Guest shoot1 Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 here is my phone call today to Erickson: Erickson: Erickson? me: Hello, I was calling to inquire about the documentary E: What about it? Me:I have really been anticipating seeing the footage and I wonder if you can give me a hint when it will come out. E: No idea Me: oh...I had been so excited to see the footage... E: We just don't have the funding...(something else that I cannot remember precise words re: production and or funding) me: so what you are saying is that you are looking for the right vehicle to get it out there... E:What?....oh yes, that is correct. me: Well I wish you luck and I hope we can see it soon, thanks (then I think he may have been saying something that I missed as he I was hanging up...rats!) I don't buy it. If he makes a trailer video asking for funding that includes the Matilda face video on Youtube and links it to an IndieGoGo campaign, he'll get the funding he needs in a heartbeat. Why do so many "Bigfooters" let their ego get in the way?
Guest Posted February 23, 2013 Posted February 23, 2013 I don't buy it. If he makes a trailer video asking for funding that includes the Matilda face video on Youtube and links it to an IndieGoGo campaign, he'll get the funding he needs in a heartbeat. Why do so many "Bigfooters" let their ego get in the way? Agreed. This field brings out the worst in people. As soon as they get something they cling to it like carnival hucksters looking to make a fast buck. It happens over and over again. It is unavoidable. The other day I came across the Ontario Squatch video where he shows an intentionally blurred sasquatch figure. He claimed that he couldn't show it because of copyright. What kind of payday is the photographer hoping to get? Who's going to publish such a photo? This field desparetly needs more transparency and selflessness to actually advance the study of these creatures. Right now, it's the complete opposite with allegeded key evidence hidden away by a trophy hunter mindset.
steenburg Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 Agreed. This field brings out the worst in people. As soon as they get something they cling to it like carnival hucksters looking to make a fast buck. It happens over and over again. It is unavoidable. The other day I came across the Ontario Squatch video where he shows an intentionally blurred sasquatch figure. He claimed that he couldn't show it because of copyright. What kind of payday is the photographer hoping to get? Who's going to publish such a photo? This field desparetly needs more transparency and selflessness to actually advance the study of these creatures. Right now, it's the complete opposite with allegeded key evidence hidden away by a trophy hunter mindset. Or it can be called, 'Ivan Marks Syndrome', That's what I like to use, people trying to pass of images or video they know is a lot of nonsense but the need for money or attention overrides any sense of doing good research. They don't have to fool everybody just enough to get everyone debating. There was a resent photo taken in Texas which had come to my attention, another blob squatch as far as I can see but the witness is giving a long drawn out story to go along with it, he mentions more than once how he likes the show "finding Bigfoot", I have the feeling this story and photo have come to light because he hopes to asked on the program? This type of situation is getting worse rather than better. Now I don't mean to suggest Erickson is behaving this way, i think the people he has been dealing with have been. He just fell for it. The same way I did in regards to Paul Freeman's original story 30 years ago. Thomas Steenburg
Guest Orygun Posted February 24, 2013 Posted February 24, 2013 I don't buy it. If he makes a trailer video asking for funding that includes the Matilda face video on Youtube and links it to an IndieGoGo campaign, he'll get the funding he needs in a heartbeat. Why do so many "Bigfooters" let their ego get in the way? Ego? It's ego that drives them to hoax in the first place. "Hey, I have something that you think you want and I'm not going to share."
Guest Posted February 25, 2013 Posted February 25, 2013 Just caught this (I apologize ahead of time if this link appears anywhere else in this thread): If those leaked images are authentic ... well ... my only comment would be is that the 'Chewbacca' resemblance is indeed uncanny ...
Guest Posted February 25, 2013 Posted February 25, 2013 @Simmon. That's just someone who has trolled, found Munns' video frame submissions and spliced it with the crappy 2 second clip released by Melba.
Guest Posted February 26, 2013 Posted February 26, 2013 so Moneymaker & Bobo both have stated on twitter that the Matilda footage is legit. I dont think Bobo would lie or y to hoax, he seems like an honest guy. He did a 2 hour podcast with Joe rogan all about bigfoot that everyone should check out.
Guest Posted February 26, 2013 Posted February 26, 2013 (edited) I've been listen to the After Hours Tazer recording where Matt Moneymaker talk about the Matalida footage. Matt states that Munn is wrong in his assumption about the Mask. He also says that MK didn't require the rights to the film. My suggestion to the critics, is listen to the broadcast. If your stance doesn't change afterwards (Matilda film'stills) something is wrong. Matt also said that the owner of the property was trying to get more money from AE. The owner would only film just a few seconds, as a teaser (my word) so AE would get his wallet out. He also believes the MK blew the DNA testing.....and goes into what he believes. Edited February 26, 2013 by treadstone
Guest Thepattywagon Posted February 26, 2013 Posted February 26, 2013 MM's opinion of what is and is not anything 'authentic' is not one I will ever hitch my wagon to. He has proven many times that he has no problem stating as fact things that are anything but.
Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Posted February 28, 2013 I've been listen to the After Hours Tazer recording where Matt Moneymaker talk about the Matalida footage. Matt states that Munn is wrong in his assumption about the Mask. He also says that MK didn't require the rights to the film. My suggestion to the critics, is listen to the broadcast. If your stance doesn't change afterwards (Matilda film'stills) something is wrong. Matt also said that the owner of the property was trying to get more money from AE. The owner would only film just a few seconds, as a teaser (my word) so AE would get his wallet out. He also believes the MK blew the DNA testing.....and goes into what he believes. Matt Moneymaker? The same Matt Moneymaket that see's every shadow as a Sasquatch and every sound he hears is a Squatch. That Matt Moneymaker?
Guest Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 It's funny how for years everyone on this forum was flipping out on a weekly basis about the Erickson Documentary. Everyone so eager to see it. And now look at everyone. They couldn't wait to find a new enemy. Good luck with ever seeing it now.
Guest miller44 Posted March 6, 2013 Posted March 6, 2013 It's funny how for years everyone on this forum was flipping out on a weekly basis about the Erickson Documentary. Everyone so eager to see it. And now look at everyone. They couldn't wait to find a new enemy. Good luck with ever seeing it now. I think what everyone was eager for was to see the promises which were made about the HD footage come to fruition, as per it being released along with the DNA study. Clearly what has emerged from the Project so far is by anyone's standard not as advertised. The first thing we see is totally ambigious and the second thing we see is a clear hoax. Such being the case I'm not surprised with the community's reaction at all. As others have pointed out: why would they fake some footage if they had other footage that wasn't faked? This is shaping up to be yet another disaster, and we're not to blame: we are just the wrong audience at the wrong time...
Recommended Posts