Mission Hoax

[Huntster]

I'm getting from this that you think it odd that someone named Quesnel would be living in Quesnel. Is that it?

Nope. I think it's interesting that somebody named Quesnel lives near the community of Quesnel, and that this particular fellow named Quesnel decided to participate in a hoax to deceive a bus load of people for no apparent financial gain whatsoever, then call a radio talk show to boast about his achievement.

I find that very interesting, and I'd like to know if this mental giant has any ties to influential people in the area.

I live in Kingston. There are thirteen listings in the phone book showing Kingston as a last name. Spooky or what?

Not really, just like there are probably lots of Smiths living in Fort Smith, Arkansas. But, then, Kingston and Smith are fairly common names in North America, aren't they? And I don't know of any Smiths or Kingstons who had the intellectual acumen to don a monkey suit and parade around in front of a bus load of people on the side of the road.........where an armed motorist might easily also show up.

I grew up not far from a village in Nova Scotia, named for one of the first residents to that specific area, (JohnG - 1784), who has the same last name I do. Nearly 200 years later, A woman with the same last name purchased the house JohnG had lived in there. It's located on a road with the same last name, not far from a lake with the same last name. Nothing unusual about it.

I would agree with that.

However, did a JohnG in the area claim to have paraded about on the side of the road for a bus load of innocent riders?

I thought you said it was illegal to hunt/shoot/kill a sasquatch?

It is. Moreover, if a real, live sasquatch was shot and killed, it might easily be ruled as human enough for the shooter to be charged with homicide.

However, there is also a person who participates on this very forum who claims to be a biology professor, and who actually claims to have lectured USFWS personnel on the topic of sasquatch, and who has written about his doubts that somebody who shoots a sasquatch would be legally prosecuted. As a hunter and outdoorsman who knows of hunting violations and how Alaska officials deal with such, I tend to disagree with the kind Professor.

So, ultimately, I don't know if I'd shoot one. Like Mr. Quesnel & company, once you do something, you own it. If I shoot a sasquatch, I'll be known forever forward as the hero or sorry ******* who killed a sasquatch.

[Guest RayG]

Nope. I think it's interesting that somebody named Quesnel lives near the community of Quesnel, and that this particular fellow named Quesnel decided to participate in a hoax to deceive a bus load of people for no apparent financial gain whatsoever, then call a radio talk show to boast about his achievement.

I find that very interesting, and I'd like to know if this mental giant has any ties to influential people in the area.

People hoax for a number of reasons, financial gain might be one, might not, and admitting how something was done isn't necessarily 'boasting' about it. What's the purpose of the 'mental giant' comment? Loaded words, perhaps?

And I don't know of any Smiths or Kingstons who had the intellectual acumen to don a monkey suit and parade around in front of a bus load of people on the side of the road.........where an armed motorist might easily also show up...

However, did a JohnG in the area claim to have paraded about on the side of the road for a bus load of innocent riders?

Apparently Quesnel wasn't parading around anywhere in a monkey suit. Nor do I see any evidence that he claimed he did. It was supposedly Ken Ticehurst who donned the costume.

RayG

[Huntster]

Huntster, on 29 January 2011 - 04:31 PM, said:

Nope. I think it's interesting that somebody named Quesnel lives near the community of Quesnel, and that this particular fellow named Quesnel decided to participate in a hoax to deceive a bus load of people for no apparent financial gain whatsoever, then call a radio talk show to boast about his achievement.

I find that very interesting, and I'd like to know if this mental giant has any ties to influential people in the area.

People hoax for a number of reasons, financial gain might be one, might not, and admitting how something was done isn't necessarily 'boasting' about it.

So what was the purported motive behind this supposed hoax? There was obviously some cost. They supposedly rented a suit, then altered it, which should have resulted in them buying the suit. There were bus tickets to buy. Gas to burn placing the suited man.

There was the potential for this to go very, very wrong. Somebody could have been seriously hurt or killed.

And I don't know of any Smiths or Kingstons who had the intellectual acumen to don a monkey suit and parade around in front of a bus load of people on the side of the road.........where an armed motorist might easily also show up...

However, did a JohnG in the area claim to have paraded about on the side of the road for a bus load of innocent riders?

Apparently Quesnel wasn't parading around anywhere in a monkey suit. Nor do I see any evidence that he claimed he did. It was supposedly Ken Ticehurst who donned the costume.

Is there a community named Ticehurst in the area?.................

Edited February 3, 2011 by masterbarber
Removed language that could be considered disrespectful

[Guest RayG]

So what was the purported motive behind this supposed hoax?

"It was a good practical joke, we thought it might fool a few people.." -- Ken Ticehurst

There was obviously some cost. They supposedly rented a suit, then altered it, which should have resulted in them buying the suit. There were bus tickets to buy. Gas to burn placing the suited man.

I sometimes wonder the same things when I hear about expeditions to the top of Mt. Everest. They have to buy their equipment, fly over there, endure miserable weather, and risk life and limb to do something that I consider pointless. So you climbed to the top of Everest, and only lost two toes to frostbite instead of three? Whoopie for you. To me, it means absolutely nothing, but to the person climbing Mt. Everest/planning a hoax, it obviously means something. Why do people continue to hoax crop circles, staying up late at night, stomping around in farmer's fields, for no recognition or pay? I'd have no interest in doing that, but others do.

There was the potential for this to go very, very wrong. Somebody could have been seriously hurt or killed.

You mean like when a 7-year-old attempts to pilot a plane cross-country, and three people died? Or when a teenager attempted to circumnavigate the globe in a sailboat by herself, and had to be rescued? I think both were stupid stunts, and in the first case ended up in three needless deaths.

It sounds like the Mission boys had planned out the hoax quite thoroughly, and I'm guessing the moment someone jumped off the bus with a raised firearm, the hoaxers would have loudly intervened.

Well, then, it would appear that Ken Ticehurst is just a bit more stupid than Quesnel.

Apparently they were smart enough to pull off the hoax.

RayG

[Huntster]

There was obviously some cost. They supposedly rented a suit, then altered it, which should have resulted in them buying the suit. There were bus tickets to buy. Gas to burn placing the suited man.

I sometimes wonder the same things when I hear about expeditions to the top of Mt. Everest. They have to buy their equipment, fly over there, endure miserable weather, and risk life and limb to do something that I consider pointless. So you climbed to the top of Everest, and only lost two toes to frostbite instead of three? Whoopie for you. To me, it means absolutely nothing, but to the person climbing Mt. Everest/planning a hoax, it obviously means something.

And, again, just what is that?

When I go on my own expeditions, I try to bring something back. Something physical. You can see it. Touch it. Likely eat it.

But climbing a mountain, even though dangerous like hoaxing a sasquatch event with pure strangers on the open road, has just a touch more sanity about it. I do like to hike on occasion, just to be outside, and I've climbed some damned tall mountains just to say that I did. In fact, I've been to the top of the tallest mountain in the Lower 48. It was tough, but really neat.

I've been shot, too. By fellow hunters once.

It hurts. Really bad. I'm not going to risk that for the meager returns of pulling "a good practical joke", or trying to "fool a few people".

Why do people continue to hoax crop circles, staying up late at night, stomping around in farmer's fields, for no recognition or pay?

I don't know. Seems pretty dumb to me.

But it doesn't appear to be as dangerous as donning a monkey suit on the side of a North American highway. Especially if you choose a docile farmer's field.

I'd have no interest in doing that, but others do.

And I consider them, too, as lacking in much intellectual acumen.

But they're not risking their lives like Mr. Ticehurst.

[Incorrigible1]

I didn't hear a "harumph" outta that guy!

[Guest]

So a few things bother me about this supposed hoax, sorry if these have already been answered...

1. Who was the planted person on the bus?

2. Can it be verified?

3. Will they admit they were in on it?

4. Where is the suit?

5. And was it really used for said hoax?

6. How do we know the suit wasn't made after the report?

7. Where are the casts to make the foot prints?

8. How did a bus load of people see a large animal cross the road and according to the original story claim it was at least 7' tall and 300lbs but it was supposedly a 5'11" man in a suit? One person maybe but a bus load?

9. And how could the driver have mistaken a 5'11" man in a suit for a real animal that he also claimed was 7' tall and about 300lbs?

[Guest RayG]

So a few things bother me about this supposed hoax, sorry if these have already been answered...

1. Who was the planted person on the bus?

Don Ticehurst, a passenger on the bus, and one of the co-conspirators, was utilized as a phony witness to excite the other passengers.

2. Can it be verified?

Probably. We have the names of the four hoaxers, plus the name of the police office who investigated.

3. Will they admit they were in on it?

They already did so in the radio interview.

4. Where is the suit?

No idea.

5. And was it really used for said hoax?

Don't know.

6. How do we know the suit wasn't made after the report?

We don't, but apparently after the boys revealed it was a hoax, an independent investigation was conducted, and the conclusion was that the pranksters were telling the truth.

7. Where are the casts to make the foot prints?

Don't know.

8. How did a bus load of people see a large animal cross the road and according to the original story claim it was at least 7' tall and 300lbs but it was supposedly a 5'11" man in a suit? One person maybe but a bus load?

That's how our brains work. We can be notoriously inaccurate witnesses.

9. And how could the driver have mistaken a 5'11" man in a suit for a real animal that he also claimed was 7' tall and about 300lbs?

Because his brain works the same as the other people on the bus?

RayG

[masterbarber]

This thread is closed until futher notice. The topic is not titled "petty bickering with insinuations about member motives and intellectual absence". It's unfortunate that members, who are trying to participate in a civil discussion, have to be subjected to this.

[masterbarber]

I'm reopening this thread because I think there is still room for some good, RESPECTFUL exchange of information. You'll find that some of the posts have been edited and/or removed due to forum violations and/or responses that no longer make sense due to a post removal. It is not the intent of any staff member on this forum to impede the exchange of information between members. Having said that, we all realize when enough is enough and we must take action.

You have my personal apology that this effort took as long as it did, due to internet connection issues on my part.

Please keep it civil and above all avoid the personal attacks, insinuations and bickering. Your prompt attention is appreciated, as always.

[MagniAesir]

So a few things bother me about this supposed hoax, sorry if these have already been answered...

1. Who was the planted person on the bus?

2. Can it be verified?

3. Will they admit they were in on it?

4. Where is the suit?

5. And was it really used for said hoax?

6. How do we know the suit wasn't made after the report?

7. Where are the casts to make the foot prints?

8. How did a bus load of people see a large animal cross the road and according to the original story claim it was at least 7' tall and 300lbs but it was supposedly a 5'11" man in a suit? One person maybe but a bus load?

9. And how could the driver have mistaken a 5'11" man in a suit for a real animal that he also claimed was 7' tall and about 300lbs?

Please read the link in my first post, it will answer some of your questions.

As I stated in one of my posts, there is one cast made by John Green in the Mission museum. At present the museum is open 1 day a week (Friday 2 to 6).

If/when they expand their hours in the spring I will attempt to post a clear picture of it.

Also if you search you will see that some of the people on the bus (Byrne I believe their name was, I will have to check) stated right away that they thought it was a guy in a suit.

How does someone turn a 5'11"guy in a suit to 7' feet, probably the same way that many 400 to 500lbs bears become 200 to 250lbs when caught/shot. The bus driver was a Sasquatch enthusiast and his mind may have filled in some of the details.