Leaderboard

Hi all, Thank you for your responses! The combined opinions were worth the price of a book to me so I just donated to the site. As an aside, this is the first site that I have ever used a screen name. The decision came based upon what seemed to be the consensus here and some small fear within me about not going public with the subject. As my screen name denotes, I am a believer in Bigfoot/Sasquatch and I was born in 1957. I am a retired Engineer from the radio communications industry (Industrial/Utilities/Military) Cheers and Happy Holidays!

Todd’s BIGfo0Ts all look different. The face is the hardest to pass off as legitimate And his apEs looks more like an amalgamation of carpet, rocks, And whatever you can find at hobby lobby. and as Aredis pointed out, it seems he combines legitimate research with hoaxes.

I find this PDF by Phil Poling (and my own eyes) convincing evidence that Todd Standing is a hoaxer. https://www.woodape.org/?smd_process_download=1&download_id=1278 And here is the link to his "Hall of Shame" web page at Squatch Detective. https://squatchdetective.weebly.com/todd-standing--sylvanic.html

I think your answer hides amongst your own words. Standing seems to have sasquatches revealing themselves to him every other time he goes out into the woods. He produces videos and close up photos of sasquatches that many think look fake. Yet he cannot seem to produce any evidence that stands up to any scientific scrutiny whatsoever. He's a boy crying wolf. Welcome to the forum.

As usual, I swim against the tide as far as Standing goes. The image that looks the most fake was the result of someone other than Standing digitally removing the branches from the original image. It gave it a very fake look. The movements of the creatures don't like right to me, but that's not enough for me to label him a hoaxer and move on. As far as the 'Squatch Detective' goes...his opinion means nothing to me. People whose relevancy and small level of fame are dependent on finding and exposing frauds depends upon producing said frauds on a fairly consistent basis... no matter what. Nobody likes a self appointed hall monitor. Well, maybe some people on here might. I will say the that Todd is probably somewhere on the spectrum, and I have heard from some other researchers that he would stab you in the back with a quickness in order to get access to an active area and the resultant possible attention. So, while he is most probably an unpleasant person...he is at best only MAYBE a hoaxer in my mind. I believe that his self-aggrandizing ways were probably the factor that drove some of his earlier partners away as opposed to them suddenly changing their minds about the quality of his encounters. At the end of the day, it's the cool thing to do in this field to hate on and dismiss Standing. Seeing as how of most of the most of the other prominent names in this field are themselves fairly unlikeable people, I don't want to blindly take their word on who I am supposed to accept and who I am supposed to hate. For me, the jury might definitely be leaning one way on Todd, but it's still out.

What field results are you talking about? Here is what rubs me wrong about Todd. He wants science and the government to accept Sasquatch as a real species and set aside provisions for this new species based on ZERO tangible evidence. Like a lot of researchers? He just side steps the scientific requirement of physical evidence. And doubles down on track casts and video footage..... And this is why 50 some years after the PGF? We are still at square one. If Todd doesn’t want to shoot one in the name of science? Then he should be sharpening his DNA collecting skills and pursue proving it that way. To me his Bigfoot subjects in his films show progression. They look like muppets in the beginning but as time goes by they look better and better. Like watching a 1950’s Tarzan movie vs a 1980’s Tarzan movie. But it doesn’t matter how good a film looks. Not to science. A solid DNA saliva or blood sample is worth x10000000 more than a film portraying a Bigfoot leaping tall trees for an hour, or whatever. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. We should all chant it repeatedly. Bone, blood, saliva, tissue, hair, etc. Biology isn’t glitzy or glamorous. It’s methodical in its approach.

The amount of opinions on this subject does not make it easy to cut through and do the research. Here is my take (not proof of anything either way). Todd found out about an area in BC with BF activity. He explored and confirmed activity. BF experiences can be fleeting. Maybe he saw something, maybe he imagined it. At the time, he was not equipped to capture any evidence. Later on he tried to manufacture it to recreate what he thinks he saw. He did so in a few poorly made and poorly edited films. This was back in...I want to say 2005 or whenever he tried peddling those DVDs for $25 or $50. The problem was, he was pitching the DVDs as the ultimate BF evidence. He is more humble about those early experiences now but back when he was selling DVDs, he thought he was king bigfooter and wanted the attention for a few still photos of puppets. That is why everything he has ever done is not well received, because of this early failure to present his claimed evidence honestly. In the early 200os, there is also a hilariously bad episode of a Canadian emergency responder show. Todd made up a story about being chased by bears after escaping being chased by BFs. I'm sure the episode is on YT so you can judge for yourself how clearly out of bounds his claims are. In his early days, he showed 1 interesting, very fast clip of something climbing rocks but that is all the video evidence he ever presented before the setups in Discovering Bigfoot (which is worth watching, even if people are not Todd fans). Fast forward to the present, Todd has improved as a researcher. He can't overcome his early mistakes though. The ending of Discovering Bigfoot, when he trudges out in camo and facepaint...and the way he tries to explain away the puppet photos, just doesn't work. He is entertaining though, in a way. Now he needs another reliable area since he scared away the BFs in his usual spot.

He's a hoaxer plain and simple. The fact folks are even questioning that at this point is just sad.

I love being out in the woods in winter. Generally no one else is there save for the occasional small game hunter and animals feel more normal now that they aren't feeling the pressure of firearms season. I've not personally seen squatch signs before but this is a new to me area with previous reports so open to the possibility. ETA: Forgot the best part of winter woods, venomous snakes are off in brumation.

I've been out in the woods all of my life because I enjoy hiking and backpacking. I've always felt at home there and underwent wilderness survival training and navigation long before Dual Survival, or any other survival series, was on TV popularizing the subject matter. My interest in sasquatching happened in 2004 and has captured my attention since. Sasquatching involves a lot of tedious work and spending oodles of hours in the field. It can be very discouraging as the success rate of finding any evidence, much less having a sighting, is very small. Those who go to the woods solely to find sasquatch are much less likely to stick with the program if that is their only reason to be there. Conversely, you are far more likely to stay with the program if you love being in the outdoors to begin with. It is akin to going out fishing and coming up dry. Was the day a disaster or did you have a blast? I went out for an overnight Thursday. There was a light amount of snow on the ground which made it perfect to look for prints. We didn't see any. At night around a fire, both of us heard a snort or blow which was probably a deer. It's easy to head home cold, maybe wet, and nothing to show for you efforts. Napoleon trudging home from Moscow. I had a great time, look forward to the next time out, and will examine what else I can do differently the next time.

Understood. I don’t begrudge people who have a different plan than my own. Although I defend my method as the most expedient. But making it back out with yourself and evidence intact is rather important. It won’t do anyone any good if a researcher becomes another 411 case. That’s a personal call.

I have a couple of plans... depending on the situation. I think that you would approve of the many of them. A lot depends on the situation though. No point trying to get a type specimen of them, only to give them a type specimen of BlackRockBigfoot instead.