|
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. |
9th April 2010, 07:04 AM | #1 |
Scholar
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 80
|
Bill Munns Calculates Probability of Patterson/Gimlin film Being faked at 0.00005
You can now add self proclaimed "probability statistician" to his arsenal of alleged professional endeavors that already included engineer, forensic expert and anthropologist. In his expert opinion, he calculates that any chance of the PGF being a hoax as being low as 1 in 20000.
link In fact, it looks like Bills gone totally ape with Bigfoot particularly at a well known squatch haunt . He has monopolized the entire forum with his expertise. 27 out 32 threads were started by BILL link. There is talk of Bill speculating on what Patty ate for breakfast that fateful day in 1967 just by the way it walks. And to think, I wasted 4 years of my life earning an engineering degree. Just some of the ground breaking lecture threads Bill has initiated. I suggest we start off with "Patterson Gimlin Film Beginner's guide-A link to a Guide which can help people new to this discussion." for us newbies. 1/ Creature Suit Analysis Part 10 - Flab Bill Munns study of soft tissue appearances in the PG Film 2/ Creature Suit Analysis Part 6 - Comparative Anatomy A study of a human figure intended to relicate the PG film figure 3/ Patterson Gimlin Film Beginner's guide A link to a Guide which can help people new to this discussion. 4/ Creature Suit Analysis Part 9 - A Study of Probability Bill Munns notes on the probability the PG Film is hoaxed 5/ Creature Suits Analysis Part 2 - Under the Fur Bill Munns notes on muscle suits and other anatomical parts 6/ Can rebuilding Patty prove anything? * 12 Bill Munns notes on what could be proved. 7/ Film Final Analysis by Bill Munns 8/ Creature Suit Analysis Part 11 - The next Step * 12 Bill Munns notes on a PG Film image research study 9/ Creature Suit Analysis Part 12 - Hip seams Bill Munns notes on seams of a two piece fur suit 10/ Creature Suit Analysis Part Five Building Patty Bill Munns notes on building a Patty Replica 11/ Creature Suit Analysis Part 8 Neck Hackles Bill Munns study of neck shadows on the PG Film figure 12/ Creature Suit Analysis Part 7 - Neck seams Bill Munns' study of fur suit neck seams and folds 13/ Creature Suit Analysis Part Four Extra Hands a look at helping hands, literally anf figuratively 14/ Creature Suit Analysis Part Three The Mime inside Bill Munns notes on the difficulties of wearing a suit 15/ Creature Suit Analysis Part 1 Fur 16/ PGF Hoax Analysis - Part Six - Makeup Artist Opinions A series of individual topic discussions 17/ PGF Hoax Analysis - Part Two - Film Processing A series of individual topic discussions 18/ PGF Hoax Analysis - Part Five - Roger's Hollywood Connections A series of individual topic discussions 19/ PGF Hoax Analysis - Part One - Editing and Splicing A series of individual topic discussions 20/ PGF Hoax Analysis - Part Four - Film Provenance and Copies A series of individual topic discussions 21/ PGF Hoax Analysis - Part Three - Bob Heironimous A series of individual topic discussions 22/ Amazing revelation about the PGF we all figured it wrong 23/ PGF Hoax, One Coherent Story how it was done 24/ Patterson Documentary Footage Analysis Summing up the overall analysis of this footage 25/ UEC (Unidentified edge coding) Something curious in Patterson's film 26/ Unidentified Man in film Anybody have thoughts on the identity of this man 27/ Film Grain Question Trying to figure out why one image is so grainy |
9th April 2010, 07:07 AM | #2 |
Illuminator
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,693
|
real film, real creature, real monkey suit, real human
|
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug Graduate of a liberal arts college! Faster play faster faster play faster |
|
9th April 2010, 07:40 AM | #3 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
William Parcher calculates the probability of Bill Munns being a weirdo crackpot who is completely wrong about the identity of the PGF subject and Bigfoot in general at 99% (margin of error 1%).
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
9th April 2010, 08:35 AM | #4 |
Godless Socialist
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Denmark
Posts: 8,171
|
How did he calculate it?
Sales records of gorilla suits? |
__________________
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. -K. Marx. |
|
9th April 2010, 09:55 AM | #5 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,694
|
" of course its real Trin, what person , has ever moved like that...in the history of people."
- Ricky, Trailer Park Boys. Come on people, the simple fact remains that if there was enough to breed there would be enough to notice. Otherwise we would be getting weird imbred bigfeet as time went on. Man, where are the people who believe in dragons? At least dragons are neat. Bigfoot just seems straight up boring. I mean really, what do you want to see, some dragon majestically flying through the air, maybe breathing a little fire? Or some ape that's claim to fame is walking around like it is bored all the time? |
9th April 2010, 10:32 AM | #6 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,700
|
Probability of it being fake: 1
|
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar |
|
9th April 2010, 07:40 PM | #7 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,877
|
It's amazing to me the (seeming) huge volume of 'work' he's done analyzing the PGF. I won't pretend to have done even 1/10th of that amount of work vetting anything Bigfoot, ever. But wouldn't it have been better for him to spend such time (instead) attempting a real & proper re-creation of the PGF subject? I mean, that's supposedly his true area of expertise, right? Appears he's been doing so much 'science' lately he thinks he's been transformed from an under-appreciated costume maker to being the grand-poobah of a new Bigfoot ThinkTank™. At least that's what it seems he's trying to make everyone believe.
I'm still not sure how much we're supposed to appreciate the notion that if a Hollywood™ costumer thinks the PGF is not just a clever suit, then it's not just a clever suit. Ya don't say? So anyway, would Bill care to properly explain why the hallowed PGF doesn't have any number of 'contemporaries' (so-to-speak) by now? In 43 years, wouldn't there be at least one more similar (or even better) film by now if the creature actually existed? Yet, not even one has showed up. Doesn't the fact it's never been duplicated ANYWHERE BY ANYONE FILMING ANYTHING THAT RESEMBLES A LIVE CREATURE OR A COSTUME give some in-your-face credence to the possibility that Roger Patterson really was as smart and clever as you refuse to believe he was? I guess I'm in awe of the fact he's publicly proclaimed the real and true existence of a newly 'discovered' species of hairy-wild-ape-man SIMPLY by re-manipulating Microsoft Paint™ (in ways its mother never intended). To me that's amazing! I hear next up is the Munn's Anti-gravity Machine® (MAM™) that uses a high pitched dog whistle and two safety pins as part of its 'engine'. Truly amazing stuff. |
__________________
"If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." - Pedro |
|
9th April 2010, 08:21 PM | #8 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,004
|
Originally Posted by HarryHenderson
Since we're dusting off old Bill stuff, check out his "Beginner's Guide to the Patterson-Gimlin Film." |
__________________
Open your mind and let the sun shine in. Let a wild hairy ape in there too, would you please? - William Parcher You can fool too many of the people too much of the time. - James Thurber |
|
29th April 2010, 10:39 AM | #9 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,216
|
Even the 'footers have realized that this guy has a world-class ego. Perhaps world-record. Of course, he can be an expert on probability. Why not?
He starts dozens of threads, and whines with delusions of persecution when anyone questions his ideas. If you hold your nose, though, and ignore his "deductions," he does provide enough useful data that his overall effect is to help debunk the PGF and Bigfoot. Of course, he doesn't realize that. |
__________________
"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 |
|
30th April 2010, 01:18 PM | #10 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,919
|
AMM wrote:
Quote:
The joke is on the "skeptics", Atomic....every 'Patty re-creation' attempt just furthers/strengthens the case of the Footers......that Patty cannot be replicated... Enter Mr. Morris...(Stunning....a virtual TWIN to Patty)... Enter Mr. Blevins...(WOW ...He 'nailed it' with the feet)... Enter Mr. D-"It's easy-I did-it-on-my-lunch-break"-Foot.....(Note: The Upper Cranium has 'Room For Rent'....if anyone's interested)... Of course.....while Dfoot crafted a 'sculpture' of Patty's form.....he failed...( )....to replicate her extreme upper-torso width.....and the widening of the body, at the hips... Details....details...pesky little details... I calculate the probability at approximately 100%....that Dfoot's "recreation" of Patty......"D-sucks". Anyone else wanna give it a try??......and fail...miserably, laughably... |
__________________
The wisdom of Diogenes.... "So far, I am not aware of any evidence which indicates with any degree of likeliness, however small, that Bigfoot creatures exist....anywhere in the world." tyr13: "There is no proof of bigfoot so there is no proof that bigfoot isn't a bear." |
|
30th April 2010, 01:36 PM | #11 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sweden
Posts: 5,764
|
Interesting that the number of new bigfoot/alien videos is inversely proportional to the number of video cameras in circulation
|
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available |
|
30th April 2010, 10:53 PM | #12 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 464
|
Ahh, yes, clearly the lack of a bigfoot anywhere in the history of man strengthens the case of the footers. Heck, bigfoot is all but proven at this point in sweaty's bizzarro world, lol.
Hey sweaty.....where's bigfoot? Who is the joke on again? That would be you. How does it feel knowing Bob Gimlin and the other members of the good old boy bigfoot network laugh their heads off behind closed doors at footers like yourself after the lights go down, and the crowds have gone home? |
1st May 2010, 07:11 PM | #13 |
Bow Tie Daddy
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: In the twilight, singing all the old lullabies
Posts: 7,599
|
"Longtabber, please pick up the white courtesy phone. Longatabber PE, white courtesy phone. Thank you."
The guy was a fraud and a jag, but it was fun to watch him yank Bill's chain. |
__________________
"Don't be too offended by the likes of him - I hear he doesn't even own ascots." -JoeyDonuts "I must be more tired than I thought. Howie, you are starting to make sense." -MG1962 "You're a mean old evil cynic. And mean." Halfcentaur "...wing collars are like an ocular violation."-TubbaBlubba |
|
1st May 2010, 08:58 PM | #14 |
a carbon based life-form
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
|
|
1st May 2010, 09:16 PM | #15 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 190
|
At least one of them is in prison for tax evasion.
http://www.amazon.com/Leviathan-Fire.../dp/B00005Y4RM |
22nd May 2010, 06:18 PM | #16 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,877
|
That would have been a better basis and surely more precise.
Case closed. You know you'll be proven wrong 'soon enough'. He said so in the other thread. <waiting> As for a little more comment on Munns' analysis, I hadn't in-fact read his 'probability article' totally (I'm too easily bored with his false humility) before my post above. Having done so now, I can say without hesitation that he's completely ******* NUTS. To wit...
Originally Posted by Bill Munns
His entire (stupid and doomed to fail) premise is based on his arbitrarily absconding a so-called 'legal principle' called Presumption of Regularity. Yes, because that's how all 'probablities' are determined, how 'regular' one thinks things should 'show up' in any one situation. As he states above, odds are just random and capricious numbers pulled out of other people's asses when needed. His entire premise is so laughable; stated simply, in his (oh-so-humble) opinion, Hollywood™ creature suits aren't and weren't regularly made or used the way it appears the PGF's was, so that means it's a REAL Bigfoot. Say what? Ya know, my own 'love of science' isn't even close to what it is with some people here, but geezus h...pulling LITERALLY random numbers out of the air, stating they're "just for illustrative purposes", then proclaiming those numbers don't lie, they prove the possibility the PGF being hoax at 'near zero'. NEAR ZERO! Amazing! |
__________________
"If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." - Pedro |
|
22nd May 2010, 06:31 PM | #17 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
|
So, this 'skepticism'...it's a way of talking about bigfoot, UFOs and Jeebus while maintaining an air of superiority?
|
22nd May 2010, 07:00 PM | #18 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Somewhere in Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,661
|
No, skepticism means you can talk about those things without relying on faith.
RayG |
__________________
Tell ya what. I'll hold my tongue as long as you stick to facts. -------------------- Scrutatio Et Quaestio |
|
23rd May 2010, 01:08 AM | #19 |
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
|
|
23rd May 2010, 01:29 AM | #20 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
|
__________________
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 |
|
23rd May 2010, 01:56 AM | #21 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,877
|
I'd suggest that 'skepticism' is at least partly about getting the other side to capitulate to one's own obviously 'superior' thinking. Ironic you'd pick this very specific and narrow thread/subject/aspect to judge those merits. Oh wait, you meant...
I would suggest next time you know a little more of what you're talking about before posting, you know, inane comments like that. As a POI, there's actually only one real person (Longtabber wasn't real) in the entire Bill Munns Affair™ who's genuinely possessed an 'air of superiority' and he is Bill Munns. His everyday-workin-man fake humility writing 'style' is so phony it makes me wanna go pound sand instead. He thinks his **** don't stink 10x more than I think mine doesn't. And mine doesn't. |
__________________
"If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." - Pedro |
|
23rd May 2010, 02:01 AM | #22 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,206
|
Certainly far more superior to a Bigfoot. Where is Bigfoot to contend this anyways?
|
23rd May 2010, 02:32 AM | #23 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
|
Rationality, absence of faith, demand for evidence - and an air of superiority. They're not mutualy exclusive, after all.
The substance of that 'inane' comment was essentially that a collection of intelligent, articulate, rational people are sitting around on the interwebs discussing bigfoot. Bigfoot doesn't exist - you know that, I know that, I expect most of the people making money off the back of it know that too. Yet here's another thread on it. God probably doesn't exist, space aliens may well exist (though not in the way abductees and corncirclers like to believe) - I probably wouldn't have made the same 'inane' comment in a thread on either. But bigfoot?? The people who believe, meanwhile, won't be here...or if they were, we already know they're not rational, they don't demand evidence and they depend on faith. So the thread can't be for them - nor will it have any impact on the con artists who feed on their gullibility. So what is the purpose of bigfoot threads here? Maybe there's a clue in another one: Speculation |
23rd May 2010, 02:44 AM | #24 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,206
|
|
23rd May 2010, 01:43 PM | #25 |
a carbon based life-form
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
|
|
24th May 2010, 03:35 AM | #26 |
New Blood
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3
|
It would seem to me that anyone who makes any sort of informed decision on the nature of the film is talking out of their asses. I remember some fbi video analyst (sorry, I can't provide a link so you'll just have to take my word for it) said that the video is in fact of such poor quality that one cannot come to any kind of real conclusion on whether or not it is a man in a monkey suit or an actual unknown primate in the pacific north-west. It would seem to me that fbi video analysts have some pretty good tools in their arsenal.
I personally think that there is enough compelling soft evidence to not dismiss bigfoots existence completely out of hand, but even I can see some very basic problems that would make it very very unlikely for bigfoot to exist, breeding population being the most obvious. |
24th May 2010, 03:37 AM | #27 |
Godless Socialist
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Denmark
Posts: 8,171
|
|
__________________
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. -K. Marx. |
|
24th May 2010, 05:06 AM | #28 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,273
|
|
24th May 2010, 09:02 AM | #29 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,216
|
Contrary to what one might expect, the certainty of the believers increases with each passing day in which no physical remains are found. By this time tomorrow, for example, assuming that no Bigfoot bodies, living creatures, poop, urine, skin, hides, hair, DNA, bones, fossils, roadkill, naturally dead, alive, ill, crippled, or other categories of actual animal are found, the average believer will be 0.23% more certain (Okay, I used the Bill Munns method to come up with that number) than they are today.
Bigfoot science also adds to the certainty level, having recently discovered that if a tree falls in the woods, and there is no one there to hear it, then it was certainly pushed over by Bigfoot. On the other hand, if there is someone there to hear it, then it was (again) certainly pushed over by Bigfoot. |
__________________
"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 |
|
24th May 2010, 02:32 PM | #30 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: All up in your business!
Posts: 1,877
|
Which of course IS the only criteria we mere mortals should be using - how Bill Munns would have actually done it PROPERLY in 1967 instead of how that hack Roger Patterson ****** it all up. To me, Bill Munns globbing on to a famous-but-long-since-dead-man sure doesn't seem a righteous avenue for fame and fortune, but okay.
BTW does this post pass (or fail) the 'air of superiority' test? Not sure I thought much about the Bigfoot Pros™ being the actual enemy, but then I smelled the dope and realized they are the enemy huh?! Those bastards! Fine, instead of just 'not feeling bad' for past bashings of Bigfoot Doofuses™, now I really don't feel bad for bashing them. I mean, I'm in it for the bashing mostly anyway. Breed Bigfoot discontent wherever possible I say. With us skeptics it's either a body miraculously shows up or we make fun of everyone in Bigfootville with **** for brains. Let's rumble. Sadly, you had to use the Bill Munns Method™, it's the law.
Quote:
|
__________________
"If you vote for me, all of your wildest dreams will come true." - Pedro |
|
25th May 2010, 04:17 AM | #31 |
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 |
|
25th May 2010, 06:14 AM | #32 |
Guest
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 208
|
Unfortunately Bfers do believe that "Bigfoot bodies, living creatures, poop, urine, skin, hides, hair, DNA, bones, fossils, roadkill, naturally dead, alive, ill, crippled, [and other categories of actual animal have been found]"
There were over 400 attendees at the Salt Fork shindig last year and unfortunately they got to hear about all the found physical remains and evidence. The Stick Structure Scheme just keeps suckin' em' in. I keep waiting for the "Ain't No Bigfoot Conference" conference |
25th May 2010, 06:36 AM | #33 |
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? |
|
25th May 2010, 01:09 PM | #34 |
Show me the monkey!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 26,646
|
Any person who says that the film shows a costumed person is not talking out of their ass. The real world itself informs a person that Bigfoot does not exist. If Bigfoot really did exist we would have a specimen by now - in all probability we would have many specimens.
Quote:
|
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot. |
|
25th May 2010, 01:12 PM | #35 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 27,766
|
And by "calculates" he means "pulls out of his butt" or "invents out of whole cloth"?
|
__________________
"That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons |
|
27th May 2010, 05:23 AM | #36 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,206
|
|
11th June 2010, 02:41 AM | #37 |
Scholar
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 80
|
|
11th June 2010, 05:22 AM | #38 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 84
|
Quote marlboruogh opening post.
And to think, I wasted 4 years of my life earning an engineering degree. What does whining about feeling he has wasted 4 years on an engineering degree have to do with a man in a monkey suit. Infact what does an engineering degree have to do with a man in a monkey suit. |
11th June 2010, 05:34 AM | #39 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 84
|
|
11th June 2010, 06:28 AM | #40 |
Pith Artist
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The '80s
Posts: 8,694
|
You don't really believe Bigfoot is real do you?
No seriously you don't surely. In this day and age? What really? And yet you can use a computer and form sentences? I don't get it. Seriously. I don't understand how a belief in Bigfoot is even possible - it doesn't even have the desirability factor that most paranormal beliefs have an element of. I just don't get How anyone could believe in Bigfoot Why they would want to |
__________________
With extraordinary few exceptions no educated person in the history of Western Civilization from the third century B.C. onward believed that the earth was flat. - Jeffrey Burton Russell It is obvious to any scientist that the bumblebee can fly because experiment proves it. - Zetie 1996 |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|