Guest VioletX Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 (edited) I just posted this in another thread but it is probably more relevant here: I actually love Finding Bigfoot, since I can watch it with my daughter, preferable to Disney Jr, haha. Since I am a Bigfoot virgin I get off on the reenactments. I know they do crazy things, but overall the show may be good PR, if/when the Bigfoot are proven to exist. Perhaps viewers would be good advocates for protection. Edited November 14, 2012 by VioletX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 "The reality TV show “Finding Bigfoot†will hold an invitation-only town hall meeting during the last week of November in Alton. The show is asking area residents to tell about their Bigfoot experiences" http://www.thetelegraph.com/arts_and_entertainment/article_6637a28c-2d4f-11e2-8bdb-0019bb30f31a.html Oh yeah, no unbiased research going on here. lol Only the squatchiest stories will be accepted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Wud - do you consider the show a 'research show'? The quote above indicates its a 'reality tv show'. Do you think that reality TV shows really depict reality? If not, then I wouldn't put much stock into what they are doing or how they are doing it as it relates to BF research. just my 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Well, MM claims to use scientific research techniques. "Founded in 1995 -- The only scientific research organization exploring the bigfoot/sasquatch mystery." http://bfro.net/ The way I see it, he threw away all residual credibility when he stepped into this venture with the Discovery Network. It makes his organization (and all the amazing people that are part of it) look bad. He has become a tool for ratings, a court jester for the masses, and a shell of anything that once may have been a bona fide contribution for bigfoot research. Then again, people love their bread and circuses, and they make wonderful distractions from what's really going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 All reality shows depict the reality created by the director/producers/and editor of each show. With enough footage you can make anyone look brilliant or stupid, like an angel or a jerk. Finding Bigfoot is no different. They film plenty of stuff that doesn't make it onto the screen. It's a show. It brings in ratings and is a Moneymaker (yes I went there). St. G- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Couldn't agree more Wud. However, as you and I both know, with extraordinary claims comes extraordinary evidence. The evidence that indicates Finding Bigfoot is a research type show is non-existant. So I don't think using that show as an example of BF research is an accurate comparison. I guess that's what I was getting at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Pont taken, but the negative stereotype that this show is enforcing doesn't help. While I'm not convinced but open to the idea of bigfoot, I have gotten to know some stand up, creative and dedicated poeple in this field. There are plenty of kooks, but also some amazing folks as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Wud - do you consider the show a 'research show'? The quote above indicates its a 'reality tv show'. Do you think that reality TV shows really depict reality? If not, then I wouldn't put much stock into what they are doing or how they are doing it as it relates to BF research. just my 2 cents. Can I answer these too? They make that scientific claim yes. Some reality TV shows are reality, some are faked. The general public watch these shows for entertainent, but most of the time see all of it as reality. So if I were to casually mention to someone that I was a Bigfoot researcher, they may reply something brilliant like " so, are you headed out into the woods to have a rave?" "Are you going to run through the woods with torches?" You may not put much stock into what happens on the show, BUT most of the casual watchers do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 If you watch the show expecting to see a "National Geographic PBS" type program done around a compelety scientific effort, you will be sorely disappointed. If you watch it knowing it's meant to entertain while occasionally educating someone who knows nothing about BF, you'll get what you expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 @Wud - again, I couldn't agree more. @John - very true, at work some of the folks that know I'm interested in the phenomenon ask me all sorts of questions regarding the show, but since I don't watch it, I can't answer a lot of questions they have. I respond along the lines of "do you believe everything you see on tv?" I don't put much stock in the 'casual tv watcher's" opinion on the matter of BF, as most do not take the time to do even the most basic of study on the subject before they come firing away with very remedial statements regarding the non-existence of the creature. SO, for what it's worth, I don't think that show can be used as a research type argument (for or against) in any arena where the participants are even vaguely familiar with the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Very true Madison. ANYONE, skeptic or proponent alike that thinks for a second that this show is somehow supposed to be taken seriously as a research program....well....I'll just leave it at that. On another side note, I have never seen an episode. Sort of a personal boycott. The show should just be called "It's a squatch!" If you never seen an episode how would you know the show is bad? Science is no closer to finding Bigfoot than MM is. MM now has a growing video library of just about every popular sighting known across the map. I can't think of anyone else that has accomplished so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 If you never seen an episode how would you know the show is bad? Science is no closer to finding Bigfoot than MM is. MM now has a growing video library of just about every popular sighting known across the map. I can't think of anyone else that has accomplished so much. Lol watched seasons 1 & 2 and quit cold turkey. Wow, so MM collects popular bigfoot videos. So do other people. How does collecting popular bigfoot videos accomplish so much? It's the same as comic book collector, Star Trek/Star Wars fan that has every phaser/light saber ever created, or a beanie baby hoarder. They are studmuffins in their little circles but the rest of humanity really doesn't care, and the various industries make lots of money off of their obsessions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Well, I'll just repeat a saying my old man used to say. "A smart man learns from his mistakes, a wise man learns from others' mistakes" He didn't coin it, just thought it was a bit of good guiding advice. With that said, from the handful of trailers I've seen, the reviews and discussions others have had regarding the show, and coworkers' questions about 'bigfoot hunting' based on the show. I am very confident that the show is not representative of how researchers conduct themselves when seriously attempting to gather evidence. I don't disagree that MM and the BFRO may have some very good evidence gathered, just that the show isn't a scientific videography of research of the subject. Or perhaps I'm wrong in my assessment of others' reviews? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 Lol watched seasons 1 & 2 and quit cold turkey. Wow, so MM collects popular bigfoot videos. So do other people. How does collecting popular bigfoot videos accomplish so much? They're making videos across the map. It's a history of sightings that future generations can look back at long after the witnesses are dead and gone. Well, I'll just repeat a saying my old man used to say. "A smart man learns from his mistakes, a wise man learns from others' mistakes" He didn't coin it, just thought it was a bit of good guiding advice. With that said, from the handful of trailers I've seen, the reviews and discussions others have had regarding the show, and coworkers' questions about 'bigfoot hunting' based on the show. I am very confident that the show is not representative of how researchers conduct themselves when seriously attempting to gather evidence. I don't disagree that MM and the BFRO may have some very good evidence gathered, just that the show isn't a scientific videography of research of the subject. Or perhaps I'm wrong in my assessment of others' reviews? I watch it and if you're really interested in Bigfoot you should to. The show has guests that are in the know. Reviews make it sound like MM is screaming the whole show and that's not what it's about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wudewasa Posted November 14, 2012 Share Posted November 14, 2012 I watch it and if you're really interested in Bigfoot you should to. The show has guests that are in the know. So when is this guy going to be a guest?! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts