yetis
Out of context: Reply #19
- Started
- Last post
- 59 Responses
- Dodecahedron0
In response to why this is NOT a human in an ape suit according to the documentary I saw ( as best as I can remember ),
There are extra muscle and bone details that can be seen moving on the thigh, hips and back, details like this don't appear on ape suits. The best suits at the time were like the 60s sci-fi movies, they were just draped over people and didn't respond to locomotion like a physical body does.
'She' has big boobs that can be seen as 'she' looks back. The old man who shot the film never said a thing about the boobs and nobody noticed them until an animal expert mentioned them. People who study film of animals a lot notice these sorts of things.
They hired primate experts to study the film. They made 3d models of the figure and recreated how it would be walking. They concluded that it was walking in a very similar manner as how chimps walk when they walk on two feet, NOT like how humans walk at all. They don't walk 'heal toe heal toe' like us they sort of drag their feet along and their soles are completely flat. This is identical to *thousands of tracks that have been found of large feet with completely flat bottoms. They were comparing tracks from North America and China that appeared identical.
They did some basic triangulation of the site and film to figure out the size and concluded it was at least 7.5-8 feet tall. The limbs are also extremely long like an ape, they could have worn arm extensions but it would be near impossible to walk properly. Not to mention who ever it was must have had to have been huge. They also said if it was a huge person they would have had to have jammed their body into this weird hunch back position leaving their head somewhere looking out at the neck as opposed to the eyes, to recreate the proportions of the hips and shoulders. Also the shoulders were like 3-4 feet, so the suit would have had to have accommodated these proportions because no human has shoulders like that.
It has the basic face of a gorilla. Very similar details on the forehead and general structure as you can tell when it turns.
All of these details would have had to have been known and recreated by whoever supposedly faked this. Is it a reasonable hypothesis that someone was not only an primate expert ahead of their time but also had the means of creating a suit that mimicked all of these anatomical details? Not likely as the doc concluded.
This in mind judge for yourself as I did. I seriously wish I could find the doc but I can't anywhere. I saw it on PBS or something a while ago.
- BTW when I say he has 'the face of a gorilla' they proved it through proper comparative facial feature analysis .Dodecahedron
- lots more points I can't remember. they did a thorough job of investigating all angles.Dodecahedron
- They actually started the doc by saying 'everyone thinks this is a fake but in fact its never been debunked' then they tried a failed. there were already lots of studies that concluded similar thinsgDodecahedron
- In addition to how it was walking it is leaning forward and swaying its arms the same way a chimp does .Dodecahedron
- still 'looks' fakewagshaft
- looks don't count in science, especially when considering a filmed document. that was the purpose of investigating it to see if looks are deceivingDodecahedron
- Umm, this is the famous Ray Wallace footage right? The one the family admitted was fake in 2002.ETM