Erickson Project

[Guest]

Susie, there has been a bit of a witch hunt going on over Paulides by some that is undeserving. Much of it stems from a single comment he made to Mike Rugg a few yrs ago. Was there 'history' between the two? I don't know. I'm sure they are both good people too, having never met either one. Then when DP simply looked into MK Davis claims, well there was another little linch mob, much of it seemed motived by the first incident. But all he really did was INVESTIGATE because that's what police detectives are trained to do. Instead he was branded as being in on MK's claims. I tried to point out that he was merely investigating it at CM, but my post and I found out others, weren't allowed. That was the last time I posted there I believe. I don't like it when the deck gets loaded.

Don't discount his work in Tribal Bigfoot because of the old lynch mob methods that go on in this field Susie. And after so many years on the job, anyone will have a few scrapes on their uniform. I'm sure any officer here will tell you that they have faced dilemmas in the field that put them in difficult situations.

[Guest]

I believe there is only one scientist publishing findings, and she is willing to risk it all. She started out a BF skeptic, but now she is 100% that BF exist, at least in the Pacific NW.

Peer review is done blind. No one knows who they are, only the journal publisher. No one's going to find out who they are. It's low risk for them.

Back when my dad was in academia *everyone* posted their names with their research.

Without names how can any of this be verified or acknowledged then?

Do they test the hairs and other stuff they may have and just post their findings without their names attached to it, or what?

I'm sorry that I'm confused ( It's okay, this is not the first time I've been confused about how this is being handled) but I do have a college education in Nursing, and understand how important it is to keep your name and work results being related *only* with research being done with the highest integrity so your name is not tarnished.

Is this true regarding the BF research being done? It's going to have to stand up to the highest standards or I fear no one will believe it.

[Guest]

I dunno. Shouldn't a skeptic be saying "I don't know if BF exists."? To me, a scofftic says, "BF doesn't exist." What's so scientific about that? Any skeptic would be excited by proof of BF gets extra special super points in my book. I'm thinking that the scofftics will be furious, or they will dig in their heels.

I guess I don't care though. BF exists, I'm sure of that, and we will prove it at some point, hopefully before I am did. So we will win, and they will lose.

I am quite certain that BF is not a relict great ape. What it is, I am not so sure, but I believe it is in the Homo line somehow. BF is a man.

Shout out to the skeptics who will leap for joy if and when BF is discovered.

Other then that, How was the play Mrs. Lincoln? Yikes!

[Guest LAL]

Don't discount his work in Tribal Bigfoot because of the old lynch mob methods that go on in this field Susie. And after so many years on the job, anyone will have a few scrapes on their uniform. I'm sure any officer here will tell you that they have faced dilemmas in the field that put them in difficult situations.

Is this a witch hunt? I'm boycotting Davis too, just in case he writes a book.

Paulides needs to publicly disassociate himself from the "massacre" nonsense. Has he done that?

[Guest]

Actually, somewhere yes, he did say he was only investigating it and that he wasn't initiating it. Where that was I read it, I'll be darned if I can recall that today nor was it something that the critics shared further. Regardless, I see nothing wrong with anyone investigating anything. That is what investigators do, and that just happens to be what he does by profession. MK has also been around and involved in a whole lot of bigfoot activities through the years. He also did some exemplary work on the PG film. Everyone realizes this. He still has good relations with Ms. Patterson as far as I know too. So what if a person has other theories as well? This is a free country, doesn't mean a person should be boycotted because he says something that people don't like. The truth will pan out in the end. Its always important that people are heard out if they believe something because even if he isn't right, it could shed light on other things unrealized.

Oh and MK also once said that bigfoot were human and everyone blasted him for that. Remember? Well this seems to be where the truth is heading with DNA now too.

Edited June 10, 2011 by PragmaticTheorist

[Guest]

For me personally, arrogant jerk or not, i don't particulary care..

I also fail to see what him beating up a Drug Dealer too has to do with anything where BF Research is concerned..

Everyone has Skeletons in their Closet, some more than others..

He writes excellent Books & he has my respect in this field for at least getting out there in this Field & attempting to get an answer, & who knows he just might have done, i have my fingers crossed for him & will be the first to congratulate him if he does..

& by the way Suzi, don't worry about your Books by him, they are superb..

Why Thank You! I thought that he was a hoaxer but I'll try the book I had planned to buy and I'll let you know what I think about it.

[Guest LAL]

Oh and MK also once said that bigfoot were human and everyone blasted him for that. Remember? Well this seems to be where the truth is heading with DNA now too.

MK was seeing braids, bone Scűncies and a stick in Patty's hand indicating culture.

I was impressed with Dr. Nelson's results with the DNA (non-replicabable though they be) but I didn't think two neucleotides found in chimpanzees sounded very human. I've read somewhere that the sequence is like that of some First Nations people but in that case the person must have had a very large and very injured foot.

Have the DNA results been published? No? Being in the Homo line doesn't make them "human", IMO. I like the use of fire, clothing and a sophisticated toolkit with my humans.

[Guest LAL]

Why Thank You! I thought that he was a hoaxer but I'll try the book I had planned to buy and I'll let you know what I think about it.

I don't think anyone's said he's a hoaxer; I just don't like his - or anyone's - apparent support of the Bluff Creek "massacre".

The Hoopa Project got good reviews, mostly (see the 3 star review), but it's one I'd get from the library if I wanted to read it. My money's on Green, literally, since I've bought three reprints of his books so far (my originals perished in a house fire) and I'm currently on Bayanov. I have interviews with Hoopas and other indigenous people on my DVDs and there are a number of stories of encounters with First Nations people such as the Chapmans and Muchalat Charlie throughout my books.

I spent most of the day immersed in Tsalagi culture at Okonaluftee Village. No, I didn't ask. Last time I asked an Aniyunwiya what they call them he kind of shrugged and said, "Bigfoot".

[Guest LAL]

Correction: Muchalat Harry. I read too much, I read too fast...............

[Guest]

If you are talking about believers who turn skeptic, happens all the time. We don't get excited about silly people like that. People have a right to their silly notions.

Well..... silly me!

[BobbyO]

Correction: Muchalat Harry. I read too much, I read too fast...............

Type too fast LAL, you type too fast...

[Guest Silver Fox]

Oh come on! Get with the program! Here' I'll think for you. Imagine a guy named Frankie Farnsworth with the exact same project except he hadn't seen one. Same amount of respect Erickson get's - all that. I think if Franke made the announcement I wrote up believers would skewer him mercilessly, calling him a Biscardi ect..ect...I'd bet on it.

In fact, within months after Ericksons stuff and the DNA come out, Erickson will be the new believer whipping boy.

Remember I predicted it here - I will.

Are you saying that it is lamentable that good researchers are accused of being hoaxers? Indeed it is. Everyone who has ever shot a BF video or photo or reported any evidence whatsoever has been called a hoaxer or a liar by skeptics, scofftics and believers.

Personally, I'm really tired of it. All this calling everyone in the field liars and hoaxers all the time. It's discouraging and disgusting.

And it's not just you guys who do it. People on our side do it constantly.

Obviously, people have a right to change their mind. Believing in BF is very difficult and trying because of all the humiliation and abuse you get from scofftics and also due to the stress and uncertainty you get from believing in something that never gets discovered. After years of waiting and watching hoax and hoax, a lot just throw in the towel and go skeptic. Who could blame them? It's human nature, but I hope I will be stronger than that.

How many of you skeptics/scofftics ever have moments when you actually believe in BF or wonder if it really exists after all? I would say almost none.

But you would be surprised how many of us believers have many moments of doubting. You guys portray us as delusional kooks, but let me tell, many times, I start thinking just like you do, that there can't be such a thing as a BF. Even a lot of us believers vacillate between belief, skepticism and denial.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Silver Fox

[BobbyO]

Are you saying that it is lamentable that good researchers are accused of being hoaxers? Indeed it is. Everyone who has ever shot a BF video or photo or reported any evidence whatsoever has been called a hoaxer or a liar by skeptics, scofftics and believers.

Personally, I'm really tired of it. All this calling everyone in the field liars and hoaxers all the time. It's discouraging and disgusting.

And it's not just you guys who do it. People on our side do it constantly.

Obviously, people have a right to change their mind. Believing in BF is very difficult and trying because of all the humiliation and abuse you get from scofftics and also due to the stress and uncertainty you get from believing in something that never gets discovered. After years of waiting and watching hoax and hoax, a lot just throw in the towel and go skeptic. Who could blame them? It's human nature, but I hope I will be stronger than that.

How many of you skeptics/scofftics ever have moments when you actually believe in BF or wonder if it really exists after all? I would say almost none.

But you would be surprised how many of us believers have many moments of doubting. You guys portray us as delusional kooks, but let me tell, many times, I start thinking just like you do, that there can't be such a thing as a BF. Even a lot of us believers vacillate between belief, skepticism and denial.

If i'm not mistaken it's not just believeres who have doubts on the Pro side, it's witnesses too, people who have seen with their own eyes..

I've read it on here numerous times..

I guess that's bordering on questioning your own sanity & can't be a good place to be..

[Guest Silver Fox]

If i'm not mistaken it's not just believers who have doubts on the Pro side, it's witnesses too, people who have seen with their own eyes..

I've read it on here numerous times..

I guess that's bordering on questioning your own sanity & can't be a good place to be..

Wow, yes, I was starting to wonder if witnesses have doubts of their own. How painful.

[Guest tracker]

I can understand doubts with brief sightings and when witnesses are pressed to conform back into the fold. They use to say that to about sea monsters not existing. Turns out there are giant squids, great whites and orcas in the vast oceans. Who knew? Ah the fisherman and sailors did way before the rest of the world including the scientific community.

same difference JMO tracker,

Edited June 10, 2011 by tracker