ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics 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 , Patterson-Gimlin film , Roger Patterson

Closed Thread
Old 30th April 2012, 12:45 AM   #8401
wheunis
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 157
Originally Posted by River View Post
If the imprint were to be behind his head as "footers claimed" then it would be aligned differently with the prior imprint. (see green and yellow lines for reference) Not to mention the distance that would put the next imprint at would be more than double. (than the following imprint is on the footage showing the trackway) Not saying you're making that claim -- just making it clear.
River, even my wife (who doesn't care at all for any of this) came to the same conclusion. She is probably the most naive fairy-girl on the planet.
(Opposites not only attracts, they compliment each other pretty well).

But since when did we expect good reasoning to prevail in the mind of the footer?

It would damn near take a track athlete to make a stepped imprint at that distance from a mere walk...
"But BF is just that athletic!"

But you said hes like totally superheavy...
"Just shows how strong he is despite his weight!"

I can do this all day btw... In fact I was once lured into exactly that in a real-life situation.
Do you know how much it sucks when you find out your friend is a dillhole believer that just tried to sucker you into this?!
wheunis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 01:28 AM   #8402
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,643
Oh, I know this. I have had many email exchanges with "known" proponents, most are polite even though we tend to disagree. You have probably experienced similar situations when having a deep conversation about religion or other deep belief. Sometimes "proof" doesn't so much matter to those individuals.

These same findings (and others, like the "beard issue", the impossible time line, etc etc) have been presented to the top level of bigfooters including Jeff Meldrum, and pretty much all of the other top bigfoot scientists. (I know because I emailed them this stuff personally) It was also presented to Bill Munns (whom which I happen to like as a person despite our disagreements about the film) and the BFRO, Doug Hajicek, Daniel Perez and pretty much everyone else you've heard of or seen on TV related to the subject.

How many of those fine folks do you think changed their opinions about the film?

This to me says one thing. Only the people that want to change their mind will. Nothing to do with the truth, or proof. I can live with that. I can also live with trying to show people the truth. (even when "footers" rant in return)

It's a fun subject. Who doesn't like bigfoot?! You're here posting about it.

Last edited by River; 30th April 2012 at 01:31 AM.
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 04:04 AM   #8403
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
Originally Posted by wheunis View Post
Reference in the case, as I circled, was not about that stick being a print.
It was made by footer's to a further object, that indicated the print would be behind his head in that shot.
Reference that it's already been covered here eleventy seven different ways.

That video is as clear as you can get, I think.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 06:29 AM   #8404
Drewbot
Illuminator
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,405
Can you guarantee that the thing by his head is a footprint?

What if the thing behind his head is just something on the ground beyond him?

Even a slight slope would make a footprint invisible with the low camera angle

__________________
"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 Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 09:01 AM   #8405
Vortigern99
Philosopher
 
Vortigern99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,941
Originally Posted by River View Post
Pink. Many other identifiable features in both scenes are there too.

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/...te-casting.jpg
See the wedge shape that I've outlined in red? That object is not in evidence in the overhead shot.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg composite-casting2.jpg (118.4 KB, 6 views)
__________________
"I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." -- Jimi Hendrix
Vortigern99 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 09:20 AM   #8406
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
They might have removed debris before filming the overhead pan.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 10:51 AM   #8407
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,643
Originally Posted by Vortigern99 View Post
See the wedge shape that I've outlined in red? That object is not in evidence in the overhead shot.
Correct. Does that effect it being the same location? No.
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 12:16 PM   #8408
Deacondark
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by River View Post
If the imprint were to be behind his head as "footers claimed" then it would be aligned differently with the prior imprint. (see green and yellow lines for reference) Not to mention the distance that would put the next imprint at would be more than double. (than the following imprint is on the footage showing the trackway) Not saying you're making that claim -- just making it clear.

Not to mention that the shadow they're pointing out is only about 14 inches from the print in the overhead shot, so it can't be the same thing that's more then 3 feet away in the Patterson shot.
Deacondark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 01:12 PM   #8409
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/files/bluffcreek.rm

There is the clip of the overhead pan. Needs real media or a conversion.

If someone could clean it up, it would be good.

That squiggly stick is a good distance benchmark, I think, if you can find it for sure in the video. I think just the end of it shows up as a very bright spot.

EDIT: I could swear that I have seen a much better version...
__________________
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?

Last edited by LTC8K6; 30th April 2012 at 01:21 PM.
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 Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 01:25 PM   #8410
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
Okay, the bright spot is not the end of that stick.

So where is that stick?
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 01:27 PM   #8411
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
Looks like we can see where that stick was in this view. Looks like an impression where the stick was picked up. Or the stick is nearly identical in color to the ground.

http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/...lationship.jpg
__________________
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?

Last edited by LTC8K6; 30th April 2012 at 01:33 PM.
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 Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 01:33 PM   #8412
wheunis
Thinker
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 157
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/files/bluffcreek.rm

There is the clip of the overhead pan. Needs real media or a conversion.

If someone could clean it up, it would be good.

That squiggly stick is a good distance benchmark, I think, if you can find it for sure in the video. I think just the end of it shows up as a very bright spot.

EDIT: I could swear that I have seen a much better version...
See, this is what I am trying to bring across.
These little inconsistencies or anomalies will just never "seal the deal".

Even if you can somehow prove the casting of the tracks was faked, the response would be "They did what they had to after the storm. They acted as best they could to be able to show us this miracle!"

What is needed is, like I said before, the proverbial sledgehammer of evidence on the ACTUAL BF EVENT, to finally close the book once and for all.
Now I am not willing to pop out and claim to know where or what that hammer might be.
As much as I am currently working towards (possibly) indisputable evidence, it is much to early to even draw any parallel, at risk of contamination.

Suffice to say that a similar investigation was shown here with the tracks-cast-footage. But like I said, the tracks-cast-footage means nothing by itself.

As I've always believed: Find the irrefutable constant. The one thing that cannot be disputed, cannot be "what if'd", and does not lie.
The Sun just happens to be one of those factors.

Last edited by wheunis; 30th April 2012 at 01:35 PM.
wheunis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 02:13 PM   #8413
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,643
Proving the footprints are fake might be more significant than you think. Especially to someone that may have published a paper on those very footprints. The casts are physical evidence documenting the alleged trackway of the beast. There are all kinds of issues involved with the "second reel" footage. Bigfooters know this. Especially the ones with published papers. Does it change anything? Nope.
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 07:17 PM   #8414
AttorneyTom
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
So the PGF site was accessible by automobile then .. and now from what I am seeing. A dirt road that ran pretty much along the creek wash and as long as the weather wasnt too bad it was and is very doable. No horses necessary and really just a short trip from the road to the film location ?

That is interesting. Thanks guys !
AttorneyTom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 08:12 PM   #8415
Vortigern99
Philosopher
 
Vortigern99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,941
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
They might have removed debris before filming the overhead pan.
They "might have" removed the rock that I outlined in red, but they certainly did not remove the rock that River outlined in pink.

Why would they engage in selective rock removal?
__________________
"I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." -- Jimi Hendrix
Vortigern99 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 08:14 PM   #8416
Vortigern99
Philosopher
 
Vortigern99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,941
Originally Posted by River View Post
Correct. Does that effect it being the same location? No.
The disappearance of an object from one frame to another, with no trace of excavated soil, does not affect your opinion that the site is the same in both frames?

This is not critical thinking. This is wishful hoping.
__________________
"I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." -- Jimi Hendrix
Vortigern99 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 08:28 PM   #8417
AttorneyTom
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
Originally Posted by Vortigern99 View Post
The disappearance of an object from one frame to another, with no trace of excavated soil, does not affect your opinion that the site is the same in both frames?

This is not critical thinking. This is wishful hoping.
Does it really matter ? It is all a bunch of silliness and yes.... the guy is a critical thinker or seems to be ?!

What do I know... I see your point but I am not sure that it is all that important or significant ?

Edit: I have not been here for many years but I just dont quite understand why we attack or get into a snit about other thoughts or observations that truly are not nut jobs ?

Last edited by AttorneyTom; 30th April 2012 at 08:33 PM.
AttorneyTom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 08:45 PM   #8418
AttorneyTom
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
Originally Posted by Vortigern99 View Post

Why would they engage in selective rock removal?
Why not ? Everything else was selective. They had a good time setting this one up.
AttorneyTom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 08:48 PM   #8419
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
Originally Posted by Vortigern99 View Post
They "might have" removed the rock that I outlined in red, but they certainly did not remove the rock that River outlined in pink.

Why would they engage in selective rock removal?
That is not a rock in red, but the vertical stick mentioned earlier. It's sticking up out of the ground. In an overhead view, it would be hard to see, but the shadow should show, given a similar time of day.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=4967
__________________
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?

Last edited by LTC8K6; 30th April 2012 at 08:53 PM.
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 Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 08:51 PM   #8420
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
http://i1178.photobucket.com/albums/...lationship.jpg

It is definitely removed after the casting scene.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 08:51 PM   #8421
Vortigern99
Philosopher
 
Vortigern99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,941
Originally Posted by AttorneyTom View Post
Does it really matter ? It is all a bunch of silliness and yes.... the guy is a critical thinker or seems to be ?!

What do I know... I see your point but I am not sure that it is all that important or significant ?

Edit: I have not been here for many years but I just dont quite understand why we attack or get into a snit about other thoughts or observations that truly are not nut jobs ?
I'm not attacking anyone, nor am I "in a snit". I'm pointing out what I perceive to be a flaw in River's reasoning. It's significant, IMO, because River is proposing his discovery as positive proof that the PGF is a hoax.

I'm saying: "Wait a second, this object is missing in the overhead shot, and there is no sign of disturbed soil from any putative excavation."
__________________
"I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." -- Jimi Hendrix
Vortigern99 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 08:54 PM   #8422
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
Could the stick stuck in the ground be a distance marker for help in casting a trackway with a long enough stride?
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 08:56 PM   #8423
Vortigern99
Philosopher
 
Vortigern99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,941
Originally Posted by LTC8K6 View Post
That is not a rock in red, but the vertical stick mentioned earlier. It's sticking up out of the ground. In an overhead view, it would be hard to see, but the shadow should show, given a similar time of day.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postcount=4967
Aha, thank you -- that image is much clearer than the other. I saw a wedge shape, like a block of stone jutting up out of the soil -- but I see now that was an illusion, I think, created by the horizontal striation of the soil.

I see the stick now, and retract my contention that there was a rock there jutting up out of the dirt.
__________________
"I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." -- Jimi Hendrix
Vortigern99 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 09:16 PM   #8424
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,643
Originally Posted by Vortigern99 View Post
I'm not attacking anyone, nor am I "in a snit". I'm pointing out what I perceive to be a flaw in River's reasoning. It's significant, IMO, because River is proposing his discovery as positive proof that the PGF is a hoax.

I'm saying: "Wait a second, this object is missing in the overhead shot, and there is no sign of disturbed soil from any putative excavation."
Why is that so significant? Perhaps the wind blew the leaf?/stick?/twig? or perhaps they removed it when they made the rest of the footprints after the casting scene. Why would you discard all of the matching features because one is missing? Is that critical thinking?

How about taking a closer look at the other matching features, especially immediately surrounding the casted track and compare it to the other scene. There are also other small twigs and such on both scenes that match. Because one is missing (almost where the next footprint was made) is not a surprise, nor does it change the location.

(eta, just saw your other response)

BTW, I like the feedback. I am positive the two scenes are the same location. Its verifiable/duplicable by anyone with good quality scans of the film. (not just on one special "enhanced version" or such.

Last edited by River; 30th April 2012 at 09:25 PM.
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 30th April 2012, 10:25 PM   #8425
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
Perhaps the stick was to test the soil?
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 1st May 2012, 03:10 PM   #8426
AlaskaBushPilot
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,179
Originally Posted by AttorneyTom View Post
So the PGF site was accessible by automobile then .. and now from what I am seeing. A dirt road that ran pretty much along the creek wash and as long as the weather wasnt too bad it was and is very doable. No horses necessary and really just a short trip from the road to the film location ?

That is interesting. Thanks guys !
Yeah. The horses were just props. There seems to be an iron law of bigfoot hunting. There has to be a gimmick deployed. Horses were Patterson's gimmick: his film is validated by using horses.

They were completely counterproductive in consideration of how they were deployed, unless their only role is a prop. If they are props then it is a staged production. (Choir preaching.)

- expensive to bring down, requiring a trailer and all, feed, etc.
-adds to logistics problems instead of solving them (eg camp; turning trailer around)
- broadcast your movements far and wide
- first thing Roger has to do is dismount so he can film.

The entire point of using horses in a legitimate hunt or expedition is because they go where the trucks can't go. So if you are trailering horses to a road, and filming yourself on that road, then you are either really stupid or a con-man about the purpose of the horses.

There are no pictures in existence of Roger Patterson on bona-fide wilderness trails on horseback. Because that would place him too far from a bar. The prime Roger Patterson footage or stills all satisfy the 20-minute rule: hunt for Bigfoot no more than twenty minutes distance from a bar.
AlaskaBushPilot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 1st May 2012, 03:47 PM   #8427
Chris L
Graduate Poster
 
Chris L's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,311
Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot View Post
Because that would place him too far from a bar. The prime Roger Patterson footage or stills all satisfy the 20-minute rule: hunt for Bigfoot no more than twenty minutes distance from a bar.
Not a bad search strategy if you assume Patty has a drinking problem.
__________________
"The lie is different at every level."
Richard C. Hoagland
Chris L is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 1st May 2012, 04:33 PM   #8428
AttorneyTom
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
Originally Posted by Chris L View Post
Not a bad search strategy if you assume Patty has a drinking problem.
Speaking of Patty.. and props. Patty is the ultimate prop and I am wondering what other "devices" were used to help create or perpetuate this whopper ?
AttorneyTom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2012, 10:46 AM   #8429
Gilbert Syndrome
Muse
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 854
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
How do you know? How do you know that his belief wasn't also a hoax?

I also brought this up a while back, but was attacked for even remotely having the idea by one of the users who're more fluent in the language of bollocks, essentially because I disagreed with his opinion.

I don't find it that hard to believe that Patterson could have, at least at one point or another, given credence to the legend of Bigfoot. It would hold no bearing on him attempting to cash in, I imagine even 60% of TV evangelists who're out to make some easy money may still believe in God one way or another.

Yeah, you could say it was all just a ploy, part of the hoax, but I don't see why Patterson couldn't have believed in Bigfoot at one point or another, just because he was a hoaxer.
__________________
1. Non Scouser - a person from Runcorn, Wirral, Southport, St Helens etc; specifically from provincial town outside of Liverpool.

Scouse saying - Wool, woolyback.

Usage: 'That's proper Wool behaviour, like.'
Gilbert Syndrome is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2012, 12:43 PM   #8430
DennyT
Master Poster
 
DennyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,525
I agree, GS, his expenditures before and after he made his bucks don't make much sense if he didn't have some belief in the animal. I refer in particular to the elaborate capture truck, and the hiring of a guy to drive around the country investigating bigfoot reports. I believe the term for the PGF would be a righteous fraud.
__________________
unlikely to stay thirsty, my friends.
DennyT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2012, 06:55 PM   #8431
DennyT
Master Poster
 
DennyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,525
well, I'm off to the land of the footers. I'll check in if I have a chance, but I'm hoping to be otherwise occupied with some lusty mountain woman or Bob Gimlin, whichever comes first. I've packed my Dos Equis and cravat, highlighted my coiffure, and put my cell phone on airplane mode and bid a fond farewell to my loving but unsuspecting wife and other members of the household. I trust you'll all behave while I'm gone. Hokahey.
__________________
unlikely to stay thirsty, my friends.

Last edited by DennyT; 3rd May 2012 at 06:57 PM.
DennyT is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2012, 07:13 PM   #8432
AttorneyTom
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
Originally Posted by parnassus View Post
well, I'm off to the land of the footers. I'll check in if I have a chance, but I'm hoping to be otherwise occupied with some lusty mountain woman or Bob Gimlin, whichever comes first. I've packed my Dos Equis and cravat, highlighted my coiffure, and put my cell phone on airplane mode and bid a fond farewell to my loving but unsuspecting wife and other members of the household. I trust you'll all behave while I'm gone. Hokahey.
Adios secret agent BF Operative .. and stay "squatchy". I am not behaving btw.. what ?
AttorneyTom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2012, 07:48 PM   #8433
AlaskaBushPilot
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,179
Originally Posted by parnassus View Post
I agree, GS, his expenditures before and after he made his bucks don't make much sense if he didn't have some belief in the animal. I refer in particular to the elaborate capture truck, and the hiring of a guy to drive around the country investigating bigfoot reports. I believe the term for the PGF would be a righteous fraud.
Then Roger has you fooled, but he's using your conscientiousness against you.

We don't actually have much data, other than some major highlights and the testimony of brother-in-law and business partner Al DeAtley. Roger never spent another penny investigating the only place to have ever produced a "documented" bigfoot: Bluff Creek, California. Even absent the PGF this was the epicenter of bigfoot "evidence". The most he ever spent on anything hands-down is the expedition to Thailand, to the likes of the Pussycat Bar. Don't get me wrong, that was a far better investment than bigfoot hunting. But no letter has ever been produced allegedly written by a serviceman that a Thai Monestary had a Bigfoot. We have only Roger's word on that, which is an obvious lie. Roger stole that idea from Nepal where the Pangboche Monestary allegedly had a Yeti hand.

Thailand did not have such a tradition or scam industry. That's why Roger couldn't name the monestary. Roger's connections to Thailand were indeed through the service since he was Army and troops frequented Thailand for the friendly local girls. So his cover story is the Monestary, an easy lie to pass off to people that don't know Thailand from Nepal. We're shocked, SHOCKED that the story did not pan out. I think the guy who went with him might have been the guy you mentioned who chased down bigfoot reports for Roger. An Ex-serviceman. I'd like to know more about this guy and his angle because its juicy enough already.

Insofar as all Roger Patterson's gadgetry and phony bigfoot hunting fronts - that is something we see him doing from the beginnning to the end. And wow, was he busy. He's writing a book extending the Yeti hoax to the USA, on the heels of Ray Wallace. Faking a LOT of tracks and casts himself to lay the groundwork for his big one. Giving talks, hoaxing Jerry Merritt in a suit. (More than one costume deployment, most likely). He constructs this "bigfoot viewing platform" that was an outright danger to life and limb, crashing down on Merritt's property, makes a "documentary" and scams numerous would-be partners before PGF...

The capture van, being the pioneer with broadcasting sounds through speakers, etc. - Roger was relentless in the same way Finding Bigfoot is in these ludicrous gimmicks "proving" their sincerity. Phony clubs too, research organizations, Roger did it all. So sure he sent someone to check out bigfoot reports. That's Roger's trade: bigfoot "investigations", ie promotions.

Roger's whole life was the entertainment business. The charitable view of his bigfooting is just that: entertainment. He has all these elaborate props, sure. And puts on an act. He must go to his deathbead making it appear he believes in and hunts for bigfoot. His wife and kids can continue to sustain themselves after his death because of it: people's belief in Roger's sincerity.

Being a righeous fraud is better than no explanation. But the systematic way he goes about faking the appearance of Bigfoot hunting from beginning to end makes the con-man model superior because it explains everything consistently across Roger Patterson actions.

Reasonable people are going to disagree on this probably. But righteous fraud clashes with the rest of his unrepentant and incessant bad faith dealings. It would be the exception to Roger Patterson's known character. And it explains neither Thailand nor his disinterest in Bluff Creek afterwards.

The Righteous Fraud view can offer an insight on the person who believes in that theory of Roger Patterson. That's a person with a conscience. Becasue we tend to substitute our character for that of others. For someone with a conscience, it is difficult to accept being a person without one.

Just discussion.
AlaskaBushPilot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2012, 10:25 PM   #8434
Deacondark
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 334
Well said ABP. The hardest thing for decent people to come to grips with is the fact that there are actually people out there who have no conscience whatsoever. And the unconscionable use just that to take advantage of people.
Deacondark is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th May 2012, 01:10 AM   #8435
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 15,723
Originally Posted by parnassus View Post
I agree, GS, his expenditures before and after he made his bucks don't make much sense if he didn't have some belief in the animal. I refer in particular to the elaborate capture truck, and the hiring of a guy to drive around the country investigating bigfoot reports. I believe the term for the PGF would be a righteous fraud.
Props and sales tools, nothing more. Have to sell the product. Have to advertise. Cost of doing business.

Net gun is a perfect example. It was just a prop.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 4th May 2012, 02:14 AM   #8436
BravesFan
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,784
Originally Posted by parnassus View Post
well, I'm off to the land of the footers. I'll check in if I have a chance, but I'm hoping to be otherwise occupied with some lusty mountain woman or Bob Gimlin, whichever comes first. I've packed my Dos Equis and cravat, highlighted my coiffure, and put my cell phone on airplane mode and bid a fond farewell to my loving but unsuspecting wife and other members of the household. I trust you'll all behave while I'm gone. Hokahey.
I hope nothing less than your journey is entertaining! It would be great if it was enlightening, but the way the protect their own, I reckon that it will be a battle at best and a removal at worst.

But , again, good luck to you sir. may the silly comments flow back to us in as real a time as possible
BravesFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th May 2012, 06:29 AM   #8437
Drewbot
Illuminator
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,405
Originally Posted by parnassus View Post
well, I'm off to the land of the footers. I'll check in if I have a chance, but I'm hoping to be otherwise occupied with some lusty mountain woman or Bob Gimlin, whichever comes first. I've packed my Dos Equis and cravat, highlighted my coiffure, and put my cell phone on airplane mode and bid a fond farewell to my loving but unsuspecting wife and other members of the household. I trust you'll all behave while I'm gone. Hokahey.
I wish I was going as well. They have good beer up thataway...
__________________
"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 Back to Top
Old 5th May 2012, 08:27 AM   #8438
Drysdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,096
Stupid question. This has been brought up before I'm sure but I haven't seen it.

Who named Patty?

Was it Roger? Reason I ask is another pseudonym for Patty would be Paddy.
As in pads underneath. It would be an inside joke kinda deal.
Drysdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th May 2012, 11:06 AM   #8439
AlaskaBushPilot
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,179
edit: image failed to load.

Never mind.
AlaskaBushPilot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th May 2012, 12:14 PM   #8440
BravesFan
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,784
Originally Posted by Drysdale View Post
Stupid question. This has been brought up before I'm sure but I haven't seen it.

Who named Patty?

Was it Roger? Reason I ask is another pseudonym for Patty would be Paddy.
As in pads underneath. It would be an inside joke kinda deal.
Ummm, it was named by the bigfoot community because the film was known as the PATTERSON/Gimlin Film. (Patterson.... Patty ,get it?).
BravesFan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics 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 04:45 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

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