Leaderboard

The only "side" that has facts to back it up is the "Rick Dyer is a lying sack of Bull feces" side". It is a fact he is a serial hoaxer. It is a fact he hates the bigfoot community. It is a fact he and Musky Allen have been caught in lies involving this latest hoax he is attempting. While it is a fact there will be a film debuting at Tribeca as has been said, that is not proof that anything Rick Dyer has said is true. That is not proof he shot and killed a bigfoot. It is not even proof he is going to be in the film. If you want to continue to buy into Dyer's latest hoax, that is fine, it is everyone's inalienable right to make a fool of themselves. But do not try to say those of us who know Dyer is pulling another hoax have only "hearsay, judgement for past sins and inaccuracies" on their side. We are the only side with facts and firm proof.

Of course I listened, and It wasn't convincing. He's made the same arguments the few believers here made. A source telling him it's credible, the movie poster, and Musky. Him not knowing Minnow was making a film about the good, the bad and the ugly of the people who search was telling. His statement that he just couldn't understand anyone not buying into the tent film is the type of arrogance that gets people in trouble. If you bash anyone that disagrees, it just doesn't make me want to believe you. Dyer never hedges. Go back to the 2008 videos. He maintained the story until it was done. And then it was stolen lol. And then it was fake. Then he saw another one. Then he had another body. Then it was stolen again. Then it was all fake. Then he put up fake pics that he stood by. Then he denied the tent video. Then he admitted the tent video. Then he claimed he shot another one. And he's gonna continue the story and bash everyone who tries to deny it. Bring out evidence and you're a hater and just jealous. Meanwhile no proof of anything. Just words. Of course he's going to stick to it.

Another "source." He also dared to go into the mind talk aspect which is going to be controversial. As to his belief, he stated the same things that people here are buying into. The video and Musky's description and out of context defense. FB/FB has pushed the video since day one, and Chris is close to them, so no big surprise there.

Oh! He already has! And I have a picture to prove it. It must have been an incredible stalk! Rubber ape suits are very wily and fleet of foot!

So you are for murdering people with stones, who hoax bigfoot stories?

Well, considering Tricky Ricky and Tom Biscardi's track record with the whole subject?! Either he produces a body pronto, or he should be stoned medieval style as a prolific fraud. Put up or shut up!

Karma!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not so much the text, as to the fact that he singled out that experience and wrote it down. I think your right, I think he was thinking through all the plausible explanations. But if he believed 100 percent it was a bear track I don't think we would know of it now, it would have been forgotten. That's what a overlap looks like for a bear. Maybe? With native American trackers there? Not likely. I disagree, while it's certainly plausible that Mr. Thompson had no idea what the legends said? If you take a Grizzly bear hind foot track, make it bigger, take away the claws, and broaden the heel? Well...........you have a Sasquatch track. That's what the man IS describing. I think Mr. Thompson was conflicted about what he saw, the Indian guides were insisting it wasn't a Bear, and Mr. Thompson felt that it was important enough to write the report down. Whether it was a Squatch or not is irrelevant, the point I'm trying to make is that early explorers did record some things they deemed "strange" concerning the subject. Here is another one: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/legends/spokanes.htm Transformer is completely wrong with the hypothesis that nothing was observed or recorded by early Europeans about the subject. As if it was somehow a invention of the last century. It's also completely wrong to think that the Native Americans themselves didn't draw or carve or record their myths of the creature other than by oral tradition. Interestingly enough I just posted a thread about "straw bears" in Europe. It would seem that the Europeans THEMSELVES had their own myths and legends about a similar creature. Better known as wildemann or woodwose, whatever.

I think, personally, that when we (the BF community) learn to give up the obsession with proving it to anyone, we'll finally begin to get somewhere with our individual and collective research. That's when the answers will come.