JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags bigfoot , Bob Gimlin , Bob Heironimus , Patterson-Gimlin film , Roger Patterson

Reply
Old 27th January 2010, 12:02 PM   #281
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 14,518
Quote:
Also, Bob simply couldn't have made the trackway, in his alleged "walk as Patty", because he's not nearly heavy enough to have made impressions that deep into the ground.
No evidence of track depth or soil hardness.
__________________
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?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th January 2010, 12:26 PM   #282
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
 
Skeptical Greg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past 'Resume Speed'
Posts: 13,428
Originally Posted by SweatyYeti View Post
That's true...to an extent. Don't forget that Patty's heel extends back further than a human's does...
A rubber foot can have the heel anywhere you want it to ..

Quote:
Also, Bob simply couldn't have made the trackway, in his alleged "walk as Patty", because he's not nearly heavy enough to have made impressions that deep into the ground.
There is no reason to believe the subject in the film made any of the impressions that were cast..
__________________
" The main problem I have with the idea of Heaven, is the thought of spending
eternity with most of the people who claim they are going there. "

Prove your computer is not a wimp ! Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Skeptical Greg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th January 2010, 02:38 PM   #283
The Shrike
Master Poster
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 2,393
Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg View Post
There is no reason to believe the subject in the film made any of the impressions that were cast..
I'm always surprised by how readily bigfooters discount this possibility - assuming it ever occurs to them to consider this in the first place.

You know, I read somewhere that magicians don't actually slice young women in half, but I've seen them do just that so that information must have been wrong.
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th January 2010, 07:25 PM   #284
SweatyYeti
Illuminator
 
SweatyYeti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg View Post

There is no reason to believe the subject in the film made any of the impressions that were cast..


There may be......


__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes....
"So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world."

tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear."
SweatyYeti is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th January 2010, 07:31 PM   #285
SweatyYeti
Illuminator
 
SweatyYeti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,027
Originally Posted by River View Post

I'll get to that, Old Man River......in the next day or two.
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes....
"So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world."

tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear."
SweatyYeti is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th January 2010, 11:46 PM   #286
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Originally Posted by SweatyYeti View Post


Fascinating...
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2010, 05:04 AM   #287
Evolved Wookie
A rigidly defined area of doubt and uncertainty
 
Evolved Wookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Two feet to the left, in accordance with the theory of indeterminacy
Posts: 600
Originally Posted by SweatyYeti View Post
And, lastly....he cannot SHOW even ONE example of an 'average' human being....(scaled to Patty's height)....whose elbow-reach matches Patty's.
{delurk}

I realise that the thread will have moved on sinch this post and for that I apologise; I am still wading my way into the mire.

However, I thought I would just point out that a quick and dirty measurement of my own 'elbow reach' as defined by Sweaty (spine to out-stretched elbow) is roughly 22" (give or take - I had a wall and a tape-measure to hand).

OK, I admit that I am not quite average at a broad 6'6", but I'm not really a freak either. As I understand it the good ole US of A can boast plenty of large people.

{/delurk}
__________________
Some creative lies.

"No. Liars aren't creative." - Justinian2
Evolved Wookie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2010, 11:55 AM   #288
The Shrike
Master Poster
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 2,393
Originally Posted by Evolved Wookie View Post
{delurk}
. . . my own 'elbow reach' . . . is roughly 22" (give or take - I had a wall and a tape-measure to hand).
Where were you in October 1967?
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2010, 01:08 PM   #289
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 14,518
Mine seems to be about 20-21"...
__________________
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?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2010, 01:30 PM   #290
The Shrike
Master Poster
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 2,393
I'm 20".
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2010, 01:48 PM   #291
Evolved Wookie
A rigidly defined area of doubt and uncertainty
 
Evolved Wookie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Two feet to the left, in accordance with the theory of indeterminacy
Posts: 600
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
Where were you in October 1967?
Sorry. Back then I was just initiating my 11 year master plan to be born.

However, I am pleased to confirm that the plan worked and now I am here.
__________________
Some creative lies.

"No. Liars aren't creative." - Justinian2
Evolved Wookie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2010, 05:20 PM   #292
inn
Muse
 
inn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 612
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
I'm 20".
Exqueeze me, what are we talking about here? Oh right...elbow reach-around.

Last edited by inn; 28th January 2010 at 05:22 PM.
inn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2010, 06:01 PM   #293
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 14,518
Originally Posted by inn View Post
Exqueeze me, what are we talking about here? Oh right...elbow reach-around.
Might as well be...
__________________
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?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2010, 06:11 PM   #294
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Originally Posted by inn View Post
Exqueeze me, what are we talking about here? Oh right...elbow reach-around.
You dirty dog.

What Sweaty said is that Patty's elbow measures about 21-22" away from her backbone, with her arm swung-out at only a 40-45-degree angle, approximately.

My elbow extends 20" from my body when my arm is out straight. Sweaty can not say with certainty what Patty's elbow measurements are at any angle. Sweaty was repeatedly asked how he got his numbers for Patty so that we might attempt to verify them. Sweaty refused and said that verification would happen outside the JREF.

Personally, I think I could get more sincerity and intellectual honesty out of Tom Biscardi.
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2010, 06:52 PM   #295
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,178
Originally Posted by kitakaze View Post
You dirty dog.

What Sweaty said is that Patty's elbow measures about 21-22" away from her backbone, with her arm swung-out at only a 40-45-degree angle, approximately.

My elbow extends 20" from my body when my arm is out straight. Sweaty can not say with certainty what Patty's elbow measurements are at any angle. Sweaty was repeatedly asked how he got his numbers for Patty so that we might attempt to verify them. Sweaty refused and said that verification would happen outside the JREF.

Personally, I think I could get more sincerity and intellectual honesty out of Tom Biscardi.
Sweaty=Biscardi.........That would explain a lot, on both sides.
__________________
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
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2010, 07:18 AM   #296
SweatyYeti
Illuminator
 
SweatyYeti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,027
Having a little more fun with Mangler's Mangled Skeletons.......I put together a chain of comparisons...


First....I compared Jim with Jim, to determine where Jim's feet would be located, in the 'Frame 352' comparison image...(just posting the thumbnail version, to save 'space'...clicking on it will go to the full-size image)...





Then, after determining where Jim's feet are located...I added Mangler's skeletal overlay comparison of Bob...(properly scaling 'Corvette Bob's' height to Jim's height)....and, then, using a 2nd image of Patty, which includes Roger....(properly scaled to Patty, via her foot, and footprint)....I got this...






Roger....when measured according to the pixels/inch figure derived from Jim's body height....checks in at a rather small 4'4"...


In addition to Roger being way too small, Patty herself also appears to be a bit too small, when placed next to Jim.


This screwy result was made possible by.......


Mangler's Mangled Mis-scaled Meaningless MSkeletal Mess...
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes....
"So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world."

tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear."
SweatyYeti is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2010, 08:15 AM   #297
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
LOL! What a mess!

Sweaty, call me a glutton for fail, but regarding your latest scribble...

1) When you pluralize skeletons, you are saying that where P7S is concerned, there is more than one with differing measurements. You also have implied that this was the result of not software failure for Poser's physics engine, but rather error on mangler's part. What is the process you would suggest by which mangler was able to actually mangler the humerus length and foreshortening of P7S, thereby creating different skeletons? Your knowledge of the software would be helpful here.

2) Now please don't ignore this, how does your scribble account for Roger faking his tracks? Have a look at post #176. Those tracks don't even match. What's going on their?

BTW, any chance you'll be getting back to River or did you not like any of that?
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2010, 09:04 AM   #298
SweatyYeti
Illuminator
 
SweatyYeti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,027
kitakaze wrote:
Quote:
What is the process you would suggest by which mangler was able to actually mangler the humerus length and foreshortening of P7S, thereby creating different skeletons? Your knowledge of the software would be helpful here.

I'm demonstrating where, and by approximately how much, there are errors in his skeletal overlays.

HOW those errors came to be....I really don't care. Perhaps mangler can address his errors, and re-work his skeletons.
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes....
"So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world."

tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear."
SweatyYeti is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2010, 11:18 AM   #299
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Yeah, that would be a problem for you. Let me help you understand. Because in your ineptitude in never having taken the simple steps of following mangler and neltana's help to get you working with Poser and DAZ, you demonstrate a comical incomprehension of a basic element of the software. That being that if you want to pose or animate something, you point to where you want things to go in each given frame. It's rocket science, I know. Now the insane part comes where if you want to change the shape or size of the object you are posing, holy crap, you have to go into a completely separate and detailed process.

For mangler to access that function to say, elongate a humerus from fitting BH to fitting Patty, or bizarro foreshorten the skeleton when turning it to do the same, he would be actively engaging in deceit and hoaxing. If he did not do such a thing, then we are going back to a problem with the physics engine itself, which you said you weren't implying. That's a smart thing for you to do, because if you would imply that consumer physics software couldn't handle something as simple as basic rotation of a given object, you'd end up looking like some kind of a driveling idiot.

In order to prevent any such embarrassment on your part, why don't we make some effort to educate you on what you're trying to invalidate? Here's a handy tutorial from DAZ...

DS: Figure Setup Tools: Skeleton Setup - Editing an Existing Skeleton

Wow. Youtube has everything. Are you going to watch and learn? I don't think so, but we can't say I didn't try.

But hey, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Your flailing around with mangler's overlay stills in no way addresses his animation, or neltana's DAZ animation, does it? Yeah, that's a problem for you.

Anywho, getting back to some basic problems with your scribbles, remember when you said this?...

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti View Post
(properly scaled to Patty, via her foot, and footprint)
Yeah, that would be why I said this...

Originally Posted by kitakaze View Post
2) Now please don't ignore this, how does your scribble account for Roger faking his tracks? Have a look at post #176. Those tracks don't even match. What's going on their?

BTW, any chance you'll be getting back to River or did you not like any of that?
I know, I was asking too much when I asked you not to ignore essential flaws in your post. That is such a chore for you, afterall. Be a dear and see if you can muster up the motivation of dealing with that, will you? You can go have a boo at the link in post #276 and see the literal two left feet of Patty's that WP posted. Have fun with that.
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6

Last edited by kitakaze; 31st January 2010 at 12:27 PM. Reason: sp
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2010, 11:43 AM   #300
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Originally Posted by SweatyYeti View Post
Having a little more fun with Mangler's Mangled Skeletons.......I put together a chain of comparisons...
Having a little more fun with Sweaty's mangled logic...

That's a nice comp of Patty by Jim you have there. You know, I've had to point this out to you a couple times already, but you really seem to want to ignore it. Nevertheless...

Originally Posted by kitakaze View Post
1) Posting a comparison of Jim and Patty where Patty is on the foreward side of a ridge or mound of uneven ground behind a pile of wood debris while Jim is on the backside of the ridge with his legs half obscured.
What's up with that? Not to mention that you're tossing out everything inn demonstrated for you in post #271. Does it ever get tiresome being so wrong all the time? I hope not, because it's great fun for me.

This post was made possible by.......


Sweaty's Super Silly Science-less Sasquatch Scribbles...
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2010, 10:22 PM   #301
SweatyYeti
Illuminator
 
SweatyYeti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,027
kitakaze wrote:
Quote:
For mangler to access that function to say, elongate a humerus from fitting BH to fitting Patty, or bizarro foreshorten the skeleton when turning it to do the same, he would be actively engaging in deceit and hoaxing.

A fascinating theory, my dear Watson!! I'm intrigued....please, say more!!

(Oh, btw...Watson...did I tell you that I don't care by HOWST mangler managed to mangle his skeletal comparisons? )



Quote:
If he did not do such a thing, then we are going back to a problem with the physics engine itself, which you said you weren't implying. That's a smart thing for you to do, because if you would imply that consumer physics software couldn't handle something as simple as basic rotation of a given object, you'd end up looking like some kind of a driveling idiot.

How very true, kitakaze....I WOULD!! But...I DIDN'T....so I DON'T!!


Quote:
In order to prevent any such embarrassment on your part, why don't we make some effort to educate you on what you're trying to invalidate?

Why don't you SHOW specifically where, and to what extent, there are errors in my graphics, kitakaze??

So far, all you've done is HISS and RANT at them.....but DEMONSTRATING something is a much more (infinitely more) meaningful thing to do, than simply SAYING something...(which is all you can do.)

You can't deal with REAL-ity, can you?
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes....
"So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world."

tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear."

Last edited by SweatyYeti; 31st January 2010 at 10:24 PM.
SweatyYeti is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st January 2010, 11:34 PM   #302
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 27,964
Originally Posted by SweatyYeti View Post

<snip>


Why don't you SHOW specifically where, and to what extent, there are errors in my graphics, kitakaze??


<snip>

Randomly coloured, sized and italicised text reformatted to obtain legibility.


1. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=163877


2. The following posts: 70, 94, 97, 99, 101, 120, 121, 140, 151, 161, 175, 193, 197, 200, 201, 211, 226 (removed by moderator), 235, 241, 250, 267, 278, 284 and 296.
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon

The Australasian Skeptics Forum
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st February 2010, 02:56 AM   #303
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Originally Posted by SweatyYeti View Post
A fascinating theory, my dear Watson!! I'm intrigued....please, say more!!

(Oh, btw...Watson...did I tell you that I don't care by HOWST mangler managed to mangle his skeletal comparisons? )
Certainly. Hey, Sherlock...

1) You've never even attempted to use DAZ or Poser.

2) Every scribble you've thrown at us, like you 2D elbow reach fail, has been squished.

3) You've never show us with any suitable physical analog that Poser 7 stills violated the laws of physics.

4) Hello. Hi, I'm DAZ. I'm not Poser 7, but rather this other separate thing and I have an animation that fits BH and Patty, too. You keep sidestepping that. The Poser 7 animation is also a separate creation that has nothing to do with anything you've done.

Quote:
Why don't you SHOW specifically where, and to what extent, there are errors in my graphics, kitakaze??
Again? Sure...

Error 1

Where:
Your comparison where you attempt to compare Patty frame 352 to Jim Mclarin.

What extent: Patty is on the foreward side of a ridge or mound of uneven ground behind a pile of wood debris while Jim is on the backside of the ridge with his legs half obscured. inn analyzed the distance between them in those shots to be 10 ft at 133 ft vs 123 ft respectively with a 25 mm lens being used. Patty is definitely significantly closer to the camera than Jim and not at all in the same place. Controls not set. Comparison Invalid.

Error 2

Where:
Your comparison where you attempt to compare Patty's height based on her foot and Roger's height based on an alleged Patty cast he is holding.

What extent: First of all, the image showing the bottom of Patty's foot is the one you just told us earlier is not reliable because...

Originally Posted by SweatyYeti View Post
The 'Frame 72' foot-ruler measurement, of 5'7", needs 'correction factors' applied to it, to correct for a few things....such as 'blooming' of the foot, the foot being closer to the camera than the rest of the body, and vertical foreshortening of Patty's height.

Therefore, the 5'7" figure is too short...by several inches.

More reality....that you can't face.
Total intellectual dishonesty on your part. You refuse to acknowlege the results of Frame 72 when it does not suit you, yet you go and use it when you think it is to your advantage.

Secondly, and far more importantly, there is absolutely no reliable evidence that the subject of the Patterson film made any of the impressions Patterson cast. Conversely, there is significant evidence that Roger faked his casts. Those are two left feet. They are not the same feet.

If Patty's feet and Patty's casts are not the same thing, then any comparison you make assuming they are is totally meaningless. To what extent is the degree of error? Pick a number. Based just on the issues you had with Frame 72 before, you'd be off by several inches. What the real extent is can not be reliably measured. All we can say is... Controls not set. Comparison invalid.

Of course, of direct relevance is the post by River concerning foot rulers and track depth that you still haven't addressed. Here's a snip...

Originally Posted by River
Let's see if Inspector Holmes can get on the case. BTW, you know he had a thing with the blow, right? Sherlock Holmes - cocaine addiction, SweatyYeti - fortean addiction. Huh. I guess the crucial difference being that Holmes was usually right, whereas you are so epically wrong all the time.

Quote:
You can't deal with REAL-ity, can you?
It is to laugh.

Sweaty, you show me one bit of reality that you've proven and that I can not deal with. Otherwise, lose the projection and try not running away from the essential points of debate.
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st February 2010, 10:21 PM   #304
SweatyYeti
Illuminator
 
SweatyYeti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,027
kitakaze wrote:
Quote:
What extent: Patty is on the foreward side of a ridge or mound of uneven ground behind a pile of wood debris while Jim is on the backside of the ridge with his legs half obscured.

A ridge????? What ridge? I don't see a ridge. Not even a bridge.


Earlier, I went lookin' for a ridge.....in the images of Jim....and, though I didn't find one, I did find an interesting little detail.
Jim seems to have moved upwards....or, forward, closer to the foreground....as he approched the frame 352 position...


__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes....
"So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world."

tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear."
SweatyYeti is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st February 2010, 11:53 PM   #305
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Sweaty, this is the fourth time. Your evasion is ridiculous and transparent for all to see. Please address the issues in Error 2 from my previous post. Are you frightened to deal with that? You say I can't deal with reality and yet I run from none of your issues raised. Also, you continue to evade the key point about the DAZ animation as well as the Poser animation. This not the behaviour of an intellectually honest person.

Now, addressing what you just posted...

That's very interesting, Sweaty. Based on that image and those posted by you and inn here...

Originally Posted by inn View Post
This is the correct image size comparison for frame 352. The camera positions look to be in sync.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y16...jan/cmpscl.jpg
http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w...352CompAG1.gif

...it looks like there is not a ridge on which Jim and Patty are on either side. It appears that was an illusion created by the differing manner in which their legs were obscured. In fact, both Jim and Patty seem to be obscured by a short cut log in the foreground that is uneven on the right vertical side. I think you are right that Jim is moving up on the terrain and forward relative to the log.

Unfortunately, regardless, that does nothing to change that Jim is about 10 ft closer to the camera than Patty at 123 ft and 133 ft respectively and also as inn proved, Jim does not follow Patty's path.

ETA: Upon further examination of the film images, I can not be entirely sure, but it seems rather than a short cut log that is uneven on the right vertical side, that the wood debris that is obscuring both Jim and Patty's leg is separate from a short cut segment of a log that is even on both sides, and yet where that segment is present where Jim is seen, it is missing where Patty is seen. At this point there is simply not enough clarity to be sure. Nevertheless, it does not affect the point I already made about the varying distances of Jim and Patty.
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6

Last edited by kitakaze; 2nd February 2010 at 01:00 AM. Reason: sp
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2010, 02:29 AM   #306
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Originally Posted by kitakaze View Post
ETA: Upon further examination of the film images, I can not be entirely sure, but it seems rather than a short cut log that is uneven on the right vertical side, that the wood debris that is obscuring both Jim and Patty's leg is separate from a short cut segment of a log that is even on both sides, and yet where that segment is present where Jim is seen, it is missing where Patty is seen. At this point there is simply not enough clarity to be sure. Nevertheless, it does not affect the point I already made about the varying distances of Jim and Patty.
After examining the PGF and McLarin footage shot nine minths later as shown in the The X Creatures: Shooting the Bigfoot episode, I can see that the log segment is in fact present in both films. This can be seen at the 5:28 mark. Now check again the video at 5:00. Starting at 5:26 you can see the two films spliced side by side. You can see by the long fallen tree in the foreground that the camera positions are not the same and walking paths also do not match perfectly. It is only for one second at the 5:32 mark that the foreground lines up and at that point, Jim looks significantly taller than Patty as they pass behind a tree. Pay close attention to the The X Creatures video from just after 5:32 where they show a splice and say that using a digital effects device, they've precisely matched the two films. However, if you look closely at the fallen tree in the foreground, you can see that they are in fact not precisely matched. In that splice that doesn't precisely match, they say Patty is only slightly taller than Patty.

I think at this point, what inn showed can't be understated in that the camera positions and paths of the subject are not the same, rendering the comparisons useless. It would appear that Patty is indeed shorter than McLarin. What is clear is that there is no evidence of Patty leaving the imprints cast by Patterson, and that tracks cast such as those posted by WP show imprints that anatomically can not be from the same foot.
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2010, 03:24 AM   #307
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Here's something extremely interesting to me that I have never seen before. From part 3 of the youtube video of The X Creatures: Shooting the Bigfoot episode we see a campfire scene from Patterson's film. In the footage we see seven individuals and some horses at a campsite. You can see this scene from 00:35 - 00:46. Roger is clearly identifiable by his stetson, red plaid flanel shirt, and jacket that he wears in the plaster cast scenes. Look carefully at what you can see of each of the seven individuals and then compare it to the cowboy photo here...



Jerry Merritt is the first man shown in close-up playing the harmonica. It looks to me that Bob Heironimus is the third man from the left in the campfire footage wearing a coat with his darker coloured stetson. It also appears of the four horses seen that BH's horse, Chico, is the second from the left. It appears that all the men from the cowboy photo are present but there is a seventh man wearing garb quite different with a cap that appears to be something like that worn by a rail attendant or something like that.

This should be filmed in Washington, right?
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6

Last edited by kitakaze; 2nd February 2010 at 03:48 AM.
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2010, 06:20 AM   #308
JcR
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Still Looking
Posts: 1,244
A Bigfoot bicker of the day

You wanna believe in the big harry dude...Smack!
It was no bear, No bear moves that way...Slap!
You can tell that from a blurry video...Kick!
Well what else could it be if it wasn't a bear...Duh on you!
Produce some solid evidence then...One on you! Sorry!
We have and here is the proof... I win!
JcR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2010, 06:29 AM   #309
Spektator
Dog Who Laughs
 
Spektator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,433
Originally Posted by JcR View Post
A Bigfoot bicker of the day

You wanna believe in the big harry dude...Smack!
It was no bear, No bear moves that way...Slap!
You can tell that from a blurry video...Kick!
Well what else could it be if it wasn't a bear...Duh on you!
Produce some solid evidence then...One on you! Sorry!
We have and here is the proof... I win!
The problem is the last line. Bigfoot speculation is like life--no one ever wins. Best you can do is put off defeat for a while.
__________________
Even when you keep piling them up, lies never compress to become the truth.
Spektator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2010, 07:19 AM   #310
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,229
Originally Posted by kitakaze View Post
Look carefully at what you can see of each of the seven individuals and then compare it to the cowboy photo here... Jerry Merritt is the first man shown in close-up playing the harmonica. It looks to me that Bob Heironimus is the third man from the left in the campfire footage wearing a coat with his darker coloured stetson. It also appears of the four horses seen that BH's horse, Chico, is the second from the left. It appears that all the men from the cowboy photo are present but there is a seventh man wearing garb quite different with a cap that appears to be something like that worn by a rail attendant or something like that.

This should be filmed in Washington, right?
I tried to analyze this months ago but found that it was too dark to get much from it. I think it is Washington. The horses don't match. At the campfire we see three with blazes, but only two have these in the actors line-up shot. There may be more than four horses there but we can't see them all because it is so dark. The photographer is an unknown in both situations, and it might be safe to presume that the camera person(s) has their own horse. Where is Gimlin in the campfire scene? If there are 7 men visible around the fire - then the camera guy makes eight. I don't know what to think about the guy with the odd hat. Gimlin should be able to answer questions about him and his "role", right?

We also have this scene...

__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2010, 08:27 AM   #311
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
If there are 7 men visible around the fire - then the camera guy makes eight.
WP, check from 00:44 to 00:46 at the very most left of the campfire scene. Pay attention to the brims of the stetsons. You will see that instead of seven men on camera, there are eight. Camera guy makes nine.
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2010, 02:24 PM   #312
JcR
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Still Looking
Posts: 1,244
Originally Posted by Spektator View Post
The problem is the last line. Bigfoot speculation is like life--no one ever wins. Best you can do is put off defeat for a while.
Kinda like me with a leak in my boat with one bucket, and the fishing is too good to paddle in just yet.
JcR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd February 2010, 07:05 PM   #313
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Lucas, please clear some space in your PM box and get that thing we discussed done tonight.
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2010, 06:21 AM   #314
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Originally Posted by SweatyYeti View Post
Why don't you SHOW specifically where, and to what extent, there are errors in my graphics, kitakaze??
Too funny. Sweaty asks me this, I give him what he asks for, and three days later he still has nothing.

[SYLVIA BROWNE]Sweaty will return soon with more scribbles trying to finagle Patty the way he wants and pretend as though the blatant errors and problems in his graphics and posts have not been explicity detailed for him.[/SYLVIA BROWNE]
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2010, 07:09 AM   #315
Drewbot
Illuminator
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,259
Originally Posted by kitakaze View Post
WP, check from 00:44 to 00:46 at the very most left of the campfire scene. Pay attention to the brims of the stetsons. You will see that instead of seven men on camera, there are eight. Camera guy makes nine.
Yes, I definitely see eight in the shot.
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2010, 07:37 AM   #316
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,229
FWIW, I didn't count seven guys. I didn't count them at all. The scene is so dark that I ditched trying to figure it out. I just went with what kitakaze said...


Originally Posted by kitakaze View Post
Look carefully at what you can see of each of the seven individuals and then compare it to the cowboy photo here...

Here is a group of images put together by Dfoot (I think). This is a mixture of genuine Patterson scenes and ones from the film Sasquatch - The Legend of Bigfoot. This has also just been put in a blog by Loren Coleman because the film director recently died. The images on the left are "Patterson scenes" and those on the right are actors in the Ron Olson film.

Anyway, you can see the same campfire scene we are discussing but also a scene showing some guys riding away on horseback. Are these the campfire guys? Are they the guys in the line-up shot? Where did Dfoot get that still frame?

William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2010, 08:06 AM   #317
JcR
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Still Looking
Posts: 1,244
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Wasn't this photo shot close to Roger Patterson's house?
JcR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2010, 08:07 AM   #318
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,229
I think I can place BH in the scene...

__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2010, 10:08 AM   #319
JcR
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Still Looking
Posts: 1,244
Nine years ago while running wild horses, deep
in the mountains with an old Indian friend,
He ran across a huge, a very huge footprint and
this is where the hunt for the bigfoot man
began.
To town and back they went and they made a
plaster cast 18 inches long from heel to the toe,
And from the print that it made, they guessed
that it must have weighed 700 pounds or so...

Buddy Knox
JcR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th February 2010, 04:40 PM   #320
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Behind the decks in Tokyo, Japan/Victoria, Canada
Posts: 9,530
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
I think I can place BH in the scene...

http://i179.photobucket.com/albums/w...r/88ceb4c9.gif
Great find, WP. For some sociopatchic nut out of the blue looking for fame and fortune by accusing P&G of a hoax, he sure did roll around with them a lot.
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer.

2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum.

I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6
kitakaze is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:42 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.