Guest Posted February 3, 2011 Posted February 3, 2011 I thought it was pretty good, well made, and interesting.... My only problem was that due to competing TV interest in the house, (yes only 1 TV, imagine that), So I had to stay up til 1 A.M to watch the re-run. By 2:15/2:30 I was lookin for toothpicks to pry my eyelids open so i could stay awake....
Guest Posted February 3, 2011 Posted February 3, 2011 I was a little disappointed. It was almost like they took all of the different ideas from Monster Quest episodes on bf and put them all together. It is my impression that the Panel did not give a lot of credance to BF's east of the missippi in areas like Ga, WV, KY, Tenn, Arkansaw and Texas.
bipedalist Posted February 3, 2011 BFF Patron Posted February 3, 2011 ....or NC FL, despite having stated the escaped chimpanzee theory to speak for all skunk ape happenings over the years, decades and maybe last century?
Incorrigible1 Posted February 3, 2011 Posted February 3, 2011 I rather enjoyed it. It was entertaining and informative.
Guest ChrisBFRPKY Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 I liked the show pretty well. It had alot of reenactments and I always love to watch those. It did seem more of a round table discussion among the scholars rather than any concentration on any new field investigations. I agree with Bigfootnis though, it seems like the panel only considered the PNW as a possible habitat for the creatures. I think they're a little misinformed on that one. But I guess overall it was refeshing to see anything new to watch about Bigfoot. The witness interviews at the very first were fantastic, I liked all of them for truthfulness save one. Chris B.
Guest tracker Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 I liked the show pretty well. It had alot of reenactments and I always love to watch those. It did seem more of a round table discussion among the scholars rather than any concentration on any new field investigations. I agree with Bigfootnis though, it seems like the panel only considered the PNW as a possible habitat for the creatures. I think they're a little misinformed on that one. But I guess overall it was refeshing to see anything new to watch about Bigfoot. The witness interviews at the very first were fantastic, I liked all of them for truthfulness save one. Chris B. Was it the guy who said it moved like a ninja? Come on people it was made for tv and the gen pop. Not people already in the field or versed on the topic. I like those reenactments too. PNW is where the highest concentration of sightings are. Cool less people messing up the tracks in my neck of the woods.
Guest Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 The show lost it for me at the point where they glazed over Florida in one swift brush of the escaped chimp theory. Over, finished, gone, done, out. There were times during the show that Meldrum seemed pained that he was in a room of people suggesting and entertaining a theory that Sasquatch sightings were actually Native American shamans running around on a spiritual journey. The look on his face said to me that the check he was getting was definately not big enough. I could care less if Bigfoot is human or animal. I don't even know if it really exists, but what I do know is that it is not secretive shamans in the woods finding themselves. I would accept misidentified bears as a more plausible theory to the whole thing. Good grief!
steenburg Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 Thank you BobbyO for posting that clip from YouTube, they never bothered to send me a disk of the show like they said they were going to. I have to state here and now for what I have seen so far has really disappointed me. You see they used my file reports for the two Bridal Falls F.S.R. incidents which occurred 4 1/2 hours apart. Also my file on the hunter on the Ruby Creek F.S.R. incident. They did do a better job on that one as the witness himself was there at the spot reenacting his story. But as for the two incidents on Bridal Falls F.S.R. I have to wonder if they even bothered to read what I wrote or listen when we had the dozen or so phone conversations on what actually occurred?? What they did was so far removed from what actually happened, I almost did not recognize them. I don't get it they had my reports in detail but changed them so much its like completely different incidents? I should have known as this was not the first time some documentary disregarded the facts of an event and then changes things for silly reasons as to try and make them seem more exciting or what have you. But if Danger films ever ask for my help again on any documentary my answer will be no. Now I am going to write a strongly worded e-mail to the producers of this program and try to get some explanation as to why they didn't follow the facts of what occurred?? Thomas Steenburg
bipedalist Posted February 4, 2011 BFF Patron Posted February 4, 2011 ..I would accept misidentified bears as a more plausible theory to the whole thing.Good grief! ... Or perhaps, ungroomed, primal, naked hippies!
Guest COGrizzly Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 I could care less if Bigfoot is human or animal. I don't even know if it really exists, but what I do know is that it is not secretive shamans in the woods finding themselves. Good grief! Well, Poly...those **** secretive shamans are like frickin' mule deer or even maybe magpies they are so plentiful when ya go out in the woods....they're everywhere you turn! Every time I go to my local, secret campsite I got stinkin' shamans swarming me like Minnesota mesquetoes (sp)!
Guest Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 COGrizzly, here in NY we do not have a shaman problem. Why? Because they dismissed the east right after FL. The white tail deer in NY are like those shamans of the PNW. They can be spotted anywhere and everywhere. lol
BobbyO Posted February 4, 2011 SSR Team Posted February 4, 2011 Thank you BobbyO for posting that clip from YouTube, they never bothered to send me a disk of the show like they said they were going to. I have to state here and now for what I have seen so far has really disappointed me. You see they used my file reports for the two Bridal Falls F.S.R. incidents which occurred 4 1/2 hours apart. Also my file on the hunter on the Ruby Creek F.S.R. incident. They did do a better job on that one as the witness himself was there at the spot reenacting his story. But as for the two incidents on Bridal Falls F.S.R. I have to wonder if they even bothered to read what I wrote or listen when we had the dozen or so phone conversations on what actually occurred?? What they did was so far removed from what actually happened, I almost did not recognize them. I don't get it they had my reports in detail but changed them so much its like completely different incidents? I should have known as this was not the first time some documentary disregarded the facts of an event and then changes things for silly reasons as to try and make them seem more exciting or what have you. But if Danger films ever ask for my help again on any documentary my answer will be no. Now I am going to write a strongly worded e-mail to the producers of this program and try to get some explanation as to why they didn't follow the facts of what occurred?? Thomas Steenburg I did notice that too Tom actually, especially with regards to the 2 x Bridal Falls Reports. If you do get an explanation, please share.. Thanks..
Guest Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 (edited) I did notice that too Tom actually, especially with regards to the 2 x Bridal Falls Reports. If you do get an explanation, please share.. Thanks.. Ditto here Bobby O, thanks for putting that up. It answered a few questions I had. Pick up the show at a later date.. Chris, agree, the re-enactments were entertaining. I enjoyed the orchestra suspense music when the videophotog whipped the cameras around looking for that figure in the woods.. Just working off the 12 min clip via Henry May via Bobby O. Is it possible the shaman theory gets more people to believe in bigfoot? Because that would be an average idea the average person off the street would have something in common with ? What was the association between a busload of shaman and sasquatch ? Maybe someone could expand on that in a way it makes sense to me ? Edited February 4, 2011 by treeknocker
kitakaze Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 My thanks to Mr. May for posting the show to Youtube. I would have missed it otherwise. Some thoughts... - It was nice to see Meldrum and Mionczynski employing tracking dogs. I think if Bigfoot were a real species, tracking dogs should have led to a Bigfoot long ago. - They focused a lot on my neck of the woods - Vancouver Island. Interesting that the motorcross rider mentioned very ape-like features and affected a Patty impression while the Vancouver Island motorist had the very neanderthal human-like impression. - It's too bad the show recycled so much MonsterQuest footage. The Vancouver Island motorist is one example as you will see from the beginning of the following two videos... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2bhSlEl2B0 From 1:20... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mh365wBk1nc - The show largely ignored the fact that the majority of their reports were coming from the eastern side of North America. - They showed the Shawn Bannon Studiodrome hoax... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIIgGtpcG94 For more info google "kitakaze Shawn Bannon Studiodrome Bigfoot hoax." - There was not enough focus on hoaxing and I felt the hermit shaman idea was weak. One need only look to the alien abduction phenomenon to see the misdentifications, overactive imaginations, and hoaxing can create a widespread social construct. - Skepticism was rather token in its expression on the show. I would have loved to be at that round table for a much more focused discussion of the Bigfoot phenomenon. - Meldrum examining the Shipton cast reminded me of Meldrum examining Josh gates yeti cast for Destination Truth. All I could think is what won't this guy take as legitimate?... - They did the wrong side-by-side for the comparison to female Bigfoot art from Patterson's 1966 book, IMO... vs
Guest Posted February 4, 2011 Posted February 4, 2011 (edited) Beat me to it Kit, 9 parts to the show via Mr Henry May and a big thank you from me to him as well. It was good to see scientist Bill happy talking about fossils in the end..I felt bad for him, he looked a little frazzled there lol. I enjoyed the Orang Pendak information and the comments regarding gorilla behavior and the comparison of the hair coloration and flow between Patty and silverbacks. I, like others it sounds, hoped for more discussion regarding some behavior and dramatic situations. Nice to hear another gorilla specialist make some comparisons with the old S3 (sasQ stick structure). Charmin I know you can buy in stores, usually grocery stores, some of the stop and go gas shops have them too.. The Chapman case was a classic and that was well illustrated.. the squatch at the window was a recreation that got the attention. Appreciated Cindy D participation along with Kathy S. The Patty film continues flowing nicely along into tomorrow. Nice to see.. looking for more in the future. I wonder if the point of the film was to simplify with easier acceptable possibilities to get the general public thinking hmm maybe there is something to this ? The Vancouver Isl series was good. I found some flaws with the fossil record, or at least what sounded like conflicts and found it interesting, the head they put on Miss X. It was like a monk head on a human body There are my two pennies. Oh yeah, got a much better hope for heidelbergensis now, but not sure what that means. Bigger bones than us, more muscular than us, hair remains a question and six feet six with the odds are there are taller is interesting. Maybe just maybe there is something significantly larger than that candidate.. Edited February 4, 2011 by treeknocker
Recommended Posts