron failing his test....but yet, had nothing positive to say about David Griffin passing his test.


In Part 5, David Griffin states:

"I saw what I saw...and, I know what I saw".

And the man who administered the test stated..."David Griffin is non-deceptive to that question....so..."

Quote:

We all know if he failed it, you would scream from the rooftops that it proves he is lying, even though it does not.

He sure would!

[The Shrike]

Consider, friends, that it's not so much the result of a Gimlin polygraph that would be telling, it would be the refusal to take one that speaks volumes.

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by The Shrike

Consider, friends, that it's not so much the result of a Gimlin polygraph that would be telling, it would be the refusal to take one that speaks volumes.

Roger Patterson took a polygraph test....and passed it.


According to Shrike's statement above....the simple willingness to take a polygraph test SPEAKS VOLUMES....IN ROGER'S FAVOR......and then, to boot, we have the result.....he passed!

Thanks, Shrike!

[William Parcher]

Patterson's polygraph test is just like a Bigfoot sighting. Somebody says it happened but there ain't any physical evidence for it.

[William Parcher]

IMO, there is enough morphologic variability in these Titmus casts of Patty to justify a variety of techniques. Some may have been made with the costume feet; some with a stamp device; and some formed or enhanced by hand. They look inconsistent to the extent that I wonder why Titmus didn't mention such. Well, I know why he didn't.

[kitakaze]

Originally Posted by WGBH

OK Joshua,

If Bob Gimlin did take a polygraph test and passed it with flying colors, how would that effect your opinions on the PGF, Patterson, Gimlin and Bob H.?

Would you use the old " polygraphs can be fooled", these tests are flawed answer?

Would it peek your interest enough to investigate this mystery further?

We all know if he failed it, you would scream from the rooftops that it proves he is lying, even though it does not.

First, please understand, I am publicly offering to pay the $400-500 for Gimlin to take a polygraph test. The Gimlin Guard and PGF Mafia know this. He can do it right there in Yakima. It could happen in the comfort of his own home. If Bob Gimlin passed a polygraph with flying colours, I would be genuinely stumped. I would not go the route of "polygraphs can be fooled." Two times BH passed a polygraph - that's 2. One was on national television. There he is in a tv studio with the lights on him and a studio audience and he passes. You should see the old BFF thread that was started leading up to that broadcast. People were waiting for him to fry. Like, salivating for fail. When he passed - pandemonium. You could almost hear the wailing like a Mob funeral.

If Bob G passed a polygraph, I would be confounded. I wouldn't ask him to do another. I would be standing there like an orangutan with a Rubik's Cube. Me what now do?

If Bob failed the test as I expect he would, I would ask for a detailed report from the examiner and the original results. I would also make sure the test was taped for future examination by people trained in detecting deception.

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

Patterson's polygraph test is just like a Bigfoot sighting. Somebody says it happened but there ain't any physical evidence for it.

As for Heironimus' polygraph test on 'Lie Detector'....I saw the show, when it aired....and what I saw.....was a farce.

From what I remember, they didn't show the response graph, during the test itself. At the end of the show, they just said...."He passed the test!"...as Heirony sat there, looking as scared as could be.


Also, during the questioning, I noticed that Bob was slowly, and deliberately, closing his eyes, just before giving each answer....as if he was trying to relax himself.
("Not that there's anything wrong with that!")


I have the show on tape....somewhere, in a pile of poorly-labeled videotapes....and, someday, I may actually find it....with a LOT of luck.
If I do, I'll transfer it onto dvd...and post a video clip from it.

[William Parcher]

We have no evidence whatsoever of Roger's polygraph. So we can't say that he didn't "act or look guilty" during the process as you are implying for BH.

A polygraph failure by Gimlin would never be considered the equivalent of a confession. The believers would likely keep on believing. He's a folk hero for a cult and that isn't going to change.

[WGBH]

Sweaty Yeti Says...

Important Update......

TO DATE.....Not ONE 'Good Skeptic' of Jref has given ONE piece of evidence for Bigfoot ONE OUNCE of weight....(any significant 'degree of probability' of being true, or real).

And that includes your sighting, John.

Sweaty Yeti,

At first it bothered me. Now I could care less if ANYONE believes my sighting. Most of my family, friends and co-workers laugh at me. Someone believing in my encounter does not get me closer to my goal and neither does arguing pro or con over a 43 year old blurry film. I want scientific documentation of the existence of the animal.

I dont care about the foot casts, the stick structures,the blurry photos, or the unusual recordings. I don't care about the MTB or the supposed language, Bill Munns or the Skookum elk cast.

When I use or take a sighting report the importance is the date, time and location.

I am not a Bigfoot fan. I do not read Bigfoot books. I do not watch Bigfoot DVD's. I do not wear Bigfoot T-shirts. When I attend Bigfoot conferences, I do not even pay attention to most of the so-called "experts" yakking. I do NOT go to buy a $50 autographed Patty foot cast from Dr. Meldrum. I go to talk to other boots on the ground researchers, exchange ideas and learn new ones. I get out there and look.

Is that clear enough?

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by WGBH

Now I could care less if ANYONE believes my sighting. Most of my family, friends and co-workers laugh at me.

Originally Posted by John Cartwright on BFF

The few people I attempted to share my sightng with in 1983 basically crucified me, so I talked to NO ONE about my sighting, for 15 years until I made a report to the BFRO in 1998. Not even my family know.

Something doesn't match up there. Cite.

Quote:

I am not a Bigfoot fan. I do not read Bigfoot books. I do not watch Bigfoot DVD's. I do not wear Bigfoot T-shirts. When I attend Bigfoot conferences, I do not even pay attention to most of the so-called "experts" yakking. I do NOT go to buy a $50 autographed Patty foot cast from Dr. Meldrum. I go to talk to other boots on the ground researchers, exchange ideas and learn new ones. I get out there and look.

Is that clear enough?

But you go as far as placing a picture of your Bigfoot on Roger Patterson's grave. You are deeply obsessed. Your caption for this photo is "God Bless you Roger". You are deep into it and one of them. Is that clear enough?

Edited by Tricky:

Picture removed. Please make sure you either own or have copyright permission before attaching pictures.

[SweatyYeti]

Originally Posted by WGBH

Sweaty Yeti Says...

Important Update......

TO DATE.....Not ONE 'Good Skeptic' of Jref has given ONE piece of evidence for Bigfoot ONE OUNCE of weight....(any significant 'degree of probability' of being true, or real).

And that includes your sighting, John.

Sweaty Yeti,

At first it bothered me. Now I could care less if ANYONE believes my sighting. Most of my family, friends and co-workers laugh at me. Someone believing in my encounter does not get me closer to my goal and neither does arguing pro or con over a 43 year old blurry film. I want scientific documentation of this existence of the animal.

I dont care about the foot casts, the stick structures,the blurry photos, or the unusual recordings. I don't care about the MTB or the supposed language, Bill Munns or the Skookum elk cast.

When I use or take a sighting report the importance is the date, time and location.

I am not a Bigfoot fan. I do not read Bigfoot books. I do not watch Bigfoot DVD's. I do not wear Bigfoot T-shirts. When I attend Bigfoot conferences, I do not even pay attention to most of the so-called "experts" yakking. I do NOT go to buy a $50 autographed Patty foot cast from Dr. Meldrum. I go to talk to other boots on the ground researchers, exchange ideas and learn new ones. I get out there and look.

Is that clear enough?

Sure, that's very clear! And very understandable.

I think basically the same way....that throwing more 'sighting reports/footprints/wood knocks/grunts and groans' onto the pile of existing 'sighting reports/footprints/wood knocks/grunts and groans'....doesn't really accomplish much...if anything.

We already have enough evidence to justify a major, conclusive search...in certain parts of the country. And I think it should be done.

[SweatyYeti]

kitakaze wrote:

Quote:

If Bob Gimlin passed a polygraph with flying colours, I would be genuinely stumped.

"genuinely stumped"...



Genuine BS.


More on that, later...