Bigfoot - The Patterson-Gimlin Film - Page 74

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 02:44 PM

Patty's left arm & right thigh are nowhere near parallel in 352, and Patty's lower legs and feet are not visible. The flex of the foot in the statue is cool though, even if invented.

Looking at it again, Patty appears to be taking a pretty short stride in 352 as well.

LAL · 2nd March 2006, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by Diogenes

Is this one of the casts he purchased ?

It's the wallpaper on his web site ...

Oh, I forgot for a moment.. .. That is the cast, that was a model for one of Wallace's feet;
right down to the crack in the heel ..

What is the the theory behind how a Sas got a scar like that ? Stepped on a machete that someone carelessly left laying around ?

It is not his website and we've been over this several times before. Wallace's inspiration was evidently one of Titmus' casts, copies of which had been for sale in the area. Rant Mullens claimed he did the carving, but his fake feet are even worse.

You might want to compare the one you posted to a photo of a Wallace foot. Again.

LAL · 2nd March 2006, 02:58 PM

Originally Posted by Correa Neto

Have I? Exactly where?

Back when I suggested you write to Meldrum. It will take a while to find the post. I'm not sure I remember the name of the thread. I think it was the one where you posted your physics argument.

I haven't seen you taking advantage of the opportunity to address Meldrum on BFF. He's still posting.

If it's too much trouble to join the board, perhaps Diogenes could post your argument for you.

Here's the link again, in case you missed it:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.p...pic=14342&st=0

Skeptical Greg · 2nd March 2006, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

http://www.internationalbigfootsocie...icle.php?id=33

Lots of interesting stuff in there that I never knew, such as the discrepancy in the track direction and the fact that no other 14.5" tracks were found at the site. Some stuff that doesn't matter too, but a lot of good stuff.

I don't know how much of the good stuff is true, though.

I figured there was only one 14.5 print, since that is the only one we see..

Even in the pic of the trackway.. The good print has the plaster in it..

The other prints look wierd and very different.. Strange that one print looks so perfect, and so different from the Laverty print..

The foot in frame 72 doesn't look look like Laverty's Tarsalfoot either..

I need to run this by at BFF.. I haven't heard the spin on it..

Is there a Laverty print with a ruler next to it ?

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:02 PM

It doesn't seem to matter how bad the fake feet are though.

There are a few particularly bad fakes on Meldrum's page, a picture of John Green examining a particularly bad straight line of particularly bad prints, bear prints, etc., etc.

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by Dfoot

...But maybe some will think about what I've demonstrated with this experiment.....

Yeah, I've thought about what you've demonstrated.

So, what's next?

Skeptical Greg · 2nd March 2006, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by LAL

It is not his website and we've been over this several times before. Wallace's inspiration was evidently one of Titmus' casts, copies of which had been for sale in the area. Rant Mullens claimed he did the carving, but his fake feet are even worse.

You might want to compare the one you posted to a photo of a Wallace foot. Again.

The wallace foot you posted is not the one with the crack in it..

Why don't all Bigfoot tracks have double ball ? Why not Patty ?

Those tracks ( wallace feet ) don't look like someone walking.. They look like they were stamped ... It is a freaking joke, and a shame ...

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:10 PM

Now, will footers apply the same standard to others who have attempted to fool them about bigfoot?

We seem to have an uproar about a little hoaxing done by dfoot.

So what about Freeman and Marx? They have done magnitudes worse than dfoot.

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:12 PM

Laverty was suspicious of Patterson since he'd been all over bluff creek and never seen a thing.

Skeptical Greg · 2nd March 2006, 03:18 PM

Dfoot,

You did a lot of great work...

You could really pull off a good hoax if you hadn't revealed yourself..

You will be the suspect behind anything good that shows up anytime soon..

As I said before, I hope you enjoyed yourself, and that you keep experimenting, but it was all wasted on the Cult Of Patty .....

I was going to predict that thread would be locked, but I decided not to bother.. Now we will see if they wipe any of it..

It is still fun to kick this stuff around, point out the flaws in the suit, and the thinking of the people who think it would have to be the product of some hi-tech FX lab...

I hope you will stick around..

RayG · 2nd March 2006, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by Diogenes

It's the wallpaper on his web site ...

Originally Posted by LAL

It is not his website...

Sources/links?

RayG

Skeptical Greg · 2nd March 2006, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Now, will footers apply the same standard to others who have attempted to fool them about bigfoot?

We seem to have an uproar about a little hoaxing done by dfoot.

So what about Freeman and Marx? They have done magnitudes worse than dfoot.

They might see it as a hoax, but I see it as a valid experiment.. He made it too easy for them, and showed his hand too soon.

You make people mad when you make fools out of them.. That's the inevitable mistake he made..

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:27 PM

Well, it's ISU's site and Meldrum's page.

Lu is just being Lu.

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Now, will footers apply the same standard to others who have attempted to fool them about bigfoot?.....

Yup.

Quote:

...We seem to have an uproar about a little hoaxing done by dfoot....

It pales to the uproar over an alleged hoax by Patterson.

Another difference:

Dfoot is now a proven hoaxer. Patterson is not.

Another difference:

Dfoot's hoax was attempted with 2006 technology. Patterson's was not.

Another difference:

Dfoot is a Hollywood insider (at least he claims to be). Patterson was not.

Quote:

...So what about Freeman and Marx? They have done magnitudes worse than dfoot....

Yup. And they are hoaxers, right alongside dfoot, robo, and a number of others.

Prove that Patterson was among them. Hell, let's see you even give me some credible evidence that he hoaxed his film (hoaxed evidence doesn't work).

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:29 PM

Quote:

You make people mad when you make fools out of them

So what about Freeman and Marx? No one seems to be mad at them.

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Laverty was suspicious of Patterson since he'd been all over bluff creek and never seen a thing.

Evidence, please?

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by Diogenes

Dfoot,

You did a lot of great work.....

And then he blew it, adn got caught.

Quote:

...You could really pull off a good hoax if you hadn't revealed yourself...

He got busted.

Quote:

...You will be the suspect behind anything good that shows up anytime soon...

Thems are called "consequences".

And let's see "anything good that shows up".

Quote:

...As I said before, I hope you enjoyed yourself, and that you keep experimenting, but it was all wasted on the Cult Of Patty .....

It was wasted because he blew it.

Quote:

...I was going to predict that thread would be locked, but I decided not to bother.. Now we will see if they wipe any of it..

I sure hope they don't. That needs to stand for future reference. Just like the Robo thread.

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:34 PM

If I had meant to include Patterson as a known hoaxer, I sure would have Huntster.

Besides, there remains the possibility that someone hoaxed Patterson that day.

This deal about Byrne saying Patty stood still in the film is really beginning to bother me.

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by Diogenes

.....You make people mad when you make fools out of them.. That's the inevitable mistake he made..

He made a fool of himself.

You're doing the same thing trying to defend his valiant effort.

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:38 PM

Quote:

14. Lyle Laverty; timber sales management; was in the area at the time with a team of five people through most of October; and never saw tracks or anything. Along comes Roger; and all of a sudden he films Bigfoot. Lyle took photos of the tracks also. But he thinks it strange that Roger should be so "lucky."

From the IBS link I posted earlier with lots of interesting stuff in it.

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

So what about Freeman and Marx? No one seems to be mad at them.

Who's mad?

I'm just calling a spade a spade.

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:39 PM

Quote:

It was wasted because he blew it.

And if he hadn't "blown it"?

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:41 PM

Well, I wouldn't trust a known hoaxer.

Maybe I'm not normal.

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

From the IBS link I posted earlier with lots of interesting stuff in it.

Searched the thread. Couldn't find the link. Searched IBS, too, but the search didn't work.

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:48 PM

Quote:

A long discussion and question period followed Daniel's talk. There were lots of questions; and a couple of interesting longer comments. I had a comment that will never be answered probably. Why didn't Gimlin watch the "movie of the year;" The object of their; at that time; existence? Perez says in his book; "Gimlin missed this premiere showing and was home in bed; completely exhausted from the trip back home and the soaking experience getting his truck out of the Bluff Creek area;" (BigfooTimes; 1994; D. Perez). If they had the film in some time earlier; and didn't view until around 4-5 PM; as Rene' Dahinden recalls...wasn't that enough time for a nap? Would you want to sleep through your premiere? John Green; at the meeting; was asked at what time the film was viewed; but replied; "well;
it doesn't really matter what time we saw it; because we had it (film) for quite a while before we saw it." Rene' had left the meeting earlier.

From the same IBS link referenced earlier. Is it true that Gimlin did not even bother to watch the movie after it was developed?

I note the mention of "the soaking experience getting his truck out of the Bluff Creek area". Yet those prints survived?

Both of these are just very difficult to believe....

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:49 PM

Here it is Huntster. I did mention earlier that I do not know if what is in this link is true.

http://www.internationalbigfootsocie...icle.php?id=33

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

And if he hadn't "blown it"?

He may have shown a suit that was as real looking as the PG film subject.

But, then again, he may have shown a suit as pathetic as the BBC suit.

Now he's proven that we can't trust him.

Doesn't matter about the trust, actually. The hoax was discovered quite quickly.

Unlike the Patterson film.

After 38 years.

LTC8K6 · 2nd March 2006, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Now he's proven that we can't trust him.

Ah hah!

I take it that you don't trust Freeman & Marx then?

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 04:01 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

From the same IBS link referenced earlier. Is it true that Gimlin did not even bother to watch the movie after it was developed? ....

I don't know.

But I do know how tired I've been after great, wet, and even exciting outdoors adventures. I've hit the sack and stayed there for 24 hours in the past.

Quote:

...I note the mention of "the soaking experience getting his truck out of the Bluff Creek area". Yet those prints survived?...

Sure. Why not? The Laverty photo even shows the signs of heavy raindrops.

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

....I did mention earlier that I do not know if what is in this link is true.

This is actually funny!:

Quote:

The film was made at Bluff creek. Was Roger trying to tell us something?
Is it

all a big bluff?

Correa Neto · 2nd March 2006, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by LAL

Back when I suggested you write to Meldrum. It will take a while to find the post. I'm not sure I remember the name of the thread. I think it was the one where you posted your physics argument.

Exactly where, LAL? Would you care to back it?

BTW, have you managed to back the other things you wrote about me, such as the use of a sockpuppet and the insinuation that I am a poseur?

Originally Posted by LAL

I haven't seen you taking advantage of the opportunity to address Meldrum on BFF. He's still posting.

If it's too much trouble to join the board, perhaps Diogenes could post your argument for you.

Here's the link again, in case you missed it:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.p...pic=14342&st=0

So, it seems you just can't find the answers to the issues I raised. And here you are, insisting on a variant of the appeal to authority.

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Ah hah!

I take it that you don't trust Freeman & Marx then?

Correct.

I don't trust much of anybody.

I don't even fully trust my own eyes. But I trust them more than the "he said, she said) games.

Correa Neto · 2nd March 2006, 04:15 PM

An still, even with all this "distrust", Huntster wants to lower the quality standards of data.

Anwer me, why should one trust in P & G?

Why trust in sighting reports?

Why trust in those who claim the footprints are not hoaxes and misinterpretations?

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 04:18 PM

Originally Posted by Correa Neto

An still, even with all this "distrust", Huntster wants to lower the quality standards of data.

Anwer me, why should one trust in P & G?

Why trust in sighting reports?

Why trust in those who claim the footprints are not hoaxes and misinterpretations?

Because, unlike the Dfoot and other such hoaxes, there's no evidence to show that they are incorrect or hoaxed.

Aren't you one who likes evidence?

tube · 2nd March 2006, 04:24 PM

Dfoot jumped the gun. There is a big difference between being "on to something" and having a "solid case". I went through the exact same set of emotions when I was working on the "dermal" business, I knew I was onto something, but I had to force myself to wait.

Even then, before I had completed my investigations I sent Chilcutt several small cast "coupons" (test specimens) that he ended up calling "tiles" that are not completely representative of what is going on. It was those "tiles" that exhibited flattened ridge peaks that LAL made so much of.

Today, I have test casts that have "rounded ridge peaks" and in fact duplicate the "ridge flow pattern" of the Onion Mountain cast very closely. The "ridge flow pattern" of the Onion Mountain cast appears to be a function of the shape of the track it was made in.

If I were Dfoot, I would lick my wounds, go home, and build a suit that backs up his claims. Then enlist someone else (perhaps Scott Herriott who also lives in LA) to help in videotaping. Clearly you will need to find an actor who can walk with a convincing compliant gait.

Best of luck Dfoot!

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by tube

Dfoot jumped the gun.....

.....If I were Dfoot, I would lick my wounds, go home, and build a suit that backs up his claims. Then enlist someone else (perhaps Scott Herriott who also lives in LA) to help in videotaping. Clearly you will need to find an actor who can walk with a convincing compliant gait.

Best of luck Dfoot!

Agreed.

Like I've said before, everybody is a liar. If you're not, somebody will turn you into one anyway.

Show us......................

Skeptical Greg · 2nd March 2006, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Well, it's ISU's site and Meldrum's page.

Lu is just being Lu.

Yeah, I know..

Read the link LU.. Who do you think ' meldd ' at ' isu.edu ' might be ? Huh ?

http://www.isu.edu/~meldd/jpg/Titmus_01_BG.jpg

Skeptical Greg · 2nd March 2006, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by Huntster

Sure. Why not? The Laverty photo even shows the signs of heavy raindrops.

I suppose the raindrops reshaped it so it doesn't resemble Patty's foot ?

Whadaya' think ?

Also there seem to be a lot more raindrops around the print than in it..

What's up with that ? Some sort of Bigfoot print rain repellant effect ?

Correa Neto · 2nd March 2006, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by Huntster

Because, unlike the Dfoot and other such hoaxes, there's no evidence to show that they are incorrect or hoaxed.

Why should I trust in your statement?

Anyway, I think you can not back the claim that no evidence points to errors or hoaxes. Remember what I was asking about?

I wrote:

Quote:

why should one trust in P & G?

There are no evidences of a hoax? None? Not a single suspicious issue?
Sure?

I wrote:

Quote:

Why trust in sighting reports?

No evidence for hoaxes and misinterpretations at bigfeet sighting reports?

I wrote:

Quote:

Why trust in those who claim the footprints are not hoaxes and misinterpretations?

No evidence for bigfeet footprints being hoaxes and misinterpretations?

Now Huntster, go ahead and make my day: say I'm behaving like a lawyer!

Originally Posted by Huntster

Aren't you one who likes evidence?

Hey, at last I can write "Huntster, you are correct"!

I am -very proudly- one of those annoying persons who like evidences. Reliable pieces of evidence, BTW. One of those annoying skeptics who check sources, verify the falsifiability of a proposal, etc.

Huntster · 2nd March 2006, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by Diogenes

I suppose the raindrops reshaped it so it doesn't resemble Patty's foot ?

Whadaya' think?.....

I think I remember statements that there were prints from more than one individual seen in the area during that timeframe.

Quote:

...Also there seem to be a lot more raindrops around the print than in it..

What's up with that ? Some sort of Bigfoot print rain repellant effect...

I think I remember statements about Gimlin covering tracks with bark.

Don't you remember such statements?

2nd March 2006, 02:44 PM	#2921
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Patty's left arm & right thigh are nowhere near parallel in 352, and Patty's lower legs and feet are not visible. The flex of the foot in the statue is cool though, even if invented. Looking at it again, Patty appears to be taking a pretty short stride in 352 as well.
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 02:58 PM	#2923
LAL Illuminator Join Date: May 2005 Location: Waynesville,NC Posts: 3,225	Originally Posted by Correa Neto Have I? Exactly where? Back when I suggested you write to Meldrum. It will take a while to find the post. I'm not sure I remember the name of the thread. I think it was the one where you posted your physics argument. I haven't seen you taking advantage of the opportunity to address Meldrum on BFF. He's still posting. If it's too much trouble to join the board, perhaps Diogenes could post your argument for you. Here's the link again, in case you missed it: http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.p...pic=14342&st=0
	__________________ Lu http://360.yahoo.com/librarylu

2nd March 2006, 03:00 PM	#2924
Skeptical Greg Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' Posts: 9,115	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 http://www.internationalbigfootsocie...icle.php?id=33 Lots of interesting stuff in there that I never knew, such as the discrepancy in the track direction and the fact that no other 14.5" tracks were found at the site. Some stuff that doesn't matter too, but a lot of good stuff. I don't know how much of the good stuff is true, though. I figured there was only one 14.5 print, since that is the only one we see.. Even in the pic of the trackway.. The good print has the plaster in it.. The other prints look wierd and very different.. Strange that one print looks so perfect, and so different from the Laverty print.. The foot in frame 72 doesn't look look like Laverty's Tarsalfoot either.. I need to run this by at BFF.. I haven't heard the spin on it.. Is there a Laverty print with a ruler next to it ?
	__________________ A quantum of solace, is better than no solace at all.. " Don't come home a' drinkin' , with lovin' on your mind "... Loretta Lynn

2nd March 2006, 03:02 PM	#2925
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	It doesn't seem to matter how bad the fake feet are though. There are a few particularly bad fakes on Meldrum's page, a picture of John Green examining a particularly bad straight line of particularly bad prints, bear prints, etc., etc.
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:08 PM	#2927
Skeptical Greg Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' Posts: 9,115	Originally Posted by LAL It is not his website and we've been over this several times before. Wallace's inspiration was evidently one of Titmus' casts, copies of which had been for sale in the area. Rant Mullens claimed he did the carving, but his fake feet are even worse. You might want to compare the one you posted to a photo of a Wallace foot. Again. The wallace foot you posted is not the one with the crack in it.. Why don't all Bigfoot tracks have double ball ? Why not Patty ? Those tracks ( wallace feet ) don't look like someone walking.. They look like they were stamped ... It is a freaking joke, and a shame ...
	__________________ A quantum of solace, is better than no solace at all.. " Don't come home a' drinkin' , with lovin' on your mind "... Loretta Lynn

2nd March 2006, 03:05 PM	#2926
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by Dfoot ...But maybe some will think about what I've demonstrated with this experiment..... Yeah, I've thought about what you've demonstrated. So, what's next?

2nd March 2006, 03:10 PM	#2928
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Now, will footers apply the same standard to others who have attempted to fool them about bigfoot? We seem to have an uproar about a little hoaxing done by dfoot. So what about Freeman and Marx? They have done magnitudes worse than dfoot.
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:12 PM	#2929
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Laverty was suspicious of Patterson since he'd been all over bluff creek and never seen a thing.
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:18 PM	#2930
Skeptical Greg Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' Posts: 9,115	Dfoot, You did a lot of great work... You could really pull off a good hoax if you hadn't revealed yourself.. You will be the suspect behind anything good that shows up anytime soon.. As I said before, I hope you enjoyed yourself, and that you keep experimenting, but it was all wasted on the Cult Of Patty ..... I was going to predict that thread would be locked, but I decided not to bother.. Now we will see if they wipe any of it.. It is still fun to kick this stuff around, point out the flaws in the suit, and the thinking of the people who think it would have to be the product of some hi-tech FX lab... I hope you will stick around..
	__________________ A quantum of solace, is better than no solace at all.. " Don't come home a' drinkin' , with lovin' on your mind "... Loretta Lynn

2nd March 2006, 03:19 PM	#2931
RayG Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,863	Originally Posted by Diogenes It's the wallpaper on his web site ... Originally Posted by LAL It is not his website... Sources/links? RayG
	__________________ Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts. -------------------- Scrutatio Et Quaestio

2nd March 2006, 03:25 PM	#2932
Skeptical Greg Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' Posts: 9,115	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Now, will footers apply the same standard to others who have attempted to fool them about bigfoot? We seem to have an uproar about a little hoaxing done by dfoot. So what about Freeman and Marx? They have done magnitudes worse than dfoot. They might see it as a hoax, but I see it as a valid experiment.. He made it too easy for them, and showed his hand too soon. You make people mad when you make fools out of them.. That's the inevitable mistake he made..
	__________________ A quantum of solace, is better than no solace at all.. " Don't come home a' drinkin' , with lovin' on your mind "... Loretta Lynn

2nd March 2006, 03:27 PM	#2933
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Well, it's ISU's site and Meldrum's page. Lu is just being Lu.
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:28 PM	#2934
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Now, will footers apply the same standard to others who have attempted to fool them about bigfoot?..... Yup. Quote: ...We seem to have an uproar about a little hoaxing done by dfoot.... It pales to the uproar over an alleged hoax by Patterson. Another difference: Dfoot is now a proven hoaxer. Patterson is not. Another difference: Dfoot's hoax was attempted with 2006 technology. Patterson's was not. Another difference: Dfoot is a Hollywood insider (at least he claims to be). Patterson was not. Quote: ...So what about Freeman and Marx? They have done magnitudes worse than dfoot.... Yup. And they are hoaxers, right alongside dfoot, robo, and a number of others. Prove that Patterson was among them. Hell, let's see you even give me some credible evidence that he hoaxed his film (hoaxed evidence doesn't work).

2nd March 2006, 03:29 PM	#2935
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Quote: You make people mad when you make fools out of them So what about Freeman and Marx? No one seems to be mad at them.
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:29 PM	#2936
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Laverty was suspicious of Patterson since he'd been all over bluff creek and never seen a thing. Evidence, please?

2nd March 2006, 03:34 PM	#2937
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by Diogenes Dfoot, You did a lot of great work..... And then he blew it, adn got caught. Quote: ...You could really pull off a good hoax if you hadn't revealed yourself... He got busted. Quote: ...You will be the suspect behind anything good that shows up anytime soon... Thems are called "consequences". And let's see "anything good that shows up". Quote: ...As I said before, I hope you enjoyed yourself, and that you keep experimenting, but it was all wasted on the Cult Of Patty ..... It was wasted because he blew it. Quote: ...I was going to predict that thread would be locked, but I decided not to bother.. Now we will see if they wipe any of it.. I sure hope they don't. That needs to stand for future reference. Just like the Robo thread.

2nd March 2006, 03:34 PM	#2938
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	If I had meant to include Patterson as a known hoaxer, I sure would have Huntster. Besides, there remains the possibility that someone hoaxed Patterson that day. This deal about Byrne saying Patty stood still in the film is really beginning to bother me.
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:37 PM	#2939
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by Diogenes .....You make people mad when you make fools out of them.. That's the inevitable mistake he made.. He made a fool of himself. You're doing the same thing trying to defend his valiant effort.

2nd March 2006, 03:38 PM	#2940
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Quote: 14. Lyle Laverty; timber sales management; was in the area at the time with a team of five people through most of October; and never saw tracks or anything. Along comes Roger; and all of a sudden he films Bigfoot. Lyle took photos of the tracks also. But he thinks it strange that Roger should be so "lucky." From the IBS link I posted earlier with lots of interesting stuff in it.
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:39 PM	#2941
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 So what about Freeman and Marx? No one seems to be mad at them. Who's mad? I'm just calling a spade a spade.

2nd March 2006, 03:39 PM	#2942
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Quote: It was wasted because he blew it. And if he hadn't "blown it"?
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:41 PM	#2943
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Well, I wouldn't trust a known hoaxer. Maybe I'm not normal.
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:48 PM	#2944
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 From the IBS link I posted earlier with lots of interesting stuff in it. Searched the thread. Couldn't find the link. Searched IBS, too, but the search didn't work.

2nd March 2006, 03:48 PM	#2945
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Quote: A long discussion and question period followed Daniel's talk. There were lots of questions; and a couple of interesting longer comments. I had a comment that will never be answered probably. Why didn't Gimlin watch the "movie of the year;" The object of their; at that time; existence? Perez says in his book; "Gimlin missed this premiere showing and was home in bed; completely exhausted from the trip back home and the soaking experience getting his truck out of the Bluff Creek area;" (BigfooTimes; 1994; D. Perez). If they had the film in some time earlier; and didn't view until around 4-5 PM; as Rene' Dahinden recalls...wasn't that enough time for a nap? Would you want to sleep through your premiere? John Green; at the meeting; was asked at what time the film was viewed; but replied; "well; it doesn't really matter what time we saw it; because we had it (film) for quite a while before we saw it." Rene' had left the meeting earlier. From the same IBS link referenced earlier. Is it true that Gimlin did not even bother to watch the movie after it was developed? I note the mention of "the soaking experience getting his truck out of the Bluff Creek area". Yet those prints survived? Both of these are just very difficult to believe....
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:49 PM	#2946
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Here it is Huntster. I did mention earlier that I do not know if what is in this link is true. http://www.internationalbigfootsocie...icle.php?id=33
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 03:50 PM	#2947
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 And if he hadn't "blown it"? He may have shown a suit that was as real looking as the PG film subject. But, then again, he may have shown a suit as pathetic as the BBC suit. Now he's proven that we can't trust him. Doesn't matter about the trust, actually. The hoax was discovered quite quickly. Unlike the Patterson film. After 38 years.

2nd March 2006, 03:53 PM	#2948
LTC8K6 Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 6,976	Quote: Now he's proven that we can't trust him. Ah hah! I take it that you don't trust Freeman & Marx then?
	__________________ 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?

2nd March 2006, 04:01 PM	#2949
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 From the same IBS link referenced earlier. Is it true that Gimlin did not even bother to watch the movie after it was developed? .... I don't know. But I do know how tired I've been after great, wet, and even exciting outdoors adventures. I've hit the sack and stayed there for 24 hours in the past. Quote: ...I note the mention of "the soaking experience getting his truck out of the Bluff Creek area". Yet those prints survived?... Sure. Why not? The Laverty photo even shows the signs of heavy raindrops.

2nd March 2006, 04:04 PM	#2950
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 ....I did mention earlier that I do not know if what is in this link is true. This is actually funny!: Quote: The film was made at Bluff creek. Was Roger trying to tell us something? Is it all a big bluff?

2nd March 2006, 04:05 PM	#2951
Correa Neto Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Digging for Au somewhere in Brazil Posts: 5,094	Originally Posted by LAL Back when I suggested you write to Meldrum. It will take a while to find the post. I'm not sure I remember the name of the thread. I think it was the one where you posted your physics argument. Exactly where, LAL? Would you care to back it? BTW, have you managed to back the other things you wrote about me, such as the use of a sockpuppet and the insinuation that I am a poseur? Originally Posted by LAL I haven't seen you taking advantage of the opportunity to address Meldrum on BFF. He's still posting. If it's too much trouble to join the board, perhaps Diogenes could post your argument for you. Here's the link again, in case you missed it: http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.p...pic=14342&st=0 So, it seems you just can't find the answers to the issues I raised. And here you are, insisting on a variant of the appeal to authority.
	__________________ Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room! President Merkin Muffley

2nd March 2006, 04:06 PM	#2952
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 Ah hah! I take it that you don't trust Freeman & Marx then? Correct. I don't trust much of anybody. I don't even fully trust my own eyes. But I trust them more than the "he said, she said) games.

2nd March 2006, 04:15 PM	#2953
Correa Neto Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Digging for Au somewhere in Brazil Posts: 5,094	An still, even with all this "distrust", Huntster wants to lower the quality standards of data. Anwer me, why should one trust in P & G? Why trust in sighting reports? Why trust in those who claim the footprints are not hoaxes and misinterpretations?
	__________________ Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room! President Merkin Muffley

2nd March 2006, 04:18 PM	#2954
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by Correa Neto An still, even with all this "distrust", Huntster wants to lower the quality standards of data. Anwer me, why should one trust in P & G? Why trust in sighting reports? Why trust in those who claim the footprints are not hoaxes and misinterpretations? Because, unlike the Dfoot and other such hoaxes, there's no evidence to show that they are incorrect or hoaxed. Aren't you one who likes evidence?

2nd March 2006, 04:24 PM	#2955
tube Muse Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 686	Dfoot jumped the gun. There is a big difference between being "on to something" and having a "solid case". I went through the exact same set of emotions when I was working on the "dermal" business, I knew I was onto something, but I had to force myself to wait. Even then, before I had completed my investigations I sent Chilcutt several small cast "coupons" (test specimens) that he ended up calling "tiles" that are not completely representative of what is going on. It was those "tiles" that exhibited flattened ridge peaks that LAL made so much of. Today, I have test casts that have "rounded ridge peaks" and in fact duplicate the "ridge flow pattern" of the Onion Mountain cast very closely. The "ridge flow pattern" of the Onion Mountain cast appears to be a function of the shape of the track it was made in. If I were Dfoot, I would lick my wounds, go home, and build a suit that backs up his claims. Then enlist someone else (perhaps Scott Herriott who also lives in LA) to help in videotaping. Clearly you will need to find an actor who can walk with a convincing compliant gait. Best of luck Dfoot!

2nd March 2006, 04:28 PM	#2956
Huntster Banned Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 6,798	Originally Posted by tube Dfoot jumped the gun..... .....If I were Dfoot, I would lick my wounds, go home, and build a suit that backs up his claims. Then enlist someone else (perhaps Scott Herriott who also lives in LA) to help in videotaping. Clearly you will need to find an actor who can walk with a convincing compliant gait. Best of luck Dfoot! Agreed. Like I've said before, everybody is a liar. If you're not, somebody will turn you into one anyway. Show us......................