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

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


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 , bill munns , Patterson-Gimlin film

Reply
Old 30th May 2013, 07:49 PM   #281
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 25,762
Originally Posted by clayflingythingy View Post
Per diplomat & double naught spy KK, ole BM know's the PGF is as phony as a three dollar bill.
They are pretending to believe. Sometimes skeptics learn that all was for naught because the believers aren't actually believers but are instead engaged in a pastime. In the end the joke is on the skeptic.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th May 2013, 09:51 PM   #282
OntarioSquatch
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,783
I don't know how some of you reached the conclusion that Bill Munns doesn't believe in Patty's authenticity. If I remember correctly, this was something that was originally brought up by Kitakaze in one of his dishonest attempts at discrediting the PGF.

What has Bill proven?

He's proven that the subject in the PGF would be incredibly difficult to re-create with traditional materials and techniques that are used for creating costumes. Maybe even impossible back in the 1960's/1970's once you add everything up.

The PGF hasn't stuck around the past 45 years simply because proponents are finding excuses for it to. It really is an incredible piece of film. You can easily confirm this yourself by comparing it to all the other Bigfoot videos that are on YouTube, where 99% are fakes.
OntarioSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th May 2013, 10:11 PM   #283
Apology
This title intentionally left blank
 
Apology's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,126
Isn't Bill Munn the one who tried to claim that there weren't any visible splices in the PGF? I wonder if he thinks that Hollywood movies are filmed all in one go, since you can't see the splices in those either. I was frankly bewildered by this claim. Or was that someone else?
Apology is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th May 2013, 10:14 PM   #284
Chris L
Graduate Poster
 
Chris L's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,344
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
I don't know how some of you reached the conclusion that Bill Munns doesn't believe in Patty's authenticity. If I remember correctly, this was something that was originally brought up by Kitakaze in one of his dishonest attempts at discrediting the PGF.

What has Bill proven?

He's proven that the subject in the PGF would be incredibly difficult to re-create with traditional materials and techniques that are used for creating costumes. Maybe even impossible back in the 1960's/1970's once you add everything up.

The PGF hasn't stuck around the past 45 years simply because proponents are finding excuses for it to. It really is an incredible piece of film. You can easily confirm this yourself by comparing it to all the other Bigfoot videos that are on YouTube, where 99% are fakes.
How has he proven that?
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th May 2013, 10:58 PM   #285
Night Walker
Critical Thinker
 
Night Walker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 262
If the ABRO, rather than the BFRO, had gained the ascendency during the internet’s formative years of the 90’s would we be having this same discussion about Marx’s “incredible footage” rather than Patterson’s?
Night Walker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 12:16 AM   #286
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,941
Originally Posted by Apology View Post
Isn't Bill Munn the one who tried to claim that there weren't any visible splices in the PGF? I wonder if he thinks that Hollywood movies are filmed all in one go, since you can't see the splices in those either. I was frankly bewildered by this claim. Or was that someone else?
That's the same dishonest person.
__________________
Normal in a weird way.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 12:28 AM   #287
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
I don't know how some of you reached the conclusion that Bill Munns doesn't believe in Patty's authenticity. If I remember correctly, this was something that was originally brought up by Kitakaze in one of his dishonest attempts at discrediting the PGF.

What has Bill proven?

He's proven that the subject in the PGF would be incredibly difficult to re-create with traditional materials and techniques that are used for creating costumes. Maybe even impossible back in the 1960's/1970's once you add everything up.

The PGF hasn't stuck around the past 45 years simply because proponents are finding excuses for it to. It really is an incredible piece of film. You can easily confirm this yourself by comparing it to all the other Bigfoot videos that are on YouTube, where 99% are fakes.
The PGF has stuck 45 years around because no one cares beside the skeptic and the BF believer. Absolutely no one. Heck scratch that no one beside BF believer and the few skeptic which are interrested and bother discussing it.

As for Bill he has proven nothing. Proof is mathematic. The only things he has evidenced is that the way he did it was not the way it was done. But looking at the hip wader and the other microscopic detail in the film, and the preponderance of other evidence (P's picture book, details changing, absence of corpse, anatomy of the things looking like a costume) I am sorry but for us most "casual" skeptic , we just shake head.

But sociologically it is fascinating to see people defending this so adamentely.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 02:06 AM   #288
captain koolaid
Muse
 
captain koolaid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 538
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
I don't know how some of you reached the conclusion that Bill Munns doesn't believe in Patty's authenticity...

He's either a liar or a dolt and he doesn't seem like a dolt to me, so that kind of narrows it down.


Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
...The PGF hasn't stuck around the past 45 years simply because proponents are finding excuses for it..

Absolutely. It's stuck around because it's hilarious.


Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
...It really is an incredible piece of film....

Damn straight. It's comedy gold. You know people are laughing at it, not with it, right?
__________________
"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)
captain koolaid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 02:17 AM   #289
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Apology View Post
Isn't Bill Munn the one who tried to claim that there weren't any visible splices in the PGF? I wonder if he thinks that Hollywood movies are filmed all in one go, since you can't see the splices in those either. I was frankly bewildered by this claim. Or was that someone else?

Some tried to point out the obvious. (I was one of them!) For one he was only examining copies. Without the out of camera original it's a pretty empty claim. I'm sure he knows this, however he will twist the presentations made. Secondly, it is quite possible to make "invisible" splices.

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
I don't know how some of you reached the conclusion that Bill Munns doesn't believe in Patty's authenticity. If I remember correctly, this was something that was originally brought up by Kitakaze in one of his dishonest attempts at discrediting the PGF.

What has Bill proven?

He's proven that the subject in the PGF would be incredibly difficult to re-create with traditional materials and techniques that are used for creating costumes. Maybe even impossible back in the 1960's/1970's once you add everything up.

The PGF hasn't stuck around the past 45 years simply because proponents are finding excuses for it to. It really is an incredible piece of film. You can easily confirm this yourself by comparing it to all the other Bigfoot videos that are on YouTube, where 99% are fakes.

The PGF only sticks around to its fans, much like the alien autopsy. Add in a few nessies, and ghosts, and I'll be darned. There are lots of cool videos/films out there! They all stuck around, even after being exposed. (Heironimus what? lol) I'll agree that it was a cool hoax, but nothing more.

The only thing Bill Munns proved regarding the suit was that he could not accurately re-create the suit using the same materials Roger did. (perhaps Munns couldve started with a Morris suit and altered it to best match - if that is how one thinks it may have been done) To me it matters not who made the suit, or who was in it. Munns did not even get close.

Sure it would be nice to get the actual suit now and document it before it falls apart. (should it still exist)

OS, what is this?

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE





Note how the upper half of the suit rotates separate from hips/legs. Moves almost like a coat on a person. Hmm. Not to mention that diaper butt/turtle legs coming out of the shell and going back in.



No way that could be shoulder pads. Must be a bigfoot!



How do you explain the sideways knee? How about the X tendons? Looks a lot like how a hipwader folds... No way a human could fit inside that suit. Impossible right OS?




Rawr.
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY

Last edited by River; 31st May 2013 at 03:03 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 04:37 AM   #290
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 18,844
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
The PGF hasn't stuck around the past 45 years simply because proponents are finding excuses for it to. It really is an incredible piece of film. You can easily confirm this yourself by comparing it to all the other Bigfoot videos that are on YouTube, where 99% are fakes.
It's stuck around because time and again, hoax after hoax, it's all the believers have left to believe; too, it's a fallback for all the hoaxers, con artists and bull **** artists to keep the believers believing.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 04:44 AM   #291
Drewbot
Philosopher
 
Drewbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,350
River, The New Sweaty

Appearing with lines and colored gifs at your local Bigfoot forum.
__________________
"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic
Drewbot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 05:57 AM   #292
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,941
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
River, The New improved Sweaty

Appearing with lines and colored gifs at your local Bigfoot forum.
Fixed that for you
__________________
Normal in a weird way.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 06:56 AM   #293
The Shrike
Philosopher
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oklahoma, USA
Posts: 5,147
Marlborough started this thread on the 9th of April 2010, in response to a new BFF thread by Bill Munns stating that his analysis had confirmed an extraordinarily unlikely probability that "Patty" could be a human in a bigfoot suit. So by early April of 2010, Bill Munns had already completed and written up analysis that compelled him to make such a bold claim: If we're willing to accept a 1:20000 error rate (and who isn't?), the PGF proves the reality of bigfoot!

What has Bill done with that startling revelation? As of midnight tonight it will be June of 2013. In the previous three years, what effort has Bill put in to publish his scholarship and actually open it up to legitimate peer review? It's not like he has no contact with a mainstream academic (Meldrum) who claims to be equally convinced of the PGF's authenticity and with whom he has worked to secure additional grant money to study the film. Meldrum can certainly help him organize his textbergs into a manuscript. From what I can see, however, since announcing three years ago that the film must be authentic, neither Munns nor Meldrum have made any attempt to publish anything on it. They have instead been beating the bushes to find more money, ostensibly to study something that they've already stated is the real deal (Munns in his BFF textbergs and Meldrum in his "ichnotaxon" paper).

Sorry, but I don't know what you call that other than fraudulent. If Bill needs more money to study the film, then he should retract his previous statements about it. If he's still sure that it's a bigfoot on film based on his analysis then he doesn't need more money to continue studying it, he needs to man up and write a paper on it.

So other than insert himself as a big man on campus in the world of bigfootery, I don't know what Bill has "done" other than to play a bunch of gullible people like Yo Yo Ma wailing on a cello.
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 06:56 AM   #294
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 25,762
This red circle shows that the PGF is a hoax.


__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 07:36 AM   #295
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 18,844
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
What has Bill proven?
That one can still profit from a fuzzy 45-year-old film of a guy in a suit.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 08:52 AM   #296
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
That one can still profit from a fuzzy 45-year-old film of a guy in a suit.
Yep, there's money in them thar hills.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 09:06 AM   #297
Chris L
Graduate Poster
 
Chris L's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,344
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
It's stuck around because time and again, hoax after hoax, it's all the believers have left to believe; too, it's a fallback for all the hoaxers, con artists and bull **** artists to keep the believers believing.
That is also my theory. I find it amusing that the high point of Bigfootology is this 45 year old movie. It's like basing a belief in UFO's just on the Betty and Barney Hill incident.
__________________
"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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 09:34 AM   #298
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 18,844
Originally Posted by Chris L View Post
That is also my theory. I find it amusing that the high point of Bigfootology is this 45 year old movie. It's like basing a belief in UFO's just on the Betty and Barney Hill incident.
Though they are getting more high tech. Following the lead of ghosthunting pseudoscience, some bigfoot "researchers" are getting into the thermal cam. I mean, what better way to get an indistinct human-like image?

I almost can't blame these folks for trying to sell such nonsense considering how many are willing to buy it.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 03:34 PM   #299
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Drewbot View Post
River, The New Sweaty

Appearing with lines and colored gifs at your local Bigfoot forum.




Clearly you can see the elbow spread is much too broad, much like the space in the mind of patty cakes. The truth is in the elbows. The elbows nose. El bows nose.

__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY

Last edited by River; 31st May 2013 at 03:37 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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 03:53 PM   #300
Jerrymander
Muse
 
Jerrymander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 624
So what is the big problem with Munn's analysis of the PGF?
Jerrymander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 04:55 PM   #301
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,941
Which one?
__________________
Normal in a weird way.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st May 2013, 05:34 PM   #302
Apology
This title intentionally left blank
 
Apology's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,126
Originally Posted by River View Post
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k2...psc14d0f3c.jpg


Clearly you can see the elbow spread is much too broad, much like the space in the mind of patty cakes. The truth is in the elbows. The elbows nose. El bows nose.

This explains everything except for the beans and the screwdriver.
Apology is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2013, 12:01 PM   #303
The Shrike
Philosopher
 
The Shrike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Oklahoma, USA
Posts: 5,147
Originally Posted by Jerrymander View Post
So what is the big problem with Munn's analysis of the PGF?
Bill Munns claims that it's (essentially) impossible for a human in a suit to have been "Patty" in the PGF. If it's impossible for Patty to have been a suited human, then that leads us to the inescapable conclusion that bigfoot is real!

Why does he claim that it's impossible to have been a guy in a suit? Specifically, I'm not sure, given that it's been shown time and time again that a person could be fit into Patty's apparent proportions. The ultimate problem seems to be that Bill is falling prey to the argument from personal incredulity. In other words, he can't figure out how Patterson could have made that suit, therefore, it must not be a suit.

Where it gets really sketchy is that Bill has established himself as something of an authority on making suits of hairy monsters. So he's baited his audience into the fallacy of argument from authority. "If Bill Munns says Patty is the real deal, then she's the real deal!"

So you have a guy claiming expert knowledge in monkey suit-making, who claims that Patty couldn't have been a monkey suit: classic use of the arguments from authority and personal incredulity to make the case that bigfoot must be real. It gets pretty hairy though the more one considers the likelihood that there's no personal incredulity at all, merely the claim of personal incredulity.
The Shrike is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st June 2013, 05:28 PM   #304
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,941
Munns announced to the world (or at least the bigfooters) that Patty was a real bigfoot and he was going to prove it. To that end he started studying the suit, looking for muscles and other organic signs, and he said he'd go where the evidence took him.

Well, he abruptly stopped studying the suit (for obvious reasons) and switched to proving Patty was a monster by proving that she was 7'-3" tall. And he did it!!!! Until the skeptics took a look at his calculations.

His height analysis was flawed because no-one knows how far Patty was from the camera, and without that measurement her height cannot be calculated - end of story. To get around that problem Munns used an established but unverified distance and calculated Patty's height at well under 6'. Undaunted he discovered that if he changed the camera lens size from 1" (25mm) to 15mm he came up with a value of over 7', so he ran with that theory instead of admitting the distance from Patty to the camera was the problem, or that Patty may be under 6' tall.

That is an example of how he is not honest and should not be trusted when the PGF is the subject.
__________________
Normal in a weird way.

Last edited by GT/CS; 1st June 2013 at 05:40 PM.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 06:13 AM   #305
clayflingythingy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 451
Originally Posted by GT/CS View Post
That is an example of how he is not honest and should not be trusted when the PGF is the subject.
It was obvious from day one when BM started posting here @ JREF talking about his "research" that he was going to declare Patty a real BF.

It would seem that BM is not @ the top of the heap in his chosen profession. I suspect he came into bigfootery with the sole intent of milking suckers for $ and getting face time on TV, etc., which he has had some success.
clayflingythingy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 12:55 PM   #306
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by clayflingythingy View Post
It was obvious from day one when BM started posting here @ JREF talking about his "research" that he was going to declare Patty a real BF.

It would seem that BM is not @ the top of the heap in his chosen profession. I suspect he came into bigfootery with the sole intent of milking suckers for $ and getting face time on TV, etc., which he has had some success.
Yep, I said that after his first posts here and got rather shushed and told to give him the benefit of the doubt. Con men love that benefit of the doubt.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 03:41 PM   #307
OntarioSquatch
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,783
Bill's analysis of the PGF is currently in peer review and I think Meldrum is somehow involved. It would be nice if Bill could be allowed back here because he's really the only one who can clear up some of the misconceptions.
OntarioSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 05:18 PM   #308
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,941
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
Bill's analysis of the PGF is currently in peer review and I think Meldrum is somehow involved. It would be nice if Bill could be allowed back here because he's really the only one who can clear up some of the misconceptions.
OS,
Do you understand the concept of an oxymoron?
__________________
Normal in a weird way.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 05:29 PM   #309
OntarioSquatch
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,783
What's wrong with Meldrum?
OntarioSquatch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 05:32 PM   #310
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8,548
Originally Posted by GT/CS View Post
...His height analysis was flawed because no-one knows how far Patty was from the camera, and without that measurement her height cannot be calculated - end of story.
Actually that is not the end of the story. If Munns used photogrammetry software, instead of his pretend reverse engineering with a CGI modelling tool, the distances and heights could be verified. OK, not verified, but he would have a valid mathematical methodology to back his claims.
Quote:
To get around that problem Munns used an established but unverified distance and calculated Patty's height at well under 6'. Undaunted he discovered that if he changed the camera lens size from 1" (25mm) to 15mm he came up with a value of over 7', so he ran with that theory instead of admitting the distance from Patty to the camera was the problem, or that Patty may be under 6' tall.

That is an example of how he is not honest and should not be trusted when the PGF is the subject.
This, and very much this.

From the outset, I asked for a couple of his high quality scans, you know, the scans he promised researchers to verify his claims, and offered to run them through a true photogrammetry programme.

Nuffin.

My correspondence with him (on and off this forum) was initially cordial, I even went so far as to obtain the same software he used and tried to get his numbers to work, but as I pointed out more and more flaws in his methodology, the replies from him became less frequent and less cordial, until there was stone cold silence.

I'm sure I was not the only one.
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. Art Buchwald
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 06:04 PM   #311
clayflingythingy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 451
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
....because he's really the only one who can clear up some of the misconceptions.
Regular posters here have no misconceptions about BM. He knows the PGF is a bloke in a suit. There is no money in telling the world what it already knows and BM is in it for $.

He's prbably beside himself that TheMelba reportedly raked in 500 G's. Makes what he has bilked from fools look like pocket change.
clayflingythingy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 06:04 PM   #312
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,941
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
What's wrong with Meldrum?
We have an entire thread dedicated to what's wrong with Meldrum.
__________________
Normal in a weird way.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 10:51 PM   #313
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,872
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
What's wrong with Meldrum?
You just gave yourself away. That is to say, now you're just trolling. You think you're playing some open ended 'last wink' game by always reassuring us somehow you're still a Bigfoot believer and nothing our sorry asses could do or say would ever change your mind. But actually it's worse...for you. You've now officially climbed (sunk?) to Forrest Gump level. Now every time you post it's like we have to retrain you all over again that it's an intelligent forum. Where apparently we discuss Bigfoot more honestly than you're able to comprehend. And where we righteously give no slack to the many phony for-profit myth peddlers.

Now please go read the Meldrum thread before you ask another stupid ******* question like that. Cripes!

Last edited by HarryHenderson; 2nd June 2013 at 10:57 PM.
HarryHenderson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2013, 10:55 PM   #314
HarryHenderson
Graduate Poster
 
HarryHenderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,872
Double post

Last edited by HarryHenderson; 2nd June 2013 at 10:57 PM.
HarryHenderson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2013, 04:59 AM   #315
Correa Neto
Philosopher
 
Correa Neto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,578
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
Bill's analysis of the PGF is currently in peer review and I think Meldrum is somehow involved. It would be nice if Bill could be allowed back here because he's really the only one who can clear up some of the misconceptions.
Can't you see some similarities with the whole Ketchum "paper" fiasco?

Ready to be fooled again?
__________________
Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me:
Together we can find the cure
Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…
Correa Neto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2013, 06:15 AM   #316
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,421
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
What's wrong with Meldrum?
He's becoming Scott Wolter?
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?
LTC8K6 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2013, 07:58 AM   #317
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
What's wrong with Meldrum?
Beside what they said, Meldrum would not be the correct one for peer review.

You would need other costume independent costume maker, or specialist in the field, and maybe independent biologist.

Having meldrum is ridiculous.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2013, 08:25 AM   #318
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch View Post
What's wrong with Meldrum?

You do understand the concept of peer review correct? It is for the paper to be challenged and checked/balanced by others currently working in the field of said profession. Meldrum already believes the PGF to represent a real animal. (or at least he says he does) Does that sound like much of a check or balance? Or does it sound much more like preaching to the choir?

Bigfooters, and especially Munns do not want this challenged by unbiased peers. If he does, perhaps they are not expressing the interest in taking the time to do so. When I last researched the opinion of other effects artists/monster guys I found 12 other opinions out there saying they thought the PGF was a GIAS. So you have Munns vs the rest. Munns does seem to have a hard time proving his theories. (at least to anyone outside of the bigfootery world)

So, do you think Meldrum would accept Munns paper? Of course. Do you think it makes it any more credible? Maybe about as credible as Meldrums work on bigfoot? (elk lay, Freeman tracks, BCM tracks, PGF)

Solid ground to stand on for sure... If you're representing that bigfoot is a man made hoax.
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
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 Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2013, 09:27 AM   #319
GT/CS
Illuminator
 
GT/CS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Inland NW
Posts: 4,941
And don't forget that Munns and Meldrum are working together on a project.
__________________
Normal in a weird way.
GT/CS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th June 2013, 05:13 AM   #320
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 23,869
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
^Has anyone done a red crayon-labeled analysis of Barney's "limb ratios" or whatever? I wonder if bigfooty analysis applied to a couple of blurry photos of Barney would reveal it impossible to be human in a suit.

As we know:

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."
~Arthur Conan Doyle
Obviously Barney is a manifestation of the daemon lord B'harne.
Destroy him and his sponge minions.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

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 05:16 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.