Leaderboard

For me, it is because he has admitted to hoaxing tracks. Sorry, but even if he did not hoax them all (and I doubt he did), how are you supposed to know which ones are legit? If you want to be a credible researcher, do not hoax anything...ever!! I realize others have much different opinions, but he destroyed his credibility with me. According to this, Meldrum bought the entire cast collection for $2000: The Paul Freeman Bigfoot Video (oregonbigfoot.com)

First thing that popped into my head when seeing the picture was the Monty Python "Dead Parrot" skit.......

Here is the original GMA interview (and yes, it is condescending and snarky): Poor quality, I know (on the order of most BF videos). The part where Freeman "admits" is at around 4:44 and lasts for all of 5-6 seconds. Obviously, there is no other context to the interview and as I said, video can be edited to "prove" whatever the editors wish. And then there was this: http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/dennett03.htm Note that the author of the article, Michael Dennett, is the same person used as the skeptical expert in the video. However, Bobbie Short speaks very highly of him and describes him as being very fair. I think there were perhaps some other sources as well, but for the life of me, I have no idea of what they were. I had forgotten about the other allegations against Freeman that are in the article. All in all though, none of this really matters. We all have different opinions, and opinions are just that, opinions. If you believe him to be truthful and legit, no problem. For me though, I have doubts. Complete Freeman video:

Here is the proper link: Bigfoot Anatomy - Scientific American Hope that this helped.

Just add the requisite http prefix or copy and paste the address into a search engine (like Google) and it will take you there.

Agreed, however it was the second most significant motion picture sasquatch evidence event of history simply because it came with casted footprint evidence, and the exact location of the event was revealed. My opinion of Freeman himself was almost immediately piqued with the surprise visit Dr. Meldrum made to his home, and Freeman then taking Meldrum to a set of prints he had found that very morning. Meldrum described this event in "Legend Meets Science", and posted this review if the prints online. Everything I read about Freeman after that further impressed me. I continue to believe that he was the best sasquatch hunter in modern times. http://www.bigfoot-lives.com/html/evaluation_of_alleged_sasquatc.html

That does not detract from my great respect for your opinions VAfooter, but I am laughing that Good Morning America qualifies as a source for ANYTHING!

Mirrors can be fun.

What I took away from the Two Reasons without adding in any of the religious elements, is that 1) Killing you during an encounter is always on the menu. Maybe choice number 10 or option 45, but always there. Therefore, be careful. They are strong and wild and you do not know them. Treat them with the respect and caution you would any wild animal (or potentially crazy human). And 2) They don't communicate, so we can't reason with them and we have no way of knowing what they're thinking. Anything else is some form of anthropomorphism. There is danger in making incorrect assumptions based on OUR beliefs that may or may not be true. I'm not interested in any of the religious interpretations one way or another, nor any woo. Carpenters' belief system influences how he views the creatures. We ALL have some sort of belief system about who we are in the grand scheme of things and who THEY are. But distilling the two reasons into the above made sense to me. YMMV.

I don’t need to invoke the two reasons Carpenter gives to not trust Sasquatches. I don’t trust grizzly bears, cougars or black bears either. The two reasons Carpenter states for not trusting Sasquatches are: 1) He believes that they are a hybrid between the Nephilim (fallen angels) and humans and thus that they don't have the same morality and conscience as humans. 2) They don’t talk or communicate with us. He assumes that they have the ability to communicate (mind-speak or other) but that they don’t want to share any truthful information about themselves. His first reason is just a belief and is not based on science. His second reason only makes sense if they are cognitively able to communicate, which we do not know. His second reason is the main reason I don’t trust anything that supposedly “ETs” or beings associated with UFOs say. Messages from ET’s are all inconsistent, contradictory, not informative and useless. Very trickster like. However, since I consider Sasquatch to be a different entity than beings associated with UFOs, I can’t really use that reason to not trust sasquatch. I don’t know what they are. Thus, when I visit areas with their presence, I proceed with caution knowing full well that they are a potential threat and are not my buddies or forest friends. I think that some folks who pursue interactions with sasquatches and treat them as teachers, elders, forest keepers or brothers are delusional. I agree with Carpenter in that those people who claim interactions with them and claim to communicate with them, have obtained conflicting and useless information. One possible hypothesis is self-delusion, whereas everybody hears their own internal voice when they go out into the forest to communicate with seen or unseen entities. They hear what they want to hear or what they want to believe. An alternative hypothesis is that the entities are trickers and are indeed deceiving and telling lies to every one of those experiencers, but that hypothesis is more complex and requires more assumptions than the simpler self-deception. And, we don’t have any scientific data to support either hypothesis (just anecdotal evidence which is very weak, dispersed, and not fully vetted).