Besides Patterson/Gimlin....

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
#31
We see a lot of claims for 'scientific analyses' etc. But this isn't CSI where one can endlessly "enhance" a picture to make all manner of detail magically pop out. This film is inherently blurry and lacking in information; no amount of enhancing or analysis can change that.
Too true.

There is also a lot of misunderstanding about how science actually works. Scientific theories can never really be proven true. In science, theories are tested to see if they can be proven false. And the problem with the Bigfoot film is that it simply doesn't contain enough clear information to do that. I'm not sure we can prove it a hoax, but failing to prove it a hoax is emphatically not the same thing as having proved that it is therefore for real.

Herniation? Most doctors are reluctant to make definitive diagnoses with the patient lying on an examining table in front of them; and here someone can diagnose a condition in another species based on blurry footage?
Yes, we're not ever going to be able to demonstrate 100% that the PG film is a set up, but we can, and have I think shown it to be so beyond reasonable doubt. And the herniation is as you say nonsense.

Tell me another one.
There's now a theory that it was the result of a bullet strike during the filming.
Scientists, of course, are also not hunter-gatherers. That is to say, I am not aware of many that are genuine experts in tracking wildlife. Even a very good scientist will be fooled by a fake track that will not come anywhere close to fooling a hunter-gatherer tracker. Such a scientist will also lose the track under conditions in which it is still plainly visible to a proper tracker. Such people are now unfortunately few and far between, but they still exist. I have seen such trackers in action, and their abilities are so astonishing they seem almost supernatural. If there is a Bigfoot leaving tracks, a proper tracker is going to find it.
I disagree with that, I know of scientists who are, I don't mean to the extent of the ones I suspect you've encountered, but they can definitely hold their own amongst European trackers.

I like a cryptid story too, always have, always will. I'm not so keen on bigfoot and it drives me mad when I see the thylacine treated as an Australian Nessie (as opposed to the sound researchers who still look for it), but I still love cryptozoology even though for me all the cryptids are extinct.
 

MetroGnome

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
162
Likes
212
Points
44
#32
I like a cryptid story too, always have, always will. I'm not so keen on bigfoot and it drives me mad when I see the thylacine treated as an Australian Nessie (as opposed to the sound researchers who still look for it), but I still love cryptozoology even though for me all the cryptids are extinct.
Yeah, I'm still holding out some hope that a thylacine may yet show up... :)
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
8,865
Likes
10,786
Points
279
#34
Todd Standing's stuff is startling to look at but the jury's long been out on him. Many say fake simply down to the amount and quality of his offerings, but he has been out there, in the deep forest for years searching for then. Les Stroud says he believes him, and Stroud's no fool. Who knows.
...and yet he can't give us one single DNA sample that can be independently (and peer) verified as 'something unknown.
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,454
Likes
4,194
Points
234
#35
...and yet he can't give us one single DNA sample that can be independently (and peer) verified as 'something unknown.
Yep. In fact all the DNA stuff, from people as dubious as Melba Ketchum to the very reputable Brian Sykes just opens up more controversies. There have been many allusions to "unknown" or "hominid" DNA over the years, but that's it.
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
8,865
Likes
10,786
Points
279
#36
Yep. In fact all the DNA stuff, from people as dubious as Melba Ketchum to the very reputable Brian Sykes just opens up more controversies. There have been many allusions to "unknown" or "hominid" DNA over the years, but that's it.
One my personal heuristics for evaluating the likelihood of a crytpid's existence is:

"If such a thing exists would it be very very reasonable to expect to have got hold of a DNA sample by now?"

In the case of Bigfoot, were it to exist, the answer is almost certainly 'Yes', but still we have no such sample.
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,454
Likes
4,194
Points
234
#39
Yes - he's Emertius Professor of Human Genetics at Oxford. He's not some fringey-type.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
#41
Not that it's relevant, but between these two replies I've fallen of a bank, noted my arm had taken on a funny shape, been to A&E, examined, X-rayed, re-examined, treated and discharged home. Not bad that.

Yes - he's Emertius Professor of Human Genetics at Oxford. He's not some fringey-type.
I'm not sure what his affiliations are now with Oxford, but they were over played and exposed during the bigfoot analyses thing. His reputation as a geneticist isn't that sound. He's made several errors, the ancient polar bear business for example, also this latest affair with Zana and Khwit.
 

titch

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
3,181
Likes
3,526
Points
169
#43
Not that it's relevant, but between these two replies I've fallen of a bank, noted my arm had taken on a funny shape, been to A&E, examined, X-rayed, re-examined, treated and discharged home. Not bad that.



I'm not sure what his affiliations are now with Oxford, but they were over played and exposed during the bigfoot analyses thing. His reputation as a geneticist isn't that sound. He's made several errors, the ancient polar bear business for example, also this latest affair with Zana and Khwit.
take care rover
 
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Messages
48,816
Likes
20,884
Points
284
Location
Eblana
#46
Not that it's relevant, but between these two replies I've fallen of a bank, noted my arm had taken on a funny shape, been to A&E, examined, X-rayed, re-examined, treated and discharged home. Not bad that.



I'm not sure what his affiliations are now with Oxford, but they were over played and exposed during the bigfoot analyses thing. His reputation as a geneticist isn't that sound. He's made several errors, the ancient polar bear business for example, also this latest affair with Zana and Khwit.
Mind that arm!
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,945
Likes
1,361
Points
169
#48
Thanks all. It's fine, I did have to go to ITU straight from A&E though, but only to tell them I wouldn't be in in the morning and gain some sympathy from my colleagues. So I'm well placed to keep an eye.

It just struck me that you never know what goes on between posts.

 

Analis

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
1,620
Likes
353
Points
99
#50
I'd agree with a fair bit of that, but have to take issue with two of the points. Firstly the arms are not too long to be a human, that's definitely not correct.
I still believe that it is the case. I don't remember what was the ratio upper/lower leg measured by a number of students of the film (which they concluded to be intermediate between human and ape), but it can be seen by comparison on the pictures from the X-Creatures recreations, or the film about Jürgen Konczak's works linked above. No, it's not a proof of authenticity, as it was probably possible at the time to replicate every feature of the creature, and not only the face - which was doable, as show John Chamber's make-up works on Planet of the Apes (I'm not mentioning him because of the many rumours implying him, which remain rumours and prove only their own existence, but because of what he was able to perform as a special-effects artist in this era). A complex mechanism, based on the use of rods, was not outside the realm of possibility. But even without taking that into account (the argument over a finger movement is certainly controversial), the suit and the face could not be performed by anybody.

And why would they have used the footprints made by the man in the suit rather than just faking a set themselves?
I have considerd the possibility, as it is certainly too difficult to check if the prints were exactely at the same place than where the footage showed the creature to walk. But it would require to put really a lot of pressure, and to repeat it for each print.
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,454
Likes
4,194
Points
234
#51
I'm actually writing a piece for FT at the moment that covers all of the above. There are a vast number of discrepancies, but what I'm finding in research is how much eminent and respected experts in biomechanics and anatomy completely disagree with one another :).

I'm not saying any more than that. You'll have to wait til it comes out!
 

Swifty

doesn't negotiate with terriers
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
25,614
Likes
31,573
Points
284
#52
I'm actually writing a piece for FT at the moment that covers all of the above. There are a vast number of discrepancies, but what I'm finding in research is how much eminent and respected experts in biomechanics and anatomy completely disagree with one another :).

I'm not saying any more than that. You'll have to wait til it comes out!
Can you blag a funky Big Foot front cover ? ... I want a funky Big Foot cover as well ..
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
11,454
Likes
4,194
Points
234
#53
Not up to me, but as it's the big 5-0 in October for Patty it may well do.
 
Top