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
 


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 4th March 2011, 11:51 AM   #5641
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 21,526
Leroy Blevins' Patty suit...


__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 4th March 2011, 11:54 AM   #5642
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
demonunderyourbed

First it was not a relative of Roger Patterson, that person was a relative to Bob Gimlin.

They knew Roger Patterson and they called him uncle but, they was a relative of Bob Gimlin.

That person has the photos and they will not give me a copy of the photos. I ask them but, they will not give them out.
I told the story that was told to me because of I was trying to tell why my suit was close to the suit Roger Patterson used for I seen real photos of the suit.
Do I have proof to show if the story was true? no I don't.
But, I made this suit by what the photos show. That is the only thing I can say about.

You see this is why I always say a story is just that a story it is nothing but, words and there is no way anyone can show proof on words.

Do I believe myself what the person told me I would have to say no but, I have my reason to why.
Just like Bob Gimlin, Bob Heironimus, Mr.Morris, Greg Long,Bill Munns, John Green, Al DeAtley, Roger Patterson or any other people that did research on this film. I believe them on something but, other things I have to say no I don't believe.
What I do believe in?
I do believe in a copy of the suit can be made for I made the suit. I do believe a man can have the suit on for at lest 4 hours. I do believe a man have to do retakes on filming. And I do know that a man can walk like the Bigfoot in the film.
I believe these thing for I have done these things myself.
So you see this is why I say a story is just a story and theories are just a theory but, proof is what can be seen and not told.
Leroy Blevins 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 March 2011, 11:59 AM   #5643
DennyT
Illuminator
 
DennyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,195
Leroy
You are certainly stirring up a lot of interest. You said:1 the torso laying on a table and the suit had a zipper in the front and it had breast on it. There was a strap that was hooked on the buttocks that came between the legs and hook in the front.
2 photo shows the legs or pants of the suit.
Leroy,
Can you show a photo of your suit that shows the strap and how it
works?
Thanks
Parnassus
__________________
"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
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 4th March 2011, 12:06 PM   #5644
UGottaB
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 20
Why argue about the costume. MK Davis' enhanced photo of the creature reveals a zipper in front. All the evidence of a hoax is in the film.

Leroy finding people in the film wouldn't be unusual if you consider that Patterson was making a film. He needed actors, wardrobes, camera and a creature. Anyone trying to make a film or documentary involving people will plan to use the same types of cloths over several days in case something goes wrong with the filming. If an event is supposed to be a one day event, it may take several days to film it. That's the one objection to Leroy's same clothes same day theory. However the same actor would wear the same clothes even on different days so Leroy's analysis is probably correct except for the possible time association.

If you want to see the real monkey try watchin "Patterson - Gimlin, Short Segment - Great Ape of North America?" on YouTube.
UGottaB 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 March 2011, 12:06 PM   #5645
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
WP-
I like to ask you something if you don't mind.
Do you have the rights to the photos you show?
Do you have a written consent from me or my wife to post them?
Do you have rights to show a photo of the copy of the suit I made?

The reason I ask these things as it was told no one can show the whole PG film because of the rights issue but, here we have people showing my photos of my suit without getting rights to show them. The photos and videos and the suit is copyrighted by me and there was only 5 people I gave rights to show my photos and videos and you are not one of them.

People post my photos and show the copy of the suit I made without a written consent. Think about it.
And by the way as you see in that photo you post look at the right leg you will see fur sticking up. That is the same location that people claim about the herniated muscle in the leg. I had keys in my pocket when I did that walk in a test to see if it was a herniated muscle in the leg or keys claim by Bob H.
In that video you will see the fur going up and down in that location seen in the PG film. And they claim it was a herniated muscle when all it was is keys.
Leroy Blevins 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 March 2011, 12:10 PM   #5646
demonunderyourbed
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
demonunderyourbed

First it was not a relative of Roger Patterson, that person was a relative to Bob Gimlin.

They knew Roger Patterson and they called him uncle but, they was a relative of Bob Gimlin.

That person has the photos and they will not give me a copy of the photos. I ask them but, they will not give them out.
I told the story that was told to me because of I was trying to tell why my suit was close to the suit Roger Patterson used for I seen real photos of the suit.
Do I have proof to show if the story was true? no I don't.
But, I made this suit by what the photos show. That is the only thing I can say about.

You see this is why I always say a story is just that a story it is nothing but, words and there is no way anyone can show proof on words.

Do I believe myself what the person told me I would have to say no but, I have my reason to why.
Just like Bob Gimlin, Bob Heironimus, Mr.Morris, Greg Long,Bill Munns, John Green, Al DeAtley, Roger Patterson or any other people that did research on this film. I believe them on something but, other things I have to say no I don't believe.
What I do believe in?
I do believe in a copy of the suit can be made for I made the suit. I do believe a man can have the suit on for at lest 4 hours. I do believe a man have to do retakes on filming. And I do know that a man can walk like the Bigfoot in the film.
I believe these thing for I have done these things myself.
So you see this is why I say a story is just a story and theories are just a theory but, proof is what can be seen and not told.
ok just to add to the confusion.you say you believe what you saw was the suit,but you dont believe what this person told ???
so can we have this persons name then am sure kit would be able to contact them.
as i stated what trouble could they get in.??? people would have to admit it was a suit..
demonunderyourbed 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 March 2011, 12:14 PM   #5647
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 21,526
Leroy, you put your stuff on YouTube and your (now defunct) website. It's fair game for anyone. FWIW, I'm not using your stuff for my profit and it always is credited to you anyway.

Welcome to the 21st Century and the World Wide Web.
__________________
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 Back to Top
Old 4th March 2011, 12:23 PM   #5648
demonunderyourbed
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Leroy, you put your stuff on YouTube and your (now defunct) website. It's fair game for anyone. FWIW, I'm not using your stuff for my profit and it always is credited to you anyway.

Welcome to the 21st Century and the World Wide Web.
yup if u put it out there then ppl will use it. i've put stuff on sites and years later ppl have claimed it as theres..nothing you can do..but nobody's going to make money off your vid or suit leroy

anyway back to the name of the relative..spill it lol you wouldnt get in any trouble.

Last edited by demonunderyourbed; 4th March 2011 at 12:27 PM.
demonunderyourbed 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 March 2011, 12:44 PM   #5649
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,159
Quote:
I found and show two frames that shows another man hat.
I found and show Bob Gimlin standing behind the brush.
I found and show the Bigfoot stopped 9 time in the footage.
I found and show two other men images taken out of the footage.
I found and show the Bigfoot was a man in a suit.
I found and show the film was filmed by someone right handed and left handed.
I found and show the film was part taken out from Roger Patterson documentary.
I really don't believe you've done any of that.

The hat idea strangely interests me, though...
__________________
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 March 2011, 12:46 PM   #5650
LTC8K6
Penultimate Amazing
 
LTC8K6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,159
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Leroy Blevins' Patty suit...
Well, I gotta admit that I wouldn't shoot at that if I saw it coming at me in the woods.

It's very hard to aim when you are giggling hysterically...
__________________
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 March 2011, 12:48 PM   #5651
JohnWS
Critical Thinker
 
JohnWS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 243
LINK to a discussion of a now defunct video that I remember, of Mr Blevins pictures/s of the alleged original Patty Suit.

I'm going strictly from memory here but did not that (or another similar Youtube vid) also claim to show a werewolf costume supposedly of 60's vintage?

Apologies to Mr Blevins if my memory here is faulty.

Edit to add text supposedly related to the video:

Quote:
In this video you will see a photo of the costume Roger Patterson used for his Bigfoot film. The photo show the costume before they added the padding and breast. However the photo is that of the costume Patterson used. Leroy Blevins Sr. copyright 2009

Last edited by JohnWS; 4th March 2011 at 12:50 PM.
JohnWS 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 March 2011, 12:54 PM   #5652
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,836
Leroy, if you saw these photo's of what we're being told was the actual suit used by Roger then why did you go to the trouble of making the suit yourself before first attempting to show the pictures of the suit? I mean, i understand you were attempting to show that anyone can have a decent go at making the apparantly unmakable, but if there were undeniable picture proof of said suit then it seems all the more bothersome to go about creating a new one when there's already apparant evidence of the actual one.
Gilbert Syndrome 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 March 2011, 12:56 PM   #5653
demonunderyourbed
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by JohnWS View Post
LINK to a discussion of a now defunct video that I remember, of Mr Blevins pictures/s of the alleged original Patty Suit.

I'm going strictly from memory here but did not that (or another similar Youtube vid) also claim to show a werewolf costume supposedly of 60's vintage?

Apologies to Mr Blevins if my memory here is faulty.

Edit to add text supposedly related to the video:
ok now it states there that its copyrighted to leroy blevins snr..
so leroy do you have that pic thats posted there claiming to be the costume
demonunderyourbed 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 March 2011, 01:26 PM   #5654
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
I will answer all the questions I can at this time.

No I don't have the photos.

The first photos I shown on the suit I was showing a suit from a old TV show that they claim was the suit Roger Patterson used in his film.

So of my research in the beginning was posted by someone that worked for me at the time without me going over it first before the claims was made.

I can not give out the person name I gave my words to them I will never tell no one their name. But, I did told that person when it come down to if I make the suit I have to give some of the information that was told to me on how I made the suit and how I knew what the suit looked like.
So they said ok on that but, I gave them my word I will not give out their name.

I will answer more latter because I am in the middle of talk to others about my research on the JFK Assassination.
Thank you
Leroy Blevins 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 March 2011, 01:31 PM   #5655
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
Gilbert Syndrome

Hay Gilbert
I don't have the photos. They did not give them to me. If I said hay I seen photos of the suit people would say I was a liar. So the only thing I can do was make a suit on what I seen in the photos and make it the way what was seen in the photos. So you see

More latter
Leroy Blevins 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 March 2011, 01:32 PM   #5656
JohnWS
Critical Thinker
 
JohnWS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 243
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
So of my research in the beginning was posted by someone that worked for me at the time without me going over it first before the claims was made.
Ah... Probably explains why I've got it in my head that the 60's werewolf costume was actually from Buffy the Vampire Slayer (TV) from pics originally posted on the old BFF.

Again - memory may be at fault.

Last edited by JohnWS; 4th March 2011 at 01:36 PM.
JohnWS 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 March 2011, 01:34 PM   #5657
FFed
Muse
 
FFed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 990
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
However after the party He started back home to Washington. The Canadian Patrol stop him and they took the suit for they thought it was a Bear hide. But, he told them it was a suit. But, they still think it was a bear hide. The Canadian Patrol took the suit.
If he was at a party in BC and going back to Washington State, he would be going through US Customs, not Canadian customs. You only go through Canada customs when you enter Canada, not when you leave.
FFed 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 March 2011, 01:58 PM   #5658
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,836
Allo Leroy, thanks for the reply. Do you have any ideas why this person wouldn't want to make these pictures public? I'm unaware of any reasons why they should fear the public eye, but i admit i'm only going off what you're telling us. I suppose that unless the pictures can be linked with the PGF directly then the public may not believe the photo's but considering the impact such photo's would have on this whole debate i'd still make them available to the world, is there any way of maybe contacting this person again to discuss the concept of making these pictiures available?
Gilbert Syndrome 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 March 2011, 02:00 PM   #5659
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368






But, some of the new comments made about the story I told is why I have never told no one before plus why I said I did not believe some of it that was told to me by that person.

However I did try to see maybe someone else may have had the suit. So what I did was compare my suit to the suit found in the documentary by Ron Olson. And the reason why I did this was if Ron Olson had Roger Patterson ideal for the documentary then he may even have the suit Roger Patterson used in his documentary. Here are side by side photos of me in my suit without the breast on the suit. Let me know what you think.
Leroy Blevins 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 March 2011, 02:09 PM   #5660
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
By me they look some what a like but, that is my opinion.


But, then again who knows.
However I just like to show you this I am not saying or even calling this as proof that Ron Olson has the suit. I just shown my opinion.
Leroy Blevins 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 March 2011, 02:21 PM   #5661
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
Gilbert Syndrome-
I try to contact that person last year but, that person moved and I don't know how I can get a hold of that person.

The reason why they may not like to shown the photos to the people is the people would come up with more claims about the photos not being real or maybe the photos was a fake.

Just look at these people seen the photos of me in my suit and people still have a hard time in saying a copy of the suit can be made. Even as you see the photos. Even people said no that suit does not look like the Bigfoot in Roger Patterson film.

So my point is WHY show anything. As it was told no one can show the proof the film was real the same way no one can show the film was a hoax.
But, 1 thing can be shown as proof the film was a hoax and that is the suit I made looks like the Bigfoot in the film. So by this 1 fact is more proof to show it was a hoax then they can show it was real.
Leroy Blevins 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 March 2011, 02:41 PM   #5662
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,836
Interesting point, but if this person has a story to go along with the photo's, complete with a record of receipt from the Canadian Border Control then I don't suppose they're any more/less credible than anyone who comes forward with info on this film. How were you put into contact with this person, did somebody put you into contact with him, if so, then whom?
Gilbert Syndrome 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 March 2011, 02:50 PM   #5663
demonunderyourbed
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
well leroy i do applaud your effort in trying to make a suit.but too say its a copy is stretching it a bit..its got similar shape.in the back.but needs an awful lot more effort to come close too the patty/bob suit.
i would still consider letting us know the name of the relative.am sure they will have approached others. did you pay too see these photo's????
demonunderyourbed 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 March 2011, 03:57 PM   #5664
Leroy Blevins
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 368
The person contact me. No I did not have to pay to see the photos.

I like to know this.

How many people here believe in Bigfoot?
How many people here believe there is no Bigfoot?
How many people here believe the PG film is real?
How many people here believe the PG film is a hoax?


The reason I ask this is Why?
No matter what people say or do there will be people making claims about one thing or another.

The only people that can say if the film is real or a hoax is Bob Gimlin and he claims the film is real. The other man that can tell if it was real or a hoax is Bob Heironimus and he claims the film was a hoax.

John Green can not give no answers, Bill Munns can not give no answers, MK Davis can not give no answers, and even me can not give the answers.
Just like if the person that shown me the photos and if they came out with the photos and shown them do you think for 1min that people that believe in the film would say no there not real or no that is not the suit they used in the film. Again so I say WHY even talk about the film when no one can agree on one thing from either side.
Let me show you.
People talked about the time frame as told about the film. The none believers said it can not be done in that time frame. The Believers say yes it can be done.

Bob Heironimus took two polygraph and past both of them and still people call him a liar.

So do you think it's right that they can call Bob Heironimus a liar when he took two polygraphs to prove he was not lying.

Now look at Bob Gimlin. He will not take a polygraph and I ask WHY NOT. If Bob Gimlin is telling the truth then he will put an end to all the stories and claim just by taking 1 polygraph to prove to people that he is telling the truth on what happen.
When I ask this before people said to me why does he need to take a polygraph for Bob Gimlin is telling the truth and he is a man of his word. But, I was also told this same thing about Bob Heironimus as well and he not only took 1 polygraph but, two polygraphs and he past them both just to back up what he said.
The PG film and however does research on this film is in the middle of a no win situation.
Leroy Blevins 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 March 2011, 04:05 PM   #5665
demonunderyourbed
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
The person contact me. No I did not have to pay to see the photos.

I like to know this.

How many people here believe in Bigfoot?
How many people here believe there is no Bigfoot?
How many people here believe the PG film is real?
How many people here believe the PG film is a hoax?


The reason I ask this is Why?
No matter what people say or do there will be people making claims about one thing or another.

The only people that can say if the film is real or a hoax is Bob Gimlin and he claims the film is real. The other man that can tell if it was real or a hoax is Bob Heironimus and he claims the film was a hoax.

John Green can not give no answers, Bill Munns can not give no answers, MK Davis can not give no answers, and even me can not give the answers.
Just like if the person that shown me the photos and if they came out with the photos and shown them do you think for 1min that people that believe in the film would say no there not real or no that is not the suit they used in the film. Again so I say WHY even talk about the film when no one can agree on one thing from either side.
Let me show you.
People talked about the time frame as told about the film. The none believers said it can not be done in that time frame. The Believers say yes it can be done.

Bob Heironimus took two polygraph and past both of them and still people call him a liar.

So do you think it's right that they can call Bob Heironimus a liar when he took two polygraphs to prove he was not lying.

Now look at Bob Gimlin. He will not take a polygraph and I ask WHY NOT. If Bob Gimlin is telling the truth then he will put an end to all the stories and claim just by taking 1 polygraph to prove to people that he is telling the truth on what happen.
When I ask this before people said to me why does he need to take a polygraph for Bob Gimlin is telling the truth and he is a man of his word. But, I was also told this same thing about Bob Heironimus as well and he not only took 1 polygraph but, two polygraphs and he past them both just to back up what he said.
The PG film and however does research on this film is in the middle of a no win situation.
yes we have read many times about bob H and the polys.
i think what everyone is interested in is that you claimed to have seen actual pics of the suit.from a relative of bob G.this needs to be looked at alot more.a name needs to be put forward.
have you read the post WP linked which shows the same story your saying about a trip to canada,and border checks,yet the person in that isnt bobs relative.
any thoughts on that leroy..
you know you would do every one a big service to name this person.if they have what you say they have then it has to be released

Last edited by demonunderyourbed; 4th March 2011 at 04:06 PM.
demonunderyourbed 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 March 2011, 04:10 PM   #5666
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,836
Leroy, can I ask who put you into contact with this person whom you met with in Chicago?
Gilbert Syndrome 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 March 2011, 04:43 PM   #5667
demonunderyourbed
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome View Post
Leroy, can I ask who put you into contact with this person whom you met with in Chicago?
he says the person contacted him???
demonunderyourbed 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 March 2011, 04:48 PM   #5668
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,836
No, I was just curious as to how Leroy came across this person in Chicago, whether he already knew of him or whether he was put into contact with him via another person or persons.
Gilbert Syndrome 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 March 2011, 04:53 PM   #5669
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,836
Also Leroy, I understand you agreed to not mention this mans name? You also said he was old, would this person ever find out if you told us his name or not? Does he use the internet much or is he interested in the whole PGF drama online? If not, then apart from your agreement to not mention him I don't see what problems could arise if you opened up about his identity, thats just my opinion though. Failing you being willing to give us his name, can you at least tell us about how this meeting came to be and who, if anyone, set it up for you?
Gilbert Syndrome 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 March 2011, 04:55 PM   #5670
demonunderyourbed
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome View Post
No, I was just curious as to how Leroy came across this person in Chicago, whether he already knew of him or whether he was put into contact with him via another person or persons.
well from wot leroy posted the guy in chicago got in touch with him???
demonunderyourbed 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 March 2011, 04:59 PM   #5671
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,836
Hmm, that just makes me curious as to why he'd approach Leroy and no'one else... assuming no'one else has met him.. but i'm sure i'd've heard about it if someone had mentioned seeing pictures of the actual suit. If this person didn't want the world to know his ID and/or didn't think he'd even be believed then why bother going to the trouble of contacting a PGF researcher to give him such info?
Gilbert Syndrome 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 March 2011, 05:04 PM   #5672
demonunderyourbed
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome View Post
Hmm, that just makes me curious as to why he'd approach Leroy and no'one else... assuming no'one else has met him.. but i'm sure i'd've heard about it if someone had mentioned seeing pictures of the actual suit. If this person didn't want the world to know his ID and/or didn't think he'd even be believed then why bother going to the trouble of contacting a PGF researcher to give him such info?
agreed.we need to push leroy more.you cnt reveal this and not back it up.
this is like the second gunman lol
whats revealing the name going to do ??? leroy wont get any come back.
demonunderyourbed 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 March 2011, 05:19 PM   #5673
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,836
People can say what they like about Blevins, but if there's one thing I don't buy, its that he's an intentionally dishonest person, I don't care about his beliefs as all, if not most of us here have some crazy beliefs and/or know of someone close who does..whether we believe them or not. So i'm intruiged by his story nonetheless, i'd like to know the details if possible.
Gilbert Syndrome 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 March 2011, 05:42 PM   #5674
demonunderyourbed
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome View Post
People can say what they like about Blevins, but if there's one thing I don't buy, its that he's an intentionally dishonest person, I don't care about his beliefs as all, if not most of us here have some crazy beliefs and/or know of someone close who does..whether we believe them or not. So i'm intruiged by his story nonetheless, i'd like to know the details if possible.
yup me too.and will keep asking..give kit the name privately ..am sure kit would be able to find a way to contact them with his connections ..
demonunderyourbed 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 March 2011, 06:15 PM   #5675
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,264
I believe I already have the name of the man Leroy is referring to. I don't think he is lying or making the story up. Some of it may have some basis in fact.

Leroy, please PM me with the man's name and where he lives. All information exchanged will be kept betyween you and I. If they are the same people, I can arrange contact and possibly obtain the photos you refer to.
__________________
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
kitakaze 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 March 2011, 06:33 PM   #5676
Gilbert Syndrome
Philosopher
 
Gilbert Syndrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posts: 5,836
Like I said, if there's one thing I don't buy, its that Leroy is an intentionally dishonest person, I presumed that parts of his story would be based on fact, I believe he met someone who claimed those things and I also believe he saw what he claims he saw.... now all we have to do is establish who this person was, how valid his story was and if the pictures are genuine.
Gilbert Syndrome 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 March 2011, 07:07 PM   #5677
kitakaze
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
 
kitakaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,264
I have a very good reason to believe Leroy's story about meeting the man. It's that guy himself I am not sure about. From time to time we have had people come here who seem eccentric or out there, yet they claim to have important confidential information. Most of the time these are random nutters like Neil Burgstahler or Teaberryeagle. But some are telling the truth. I would probably still to this day not have connected personally with Bob Heironimus if I had not listened to the person who came here and claimed to be in touch with him.
__________________
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
kitakaze 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 March 2011, 09:44 PM   #5678
bobbieshort
Scholar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 109
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
Bigfootery Flashback to 1997/98


Way back when NASI was cozy with the BFRO. We don't just analyze old Bigfoot films and estimate the creature size... we also are interested in your Bigfoot sightings. Folks... we have a big hairy ape in our woods. Let's talk, ok?

Note that the BFRO used to be moneymaker.org.
---------------------------------------------
I was browsing back over old posts and reread the above
- .... as sort of an fyi... Moneymaker was never on the NASI Board.
Members of the board in 1997-8 and present at the first teleconference gathering in 1998 were Henry Franzoni, the late Mike Dennett, Tod Deery, Bobbie Short, Loren Coleman, Jeff Glickman and Debra Wolman in no particular order.

In 1994 Moneymaker couldn't code a website, he hadn't graduated law school yet. His website went up the same month as mine in Sept of 1996. He often posted under the screen name Matt Edwards but he was no part of NASI.
Many of us, including Kyle Mizokami leaned heavily on Franzoni's code & script-writing abilities for those early websites. Basic and html were like foreign languages to us back then....anyway, the link above "Bigfootery Flashback" has info on the linked page that is not accurate - http://huisam.150m.com/Athens_P3/wbs.html - no biggie, just thought I would mention it.
bobbieshort 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 March 2011, 12:07 AM   #5679
bigfootbookman
Critical Thinker
 
bigfootbookman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 276
How Leroy Blevins Has Proved Nothing, Only Making "Claims" and Seeing Things

Leroy, did it ever occur to you that "what can be seen" may not be the truth either? The eyes can fool you, the mind can play tricks on you, the imagination can take over. It is well known that perception is relative. It is an approximation to reality. Photos are even more subject to interpretation, as there are the issues of blur and perspective and context to consider.

Originally Posted by Leroy Blevins View Post
Do I have proof to show if the story was true? no I don't. ...You see this is why I always say a story is just that a story it is nothing but, words and there is no way anyone can show proof on words. ... So you see this is why I say a story is just a story and theories are just a theory but, proof is what can be seen and not told.
Here's how. My responses below in capitals.
Leroy said:
"Bigfootbookman-
What I found.
I found and show two frames that shows another man hat."
NOPE, YOU PERCEIVED A TOTALLY UNLIKELY BLOB THAT AT BEST LOOKS LIKE A CARTOON OF A HAT, AND MOVES "INTO" AND "OUT OF" THE FRAME MUCH MORE QUICKLY THAN ANY HUMAN MOVES

"I found and show Bob Gimlin standing behind the brush."
THIS IS PURE PAREIDOLIA, AS GIMLIN WOULD HAVE TO BE HUGE TO APPEAR ESSENTIALLY THE SAME SIZE AS THE CREATURE WHILE SITTING SOME APPRX. 40-60 FEET BACK INTO THE BRUSH. PLUS, IF IT WAS HOAXED, WHY WOULD THEY RUIN IT WITH A GUY IN THE BUSHES? I ALSO "FOUND" AND "SHOWED" TO YOU HOW THERE IS ANOTHER "GUY" SITTING RIGHT IN FRONT OF GIMLIN, AND THEN A BUNCH OF TINY DANCING BABY BIGFOOTS ALL AROUND HIM. ARE THESE ALL TRUE THINGS, THEN?

"I found and show the Bigfoot stopped 9 time in the footage."
HUH? I SEE A CREATURE MOVING QUITE NATURALLY THROUGH THE WHOLE FILM. HOW DID YOU "PROVE" THIS?

"I found and show two other men images taken out of the footage."
AGAIN, WHY WOULD THEY BE THERE? LOOK AT THE OTHER FRAMES AND YOU WILL SEE THESE ARE JUST BLURRED WOOD DEBRIS OBJECTS. IF THEY WERE REALLY MEN THEY WOULD ALSO BE AS BLURRED AS THE WOOD ON THE GROUND. ALSO, PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS COMPLEX TECHNIQUE OF BLURRING SOMETHING OUT WHILE LEAVING SHADOWS BEHIND, YET LEAVING THEIR WATCHES VISIBLE.

"I found and show the Bigfoot was a man in a suit."
OH, SO BY REVERSE ENGINEERING YOU COPIED SOMETHING. THAT PROVES NOTHING. IF, JUST MAYBE, THE FILM SUBJECT IS REAL, THEN YOU HAVE ONLY COPIED SOMETHING WITH AN IMAGE OF IT, JUST AS AN ARTIST PAINTS OR SCULPTS A REASONABLE APPROXIMATION OF REALITY. THE ARTISTIC PRODUCT SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED WITH REALITY. JUST BECAUSE A MAN CAN FIT IN YOUR SUIT DOES NOT MEAN THERE WAS A MAN POSING IN A SUIT AS THE ORIGINAL SUBJECT.

"I found and show the film was filmed by someone right handed and left handed."
HOW IN THE WORLD DID YOU PROVE THIS? AND ARE YOU SURE OF WHICH HAND PATTERSON FAVORED? THE MINUTE SHIFT FROM ONE SIDE OF THE HEAD TO THE OTHER WOULD MAKE NO NOTICEABLE DIFFERENCE IN THE FINAL VIEW AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE FILM.

"I found and show the film was part taken out from Roger Patterson documentary."
YOU HAVE DONE NOTHING OF THE SORT. YOU HAVE ONLY SHOWN THAT PATTERSON MADE FILMS ABOUT BIGFOOT, WHICH WE ALREADY KNEW. ONE WAS A PROJECT MADE EARLIER (AND KNOWING PATTERSON, PROBABLY ABANDONED FOR NEW THINGS), THE OTHER A FILM OF A SUBJECT ON AN EXPEDITION TO FIND SUCH A SUBJECT. PERHAPS PATTERSON HOPED TO INCLUDE THE FOOTAGE OF SCENERY AND BIGFOOT HUNTING IN THE DOCUDRAMA, BUT AGAIN, HE FILMED LOTS OF OTHER STUFF ON HIS TRIPS THAT WAS NOT STRICTLY OR AT ALL A PART OF THAT PROJECT WITH GIMLIN AS AN INDIAN GUIDE, ETC. IF THE PGF FOOTAGE WERE FOR THE DOCUMENTARY, WHY WAS GIMLIN NOT WEARING HIS INDIAN WIG??? ALSO, THERE WAS A SIMPLE *INFLUENCE* OF IDEAS BETWEEN PATTERSON'S ORIGINAL PLANNED FILM AND THE ONE OLSON EVENTUALLY MADE.

"I show the test I did."
YOUR "TESTS" ALL FAIL KNOWN HISTORICAL AND SCIENTIFIC METHODS, IN MY OPINION. IT SEEMS, RATHER, THAT YOU COME UP WITH A THEORY FROM YOUR IMAGINATIVE PERCEPTIONS OF BLURS AND BLOBS IN THE FILM, AND THEN MAKE UP STORIES TO SUPPORT IT. I COULD PROBABLY SAY THAT THERE IS ANOTHER NOAH'S ARK THERE ON THE FILM SITE, AND "PROVE" IT, IF ONLY I "LOOKED" HARD ENOUGH.

"I even made a copy of the suit they claim no one can make.
This is what I found and did."
AGAIN, THIS PROVES NOTHING. TO ME YOUR SUIT LOOKS JUST ONE SMALL STEP UP FROM THE COMMON CRUD RELEASED AS CHEAP GORILLA COSTUMES FOR HALLOWEEN. LOOK AT THE PHOTO PARCHER POSTED ABOVE, IN FRONT OF THE BRICK WALL--IT LOOKS UTTERLY FAKE AND RIDICULOUS. ALSO, IF YOU REVERSE-DESIGNED A UFO, WOULD IT FLY? YOU CAN MAKE A THING THAT *LOOKS* LIKE A REAL ALIEN SPACECRAFT, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN IT CAN FLY. ALSO, I HAVE YET TO SEE A *MOVING* IMAGE OF YOUR SUIT IN ACTION. A POSE IS ONE THING; AN EXTENDED MINUTE-LONG FILMED WALK IS ANOTHER. WHY WON'T YOU RESPOND TO MY REPEATED QUESTIONING AS TO THIS? DOES A VIDEO/FILM EXIST OF YOU WALKING OVER ROUGH GROUND IN THE SUIT FOR ABOUT A MINUTE?

Words, critical and contextual thinking, knowledge of the historical record and facts, and basic literacy and patience of mind are all beneficial and good, and are the tools of a mature mind. Language is, after all, the basis for your thought and ascription of meaning to things. Your disparagement of "words" leaves me feeling highly suspicious that you have a bias against their proper use, against the process of rational thought, perhaps tainting your image-based pareidolic research.

bfbm

Last edited by bigfootbookman; 5th March 2011 at 12:34 AM.
bigfootbookman 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 March 2011, 09:05 AM   #5680
Chris L
Graduate Poster
 
Chris L's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,344
Quote:
NOPE, YOU PERCEIVED A TOTALLY UNLIKELY BLOB THAT AT BEST LOOKS LIKE A CARTOON OF A HAT, AND MOVES "INTO" AND "OUT OF" THE FRAME MUCH MORE QUICKLY THAN ANY HUMAN MOVES
I wonder if you realize the perception thing works both ways. All the little details that Bigfooters use to collaborate the validity of the PG film are really just as much products of perception as you claim Blevins is making. If perception is not a valid basis for evidence, then most of the "details" I've heard discussed are nonsense.
__________________
"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
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 12:43 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.