Bigfoot: The Patterson Gimlin Film - Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
SweatyYeti said:
A couple of looks at the complex movements of Patty's "padded" thigh...


Pattywalk59.gif



Pattywalking3.gif
Click to expand...

In these images, in the final "resting" frame of the cycle, the "bulge" becomes an r-shaped ridge, which begins at an anterior point on the surface of the thigh, and ends at an interior point behind the knee.

To me, an illustrator by profession who also understands bipedal primate musculature, this r-shaped ridge has no known antecedent. It's not a muscle or a tendon; muscles and tendons don't act that way or go in that direction. It's not a hernia because that has already been identified as the ball-shaped mass at the upper terminus of the "r". It looks rather like a material fold, which does not happen in any primate's taut-skinned leg area.

As an illustrator, I also comprehend the dynamics of drapery and folds. This r-shaped leg ridge looks like a material fold.

Take that opinion for what it's worth: a subjective opinion by a trained illustrator and erstwhile anatomy instructor.
 
Just for the fun of it.......this being almost the 4th.....of Joo-ly....here's a kind-of-a-3D look at Patty walking....


Patty3DWalk1.gif
 
Skeptical Greg said:
That's a nice effect Sweaty. How was it done ?
Click to expand...


That's the way the film normally looks....it's just hard to notice when it's watched at normal speed.

But the effect is due to Roger moving a small distance to his left.




I like the way Patty's arm's look to be a very normal length from that perspective ..
Click to expand...


I don't have time to respond to that now....but there's another frame, which I can post later, (that you've commented on before)...which may explain why the arms appear more of a 'normal length', in these frames.
 
SweatyYeti said:
Just for the fun of it.......this being almost the 4th.....of Joo-ly....here's a kind-of-a-3D look at Patty walking....


[qimg]http://i172.photobucket.com/albums/w28/SweatyYeti/Patty/Patty3DWalk1.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Sweet African Wild Ass, baby got back!

All that and no crack.

Sweaty says Patty's arms are inhumanly long...

:drinkspit:
 
Sweaty says Patty's arms are inhumanly long...
Click to expand...

Im lost here, Kitz. Even if they were inhumanly long, wouldnt that be the whole point of donning an ape costume: To look as real as it can? Why cant Sweaty understand that long arms do not rule out trickery?
 
Larry Battson, who knew Bob Titmus, just said this on BFF:

Bob Titmus was the best researcher ever to be involved with this subject.
Click to expand...


An Old Bob Titmus Story by Battson.

All of a sudden it started screaming, breaking branches and throwing rocks in his direction. Titmus held very still, very quiet. The sasquatch started moving around, pacing back and forth through the forest continuing to scream, bellow and throw debris. Titmus related that this behavior continued on until about an hour before daybreak. Then, as the sun began to rise and light trickled through the forest canopy, the creature went away and the forest fell silent again.

He pulled himself out of his make-shift bed in the ground and started to look around investigating the entire area. He walked in the direction of where the ruckus had come from and he could not believe his eyes.

It looked like a bulldozer had gone through the forest. Saplings had been pulled out of the ground, larger trees pushed over, broken or snapped in two. There were branches covered with hair samples and the ground was littered with footprints. It was no bear.

In later years, Titmus went back to Bluff Creek shortly after the Patterson footage had been filmed in October of 1967, - he saw the footprints on the sand bar the film subject had left and he was certain that this was the same sasquatch that he encountered the night he slept in the pit in the wilds of Bluff Creek.
Click to expand...


Larry recently presented a Bigfoot lecture to the USFWS and an audience.
 
Here at 2:40, Titmus himself says "by tracking it hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of times over a period of 26 years".

That is many hundreds. How could he do this and yet never confirm the creature? Battson's above story says that Titmus found hair after his campsite was trashed.
 
One problem with the Titmus/Krantz map is that the caption is misleading. It shows where both Patty and Patterson were at the moment of first sighting. But this distance shown on the map seems too short according to what P&G have said...


"I yelled 'Bob Lookit' and there about 80 or 90 feet in front of us this giant humanoid creature stood up. My horse reared and fell, completely flattening a stirrup with my foot caught in it. Times-Standard Eureka
Click to expand...


About 100 feet ahead, on the other side of the creek bed, there was a huge, hairy creature that walked like a man. Argosy Magazine
Click to expand...


"About 1:30 in the afternoon, as we rounded a bend in the road, we saw the creature. My horse reared, and then fell as I tried to control it. But I got the camera out and yelled to Bob to cover me with his rifle while I tried for pictures. The thing was across the creek beside the road, about 50 yards away.” The Province
Click to expand...


“We were about 60 to 80 feet away from it when we first saw it.” Bob Gimlin to John Green 1992
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • tms.jpg
    tms.jpg
    138.2 KB · Views: 7
William Parcher said:
Here at 2:40, Titmus himself says "by tracking it hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of times over a period of 26 years".

That is many hundreds. How could he do this and yet never confirm the creature? Battson's above story says that Titmus found hair after his campsite was trashed.
Click to expand...

I always wondered about that statement by Titmus. What kind of dolt tracker do you have to be to track something and never actually once see and confirm it.

CBC interview with tracker Bob Titmus on the existence of a long-eared jumping rodent...

I have been tracking rabbits hundreds, and hundreds, and hundreds of times over a period of 26 years. I have yet to actually see a rabbit but I am 100% confident rabbits do exist. How else do you explain Easter, for example?
 
William Parcher said:
Just for clarification, Titmus did claim to see them on several occasions. His first sighting was in 1942.
Click to expand...

Was this in Meldrum's book? The date rings a bell but I didn't recall Titmus talking about actual sightings. I always had Titmus filed in that category of apparently inept people who have no problem locating Bigfoot but couldn't ever manage to produce any good evidence.
 
kitakaze said:
Was this in Meldrum's book?
Click to expand...

Well, Titmus talks about it in the CBC clip I linked above.

Battson said this today on BFF...

Bob Titmus also told me that when he viewed the PG film that he thought it was over there was the proof, it was the same type of animal that he had seen in Alaska in 1941 and the same type of animal when he saw the three in Kitimat, British Columbia in 1963.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom