Erickson Project

[Guest]

I'd like to see where there is past evidence that Mr. Erickson has been "preparing the field" or buying up fakes. "Preparing a field" would be a very strategic and lengthy process that leaves tracks.

Being I had been 'following' the Sylvanic claims for many years, Sallandra had allowed me to read the email received from the Ericksons in order to help make sense of where it is coming from. I'm not going to post it either but I will say that it was written in defense of Standing. Plus if you go here to Sasquat, you will see another source who received such a reply.

"Simone Erickson replied friendly and extensively. In a nutshell she stated that Adrian Erickson thinks that Todd Standings evidence is genuine. She complained about the way video footage gets analyzed on the internet and that reviews are done by people that haven't had Sasquatch encounters and therefore "don't know how they look like". She also stated that the characteristics of the face in the Standing footage are consistent with descriptions in sighting reports."

She is right about how video footage sometimes gets analyzed on the net, but I have seen bigfoot and the faces of the ones I've seen don't look like the one in the Standing footage. Sure they are all individuals, but if the Ericksons are going by "descriptions in sighting reports" then that's equally unreliable in validating the Standing footage. Of course he does say he has seen bigfoot himself, how close was he?

I'd like to think that Erickson is savvy and he probably is as a real estate developer, but look how far the world went in believing the bigfoot in the freezer. Standing has long had access to high end video equipment and makeup artists, including his sister. I have to wonder how much Mr. Erickson has actually validated the Standing videos? I only raise this because if Erickson is to bring us science, then everything surrounding that evidence needs to be clean of controversy. If Erickson is just going by what he sees in the video and of supporting statements by Standing, well that's just not enough for validation purposes. Erickson needs to maintain a Standard of Evidence in validating the Standing claims. He would need to go to the film site himself and see ample documented evidence of proof. He's need to talk to Barr w/o confidentiality borders to find out what all the roles of prior hired actors were. He would need to have been to this so called hidden land of Sylvanic (Not a Native name but allegedly natively named anyhow) that takes days to get to under the most extreme conditions. Unfortunately Erickson probably doesn't even know about all of the potentially contradictory issues. He cannot be supportive of Standing based on emotional reasons or because of how he has seen the field can be. I'm raising these points because Mr. Erickson needs to understand HE too will be under the microscope, and will be more so in the future, and so he needs to put Standing's claims and videos under the microscope as well, and not just believe him because he is a fellow Canadian. That will not hold up in the court of popular opinion.

Of course he also has MM endorsing his work in the video, and having seen some of the claims of evidence coming from MM over the years, including only recently his trying to push a blurry figure right here in my area, this doesn't speak well for the salesmanship aspect of the endeavor. Salesmanship should be at a minimum and really has no place in science. I'm guessing that at least one scientist involved recognizes the juxtaposed positions of having different masters & influences, and will have chosen to conduct their work independently. Scientists often find conflict when there are publicity or other agendas, and rightly so because the integrity of the findings must insulate against any and all such influences.

If Mr. Erickson is reading this, please understand that I am not trying to pour cold water on efforts, but everything you do will be put under a much more powerful microscope in the future. Get used to it. No doubt you might feel like you are on top of the world in all of this, but even you are susceptible to overlooking things in all the excitement. Evidence you present & endorse, and people associated, will need to be of unquestionable character and of completely defensible nature if presented as evidence, otherwise one flawed element can sour the pot. Please understand this as you proceed forward.

I for one also look at the Responsibilities involved in bringing the existence of this species forward. This is not some new subspecies of turtle or bird. Protection under Endangered Species Act (ESA) may not even apply if 'human' or part human, or alien for that matter. lol I am certain there are actually much higher numbers out there then are likely required for protection anyhow. The scientists estimates of their low numbers have little basis for proof just because they have never seen one. So what happens when you find you cannot get protection? There may never be an accurate count due to how amazingly elusive they are by nature, or by unanimous consent of the majority. Their elusiveness is more then just some individually realized desire to avoid us, instead its more like the rule is followed species wide. If so, we are dealing with a much more complex communicative intelligent species here. Maybe the day we can talk them into taking a seat at the UN, then they will be understood, but that may not happen for a while. Bottom line is, they don't seem to even fit into our present system of animal protection laws. Several years ago I even wrote up a 36 page Draft - 'Petition To List' under ESA, only to realize within myself, that they are an enigma and that there is much more involved as we proceed in this grandiose quest of this little mystery. Responsibilities and ramifications we have not even considered. Even DNA won't tell us about their nature and we barely scratch the surface there. Why are they even here, largely invisible to our world?

With some reported at up to 14' and even 15' tall, glowing eyes, ability to do things we can't accept, there is more to them then DNA, and yet they seem very wild and primal too. Once proven, will there be much higher numbers of people out there trying to 'bag' one? Protection in US and Canada won't help them in Mexico or third world countries where attempted poaching may go rampant once proven. In fact it may open up a whole new world of Black Market you could not have contemplated. That is one of the Responsibilities I speak of. And what will happen if more humans begin chasing them with guns? No doubt there are things you have heard about them that will likely not be addressed in your findings. What if they decide they don't like having a world of humans chasing them like never before, even just to count them? Somehow it would be nice if we could ask them what they want. They seem to have a will of their own too. Have any of these things been considered as you proceed? Yeah I know, a lot of people just want to see proof and will say deal with all that after, but I see a need for responsibility and forethought beforehand as well, because we could open up a Pandora's Box with their proven existence that we did not consider. Your 'team' is not the only ones involved in this mystery. There are people out there who have more of a handle on their nature then you, and I'd advise seeking some of them out because DNA and physical evidence by itself is not representative of the important aspects of these beings. Their existence is much more complex then DNA, a few videos, some tracks and hairs. They are a species that at least individually is more dominant then us after dark and on most of the continent if they chose to be. Validation of their existence in involves many more issues then I fear you may have considered in your quest Mr. Erickson.

Last year an NA Storyteller told me in conversation that when their existence is proven, then the world will end. Sure, could just be more folklorish tales and embellishment, but maybe these kind of things are important to understand even if for the sake of avoiding self fulfilling prophesy? Remember 2012 is right around the corner so there could be more involved then just your announcement. Example: panic, greed, exploitation, unanticipated inter-species hostility, whatever have you that may come. Proving their existence is big no matter how you cut it. Give all this some thought as you proceed okay. IMHO

[Guest]

Nobody "in the know" has come forward about the Erickson/Standing relationship. All we have is speculation until Adrian decides to make a statement (or call a Bigfoot show) .

I still give him the benefit of the doubt personally. From everyone I've talked with, and everything I've read, Adrian Erickson is a stand up guy. I do question his milking the project for so long.

I'm still of the opinion he's probably waiting for Dr Ketchum's DNA paper. It's important to note that the "hype" can dry up just like the milk from a cow that has been milked too long. Alot of folks are getting past the point of caring I fear. It's getting past time to do something IMO. Chris B.

Any "Erickson/Standing relationship" has nothing to do with the Erickson Project and speculation about it is honestly a waste of time. As I have said before, there is no "hype" being perpetrated and no "milking" of the project, the Erickson Project is in an agreement with Ketchum to release simultaneously. Real research takes time.

[Guest]

Yeah I know, a lot of people just want to see proof and will say deal with all that after, but I see a need for responsibility and forethought beforehand as well, because we could open up a Pandora's Box with their proven existence that we did not consider. Your 'team' is not the only ones involved in this mystery. There are people out there who have more of a handle on their nature then you, and I'd advise seeking some of them out because DNA and physical evidence by itself is not representative of the important aspects of these beings. Their existence is much more complex then DNA, a few videos, some tracks and hairs. They are a species that at least individually is more dominant then us after dark and on most of the continent if they chose to be.

Excellent post PT! For what it's worth I agree with you DNA and/or species recognition is only the beginning of a long term effort by people from all over the world to learn more about them.

[Guest]

Any "Erickson/Standing relationship" has nothing to do with the Erickson Project and speculation about it is honestly a waste of time. As I have said before, there is no "hype" being perpetrated and no "milking" of the project, the Erickson Project is in an agreement with Ketchum to release simultaneously. Real research takes time.

I have the impression that the documentary is not even complete. I've heard that the filming was done by the project members themselves (that's why it looks rather amateurish), and that Erickson still searches for a company that puts it together. If they want to release it simultaneously, it probably won't happen in late Spring.

Sasky? Can you comment?

Thank's by the way for coming to the BFF and clearing some things up!

[Guest Carl]

I'm cautiously optimistic about the Erickson project. I'm more inclined to imagine it'll just be a ploy.

[Guest]

I have the impression that the documentary is not even complete. I've heard that the filming was done by the project members themselves (that's why it looks rather amateurish), and that Erickson still searches for a company that puts it together. If they want to release it simultaneously, it probably won't happen in late Spring.

Sasky? Can you comment?

Thank's by the way for coming to the BFF and clearing some things up!

The documentary is essentially complete, except for a possible commentary on the findings of the DNA study.

[Guest Carl]

You know what makes me nervous though? I saw a trailer for the Erickson project featuring interviews with reputable investigators like Dr. Bindernagel and Jeff Meldrum. If this turns out to be BS, it could soil the reputation of bigfoot research. Plus, I'd hate to see Meldrum and Bindernagel get had like that.

It would damage their reputations big time.

Edited May 10, 2011 by Carl

[Cisco]

The whole Standing/ Erickson relationship has been very intriguing. I have never seen a Bigfoot myself so I'm always open to new video footage or witness descriptions. That being said, I have my own opinions as to what looks "real" or not. I can watch a Hollywood movie with incredible special effects that look very realistic, but it does not mean that it looks real to me. The Patterson footage looks "real", to me, based off my own perceptions. Standings video of the Bigfoot that is up on the hillside and is crouching, looks very real to me but the video of the one running across the hillside looks like a guy in a suit.

That being said, I have not reached a decision on Standing's latest video. Many people have stated that the creatures faces don't look animated and that their eyes never blink. I can see the same thing but there's something about the subjects in the video that gives me pause. Right now, I can't really say what it is but there something about them that makes it plausible to me. Perhaps it's because I have not seen a mask or suit that looks anything like what Standing filmed. If it were me, and I was going to hoax something, I would have made it more stereotypically Bigfoot like. Also, after studying the video closely, there are at least two different faces. Even if Standing hoaxed them; why not just make a video of one? Plus, even costumes take resources and time, so why make it harder than necessary? Again, I'm not saying that they are real but I'm not convinced that they're absolute fakes.

The last obstacle is Adrian Erickson himself. Why would he purchase videos from Standing or even associate himself with Standing if believed the footage was fake. As everybody has said, Erickson appears to be a very sharp guy with a lot of experience in this field. He has a golden reputation and he also has the backing and support of the biggest names in Bigfoot research. That being said, I just don't buy into the idea that he could be hoaxed by Standing. If Erickson believes that Standings video footage is real, it's because he has a very good reason. I'm fairly certain that Erickson keeps up with current Bigfoot information and probably reads this particular thread. He can Google as well as we can and I promise you that he's not going to throw away five years of work, and God only knows how much money, to support a hoaxer.

This whole thing with Standing has me confused and I'm not sure what to think. However, like everybody else, I'm ready to find out! I can understand wanting to create hype but enough already.

Cisco

[Guest]

The documentary is essentially complete, except for a possible commentary on the findings of the DNA study.

ok, good! Thank's for answering this!

[Guest]

Pragmatic Theorist-

" He would need to have been to this so called hidden land of Sylvanic (Not a Native name but allegedly natively named anyhow) that takes days to get to under the most extreme conditions. Unfortunately Erickson probably doesn't even know about all of the potentially contradictory issues."

Somewhere back on this thread there was a news article detailing/corraborating the search and rescue efforts of Todd Standing...Didn't anyone but me google this town? Sylvanic if it is indeed two or three days of hard hiking still not nearly as remote as folks are being lead to think. It also if you follow the S&R report not in alberta, but it looks to be in BC. The article gave the name of the fire road S&R were called to and with all of TS's other details things just don't add up for me.

(JMO)

[Guest]

I don't want to turn this into a Sylvanic thread either, but the S&R was a completely diff location then the alleged Hidden Valley of Sylvanic in the Rockies, which he said was compromised, even tho it was 3 days in via snowmobile.

[Guest]

Thanks for the clarification PT!

[Guest]

The documentary is essentially complete, except for a possible commentary on the findings of the DNA study.

Sasky, Do you have any idea about a time line for the revelation? I'm pretty sure that everyone is practically holding their breath for the *Big day*! I am, and I so hope to hear about it here so that I can keep an eye out for the *big* event.

Will it be televised, or only on the internet?

It should be national *headline*news, IMVHO!

[Guest Sallaranda]

Nobody "in the know" has come forward about the Erickson/Standing relationship. All we have is speculation until Adrian decides to make a statement (or call a Bigfoot show) .

I still give him the benefit of the doubt personally. From everyone I've talked with, and everything I've read, Adrian Erickson is a stand up guy. I do question his milking the project for so long.

I'm still of the opinion he's probably waiting for Dr Ketchum's DNA paper. It's important to note that the "hype" can dry up just like the milk from a cow that has been milked too long. Alot of folks are getting past the point of caring I fear. It's getting past time to do something IMO. Chris B.

I don't know if the hype has exactly dried up. I think Erickson is waiting to start pushing this project until he knows the DNA evidence is done analysis. Why waste all his money now on advertising if his project won't be ready for public release for another 6 months? Best to start the advertising 2-3 months prior to the release. We know Erickson has money and has already made a trailer, so I expect full blown advertising and hype to start 2-3 months before the footage is released.

Sasky, Do you have any idea about a time line for the revelation? I'm pretty sure that everyone is practically holding their breath for the *Big day*! I am, and I so hope to hear about it here so that I can keep an eye out for the *big* event.

Will it be televised, or only on the internet?

It should be national *headline*news, IMVHO!

It's going to be a gradual process, in my opinion. I don't think we will suddenly wake up and notice that Adrian Erickson has divulged Grade A evidence of Bigfoot. Instead, there will be a long road of trailers, spoilers, "inside looks", leaked footage, etc. Then we will finally get the release of the final documentary. I am hoping that by the time the documentary does get released, that it will have the public's eyes and attention.

[dopelyrics]

Hi there,

Pragmatist Theorist, thanks for your post. It's really fascinating. I am unsure as to whether or not Bigfoot actually exists. But if he does, I can't help thinking it would be best for everyone if it was never proved that these animals existed. Leave them be.

Best regards,

Lee