|
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. |
14th April 2012, 10:06 AM | #8121 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,314
|
I think the production year is 1955 on that, so 12 years before the PGF, and that picture of the abominable snowman is far better clarity, much closer shot.
Look where his arms would drop too - giving the same appearance as the Patty Suit in terms of arm length proportions being influenced by the built-up shoulders. |
14th April 2012, 10:54 AM | #8122 |
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 153
|
If you look at some of the additional shots of the costume at the provided link, it's actually a pretty sophisticated suit. Given the age of that costume versus Patty, I think one could effectively eliminate the argument of "the means to construct a Patty suit were not available in 1967."
|
14th April 2012, 11:24 AM | #8123 |
Sorcerer Supreme
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 7,905
|
AtomicMysteryMonster has shown that to be the case time and time again, with pictures of, for example, the muscled ape suit used in the Weismuller Tarzan films of the 1930s... among dozens of other examples.
To my own eternal shame, I used to argue from ignorance of such suits toward the biological reality of the PGF bigfoot, but I was tragically uninformed of the extensive history of such suits stretching back to the early decades of Hollywood make-up and costume effects. |
__________________
"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 |
|
14th April 2012, 12:51 PM | #8124 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,942
|
|
__________________
Normal in a weird way. |
|
14th April 2012, 03:32 PM | #8125 |
Guest
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
|
|
14th April 2012, 04:02 PM | #8126 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,314
|
Much further back, actually. The girl-to-gorilla trick goes back at least to the 1860's. This is where the magician has mirrors and light employed in a way that makes objects appear, disappear, or change from one to the other. The most dramatic of which was turning a hot little assistant girl into a gorilla, and the guy in the gorilla suit charges the audience, sending people shrieking out of the room. This is a circus side-show act popular in the mid 19th century.
You hear this disengenuous myth about mountain gorillas not being discovered until 1902. Well sure - but gorillas have actually been written of by explorers as far back as 500 BCE. Not just sighted, but shot and killed with specimens taken back for study. There are three species with a couple sub-species of each. The very last of them was not categorized as a sub-species until 1902 but gorillas have been known for millenia by explorers outside of Africa. So the copying of gorilla-type suits is centuries and perhaps even millenia older than Roger Patterson. There were apes, chimpanzees, and baboons in the Roman Ampitheater. There were actual skins available for theater people to work with in plays or performances, so it would not surprise me some artisan much better than Roger Patterson made a superior suit two thousand years ago. |
14th April 2012, 04:35 PM | #8127 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 453
|
|
14th April 2012, 07:09 PM | #8128 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,942
|
|
__________________
Normal in a weird way. |
|
14th April 2012, 08:27 PM | #8129 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
|
I would like to categorically state, proclaim and let it be known in general that I do not have the suit. I do have a suit but it would not work since it is wool and has pockets etc..and trying to find a matching mask or some sort of foot covering would be a fashion nightmare for me.
|
15th April 2012, 02:13 AM | #8130 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,784
|
|
15th April 2012, 08:50 AM | #8131 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,712
|
|
__________________
"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 |
|
15th April 2012, 09:23 AM | #8132 |
Sorcerer Supreme
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 7,905
|
Fair point, but I was specifically referring to muscled ape suits which are relatively anatomically convincing. I'm not certain, but I doubt the various Pepper's ghost/girl-to-gorilla sideshow illusions used any kind of muscled suit.
I'll go out on a limb (get it??? like an ape!!!) and assert the claim that no convincingly muscled ape suits existed till the 1930s. I've never seen a picture of one, but I'll be happy to be proven wrong. I'm with you all the way here. Mountain gorillas are extremely rare and live only in a small pocket of upland rain forest, so it stands to reason it took Western science (namely, Captain Beringe) until 1902 to find a specimen. Dr. Savage first described the Western (lowland) gorilla in scientific papers in 1847, from specimens obtained in Liberia, and described other gorilla species in succeeding years. Of course, the main distinction between the discovery of gorillas, and that of bigfoot which has yet to occur (*cough*because they don't exist*cough*) is that scientists did not go looking for the gorilla until the 1840s. Dr. Savage was the first to go looking... and lo and behold, he found them! Amazing. Maybe it wouldn't surprise any of us, but it does bear noting that we have no evidence for such a claim. As far as anyone knows the ape suit was invented in the 1860s for the Pepper's ghost illusion you referenced at the top of your post. But again, I'll be happy to be proven wrong on this assertion. |
__________________
"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 |
|
15th April 2012, 09:24 AM | #8133 |
Muse
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 834
|
|
15th April 2012, 09:29 AM | #8134 |
Sorcerer Supreme
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 7,905
|
Ah, I see. IOW, the claim is that he has seen the suit. He doesn't have it, but he's seen it.
Not sure how useful that is going to be. |
__________________
"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 |
|
15th April 2012, 10:10 AM | #8135 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,942
|
I don't want to speak for Kit but from what I've read in his posts on the BFF he does not have the suit, and has not even seen it in person, but he knows who has it.
As with the BFF thread I assume he won't answer detailed questions about it here because of the extreme sensitivity of the situation.
Originally Posted by Kitakaze @ BFF
Originally Posted by Kitakaze @ BFF
|
__________________
Normal in a weird way. |
|
15th April 2012, 10:37 AM | #8136 |
Sorcerer Supreme
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 7,905
|
I have great respect and admiration for Kit, but his claim to have seen the suit (presumably in pictures) and to know who has it is essentially worthless. ECREE and all that.
|
__________________
"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 |
|
15th April 2012, 12:02 PM | #8137 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,314
|
Not sure, since cameras were not generally available until the late 1800's. That is a reasonable thing to expect.
Padding isn't a high-tech affair though. Insofar as artwork is concerned, the ancients were very talented. I think they could put together a good suit with real skins.
Quote:
Quote:
The mountain gorillas inhabit volcanic slopes that comprise an area smaller than the smallest counties in the USA. The Germans had sent a survey and diplomatic team to the furthest corner of their newly claimed empire of German East Africa. They were not looking for the mountain gorilla. They just ran into them and shot them while exploring, just like Hanno more than two thousand years before. So it is much worse for the 'footers than one could imagine. The gorillas were not found by people looking for them. They were stumbled upon randomly simply by passing through their habitat. Modern 'footers claim to know where bigfoot lives, launch probably hundreds of expeditions over half a century to find them - and not one specimen. So the history of gorilla "discovery" is an outstanding demonstration of how stupid it is to use gorillas as an example of how bigfoot might still be undiscovered. In 1902 any local native could have led explorers directly to the mountain gorilla habitat, and to a family of living specimens in the same day he was asked. That would have been true a thousand years before, and will be true another thousand years hence. The reason the Germans went to the volcanos is because they were survey landmarks pertaining to the unknown boundaries of the German land claim. To the natives, these were just bigger gorillas that lived on the volcanos - so what. Hanno in 500 BCE is also just exploring. They run into Gorillas. So they kill them. The Romans know of all manner of wild beast, not just numerous hominids but lions and tigers and so forth. These are all big money animals at the ampitheater. So gorillas are widely known through the Roman Empire, by even the most uneducated peasant.
Quote:
|
15th April 2012, 07:15 PM | #8138 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
|
So.. Sacagawea would have turned L & C onto Sasquatch ? Um.. had there been such a thing.. that would have been so.. awesome.. and Jeffersonian !)
It is neat that noone knew of them then.. yet they (much like those well known coyote creatures) were able to migrate east to Rhode Island and the rest of the original 13 colonies by 1999 ! Like a McDonalds franchise also !! |
17th April 2012, 12:38 PM | #8139 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,216
|
|
__________________
"Take the children, but LEAVE ME MY MONKEY!" --Dewey Cox, in "Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story." "The main skill of bigfoot investigators is finding ways to deny the obvious." --DFoot |
|
18th April 2012, 06:48 PM | #8140 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
|
|
18th April 2012, 11:12 PM | #8141 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,784
|
|
19th April 2012, 07:52 AM | #8142 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
|
I have to admit that kk's claims with the suit do appear much like proponents claims with bigfoot. Probably not a wise thing to make public claims about until you can offer up proof. (and hopefully your public mentions will not sour those efforts as well) Good luck kk.
|
19th April 2012, 08:00 AM | #8143 |
Muse
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 917
|
This website documents the kind of do-it-yourself romanticized Western culture in which Patterson and others participated:
http://www.helenahistory.org/frontier_town.htm |
__________________
Bigfoot is everywhere, yet nowhere. LTC8K6 (Bigfoot) evidence doesn't look better on deeper analysis, it looks worse. David Daegling The Bigfoot hypothesis is tested daily. |
|
19th April 2012, 08:01 AM | #8144 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
IIRC, a claim of seeing the suit in someone's house has come up before here at JREF.
|
__________________
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? |
|
19th April 2012, 10:07 AM | #8145 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,942
|
Didn't Leroy claim to have access to the suit, or examined it, or something similar?
|
__________________
Normal in a weird way. |
|
19th April 2012, 01:51 PM | #8146 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 343
|
|
19th April 2012, 08:12 PM | #8147 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,344
|
|
__________________
"The lie is different at every level." Richard C. Hoagland |
|
19th April 2012, 08:50 PM | #8148 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
GT is right, I don't have the suit in my personal possession. It was a mistake on my part to ever say anything, and I expect and deserve skeptics and believers alike to call BS. I have given out as much information publicly as I am going to until I am much farther along with the project I am working on.
Ever having said anything prematurely was a mistake, but one I will try and make work to my advantage. |
__________________
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 |
|
19th April 2012, 08:56 PM | #8149 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
|
I hope it does work to "your advantage". I wish you well . Maybe try not to make anymore "mistakes ".
In other news... I am working on a project that I cannot tell anyone else about until some other time... maybe a later time.. unspecified..um.. at a later time . Skeptics and Believers will understand I am sure.. since it is a later time.. It involves somethings.. and other things that I can only disclose at a certain.. um.. time.. so .. I will reveal all soon . I made a mistake by revealing too much about it already. All will be revealed in due time ! You know of a suit that was used in the PGF ? You have seen it ? Please do tell now all about that? |
19th April 2012, 09:24 PM | #8150 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,942
|
Some people on the JREF have earned the benefit of the doubt on things like this, and some haven't been here long enough to have earned that respect.
If you want to guess who is who go for it. |
__________________
Normal in a weird way. |
|
19th April 2012, 09:28 PM | #8151 |
Muse
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 883
|
Just guessing here.. Kit ? That is too bad because he just pops in.. after the fray.
OH wait.. you meant me ?! Holy.. BF ! Really ? If that is the sitch... What is he.. we waiting for ? |
19th April 2012, 11:12 PM | #8152 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,314
|
Well, it made me laugh.
GT/CS - Not only that but Leroy claimed the PGF suit provided the pattern for his if I recall correctly. Kitikaze was going to contact him and follow through with the same lead. I have no opinion on all that. Not much point to it. I do eagerly admit to hoping the suit is preserved because the story - the real story - is much more interesting to me than the hoax. There can't be any other way for a bigfoot hoax to be done as has been proven ad nauseum since Roger Patterson's "seminal work". The suits are secondary to shaking the camera, keeping it out of focus, shooting at distance, fourth generation copy or poor lighting etc. - anything but a clear shot. Roger definitely used more than one suit if we can trust the camera shop owner who reported Roger bringing one up by bus from hollywood. Delong writes about it. That rings true as a trial run. But the problem with a rented ape suit is that it looks like an ape suit. So to film a bigfoot like Roger drew (plagiarized) for his book - he had to modify a Phillip Morris suit. |
19th April 2012, 11:53 PM | #8153 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
|
__________________
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? |
|
20th April 2012, 02:36 AM | #8154 |
Muse
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 538
|
Leroy Blevins said he based his suit on photos of the original, which he had limited access to. The anonymous source was supposed to be a fairly close associate of both Roger P. and Bob H. Kitakaze had already some idea on this individual plus the location and may have already had a lead on the suit/photo angle before Leroy Blevins posted his account. The identity of the alleged anonymous suit holder was confirmed to Kitakaze's satisfaction... if I got it correctly.
|
__________________
"Bigfoot does not leave hair samples for us unless he is in our dimension to begin with, obviously. Once the hair is separated from the electrical field associated with the Bigfoot's free quanta energy loops, the hair becomes independant and remains in it's most stable dimension, which presumably is our dimension."(Historian) |
|
20th April 2012, 07:14 AM | #8155 |
Sorcerer Supreme
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 7,905
|
Of course it would be fun to see a suit, and conjecture on its provenance and whether it is "THE" suit or not. The topic alone would keep skeptics and enthusiasts alike entertained well into the foreseeable future.
But short of still shots of Patterson or Gimlin holding it, followed by time lapse photography of the object as it ages over the succeeding decades to the condition it is (putatively) in now, there is no way to certify that any alleged ape suit is Patty's furry hide. |
__________________
"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 |
|
20th April 2012, 08:17 AM | #8156 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
|
If we're only talking photos of a suit, not likely to verify. (no matter who is in possession of it, or the story) If we're talking the suit is available for inspection it's entirely possible to identify it as being "the suit". The Morris claim could be verified as well if it's a modified Morris suit. How it's modified and the materials used could be identifying as well. Morris claimed Patterson ordered more dynel. Things like shoulder pads, hip waders, glass eye etc could come into play. Imagine finding it with all of these things just as were claimed. I think it could be positively identified in that fashion. The age of the suit and condition could play a huge factor as well. (as well as the construction of it, some of can be seen from the film itself)
Completely possible to identify, but from photos only - not very likely. |
20th April 2012, 10:07 AM | #8157 |
Sorcerer Supreme
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 7,905
|
|
__________________
"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 |
|
20th April 2012, 11:55 AM | #8158 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,784
|
I was convinced that Patty was a suit on the BFF. (by a proponent of the film oddly enough) They put up a gif showing very clear movement and I noticed a lateral shifting of the "fur" at the waistline contrary to the bottom half, convincing me it was made up of two halves. An animal's skin wouldn't move that way.
|
20th April 2012, 02:30 PM | #8159 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oklahoma, USA
Posts: 5,147
|
I'm encouraged by the potential for a "suit reveal" to finally stick a fork in the silliness that is the PGF. Frankly I think it's a huge distraction for the bigfooters. So much of their energies are tied to the PGF and its offshoots, e.g., Meldrum's mid-tarsal break, but a debunk of the PGF that convinces the die-hards does not debunk bigfoot. The lore existed prior to 1967, and people who think they've seen one will still think they've seen one. We can focus more clearly on anecdotal accounts and new analyses (like Ketchum's) if we could finally put an end to the arguing over PGF minutiae.
That said, I'll still be surprised - really surprised - if the suit could be found. When I think like a hoaxer, I destroy the suit after seeing footage good enough to convince people that the film is authentic. Only a complete moron would risk keeping the suit! (I know others have argued reasons for keeping the suit; to me it's just obvious to destroy the suit to preserve the hoax.) |
20th April 2012, 02:44 PM | #8160 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,216
|
I kind of agree but I think the impact of loosing Meldrum/Krantz (and really all tracks and casts) credibility is huge.
As far as the actual suit, I have no reason to doubt that kitakaze has located it. Destroying a valuable item is not something that one would do unless one felt like one had committed a serious crime. And from what Bob H. says, that wasn't the mentality at all. Patterson wasn't one to throw away easy money. Collectors pay big money for stuff like this. p. |
__________________
"Take the children, but LEAVE ME MY MONKEY!" --Dewey Cox, in "Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story." "The main skill of bigfoot investigators is finding ways to deny the obvious." --DFoot |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|