Yowiehunters Forum

gregvalentine wrote:http://www.cryptozoonews.com/morris-obit/

Seriously you would have to have rocks in your head to wear a suit in the bush nowdays with so many guns and whacko's!! Chances of getting shot are very high.

I think those who stick to the man-in-a-suit defence to debunk the PGF are either ignorant of the amount of investigation and research done in that area or they are being deliberately false.

Thanks for the link Greg.

I remember seeing Patty on tv numerous times in the 1970s when i was a kid. I didnt see the fuss as it just looked like a big ape to me.They would always bring the skeptics on after awhile to enforce or confirm it was a guy in a suit and you wouldnt be sure then.

Saw the doco on the guy who reckons he wore the suit as well and i dont think its him in the suit even though he went on the lie detector. Cant remember if he mentioned the breasts or not but youd think he would have and its suss if he didnt.

Yowie bait wrote:I remember seeing Patty on tv numerous times in the 1970s when i was a kid. I didnt see the fuss as it just looked like a big ape to me.They would always bring the skeptics on after awhile to enforce or confirm it was a guy in a suit and you wouldnt be sure then.

Saw the doco on the guy who reckons he wore the suit as well and i dont think its him in the suit even though he went on the lie detector. Cant remember if he mentioned the breasts or not but youd think he would have and its suss if he didnt.

One of the convincing issues re 'Patty' is a monster quest doco where they tried to get a human to reproduce the exact movements and he simply could not do it.

Wolf wrote:

Yowie bait wrote:I remember seeing Patty on tv numerous times in the 1970s when i was a kid. I didnt see the fuss as it just looked like a big ape to me.They would always bring the skeptics on after awhile to enforce or confirm it was a guy in a suit and you wouldnt be sure then.

Saw the doco on the guy who reckons he wore the suit as well and i dont think its him in the suit even though he went on the lie detector. Cant remember if he mentioned the breasts or not but youd think he would have and its suss if he didnt.

One of the convincing issues re 'Patty' is a monster quest doco where they tried to get a human to reproduce the exact movements and he simply could not do it.

I think thats what ive seen with the athlete who just can't do the walk. Thinker thinker has a video as well thats convincing. Lots of convincing patty breakdowns out there.

She certainly looks real but i doubt ill ever be sure.

Maybe future technology will be able to prove the Patty footage once and for all?

Thinker Thunker..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79fEVN-_4hw

This video is poor quality, but there's also a book based on it which goes into more detail.

Meldrum's investigations into 'Patty's' gait and other movements is especially interesting. This is an investigation by actual, professional scientists who still cannot explain every aspect of 'Patty' or how she moves.

Simon M wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79fEVN-_4hw

This video is poor quality, but there's also a book based on it which goes into more detail.

Meldrum's investigations into 'Patty's' gait and other movements is especially interesting. This is an investigation by actual, professional scientists who still cannot explain every aspect of 'Patty' or how she moves.

Thanks Simon. Its a shame Patty didnt jump down and run off on four legs. I doubt there would be any doubters then! Even with the footage we have, it sure moves very fluent for someone in a suit...

I think the general consesus is that the footage is accepted as authentic.
The doubters really have not put up a convincing argument from what I have seen.
Only reason it has not been fully approved is that Bigfoot itself has not been officially proven.

ChrisV wrote:I think the general consesus is that the footage is accepted as authentic.
The doubters really have not put up a convincing argument from what I have seen.
Only reason it has not been fully approved is that Bigfoot itself has not been officially proven.

I agree. It's all too easy, though, for the casual observer to say that because there's no conclusive, agreed-upon physical proof these animals exist that the Patterson/Gimlin film 'must' be fake. It's a specious argument, but one that many people would accept without question, sadly.

I doubt I would even argue with a sceptic about this issue. I'd simply say that no one has ever produced the alleged suit and of the multiple people who've claimed to have been the person in the footage, not one of them has managed to prove their story is true and leave it at that.