Guest BFSleuth Posted July 15, 2012 Posted July 15, 2012 It seems that Outstanding Productions' web site I reviewed a year or two ago might be defunct, or maybe I simply can't find it again. However, I seem to recall that the web site I looked at a while back noted that their production company had a range of capabilities, which included special effects, make up, etc. If anyone else remembers this or perhaps can find current information that would be helpful.
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted July 15, 2012 Posted July 15, 2012 (edited) They are completely fake He has been on blog websites posting as other people trying to gain leverage. His ip address was proof of that. Edited July 15, 2012 by OntarioSquatch
Guest Posted July 15, 2012 Posted July 15, 2012 +1 Cisco. I'm not tripping over myself to defend Standing by any means, but I don't know that he's a hoaxer. This thread (and others) has described in detail who the "known" hoaxers are, and I'm not so sure we should be flippantly passing this information around like it's common knowledge. In many uninformed circles Patterson himself is a "known" hoaxer, although it drives me crazy when I hear someone say "wasn't that video proven to be a hoax a long time ago?" or "those footprints were proven to be fake" or "Patterson is a known hoaxer"... there are people who simply believe this to be true because they have always heard it to be true. So now picture this- I'm young guy who caught an episode of "Finding Bigfoot" or something on History or something like that, I take an interest in Bigfoot, and decide I'm going to read up on it. Whoa, here are some cool videos! Let's see what they have to say about it on BFF... oh, they're all fakes. Every single one of them. They were "proven" fakes long ago, apparently. That PGF must be fake too, I've always heard it was a proven hoax too. No opportunity to allow my curiosity to grow, no opportunity to actually learn anything about it, no opportunity to make up my own mind on anything. The whole thing is stupid and these people are a bunch of kooks. Or, even worse, if I do happen to take some excellent, top-notch footage of an animal myself, there's NO WAY I'm releasing it and willingly feeding myself to the wolves that are the Bigfoot Community. I see the vitriol that accompanies any mention of the names Standing, Biscardi, Dyer, etc., and there's NO WAY I'm adding my own name to that list by showing my footage to the very community that is so DESPERATE to be vindicated! This is why I see these bash sessions as more destructive than helpful. I get the sentiment that hoaxers do not add anything of value to Bigfoot-dom, but bashing them and proclaiming them all to be hoaxers "just because" doesn't help either. If one is interested in the subject, one will come up with his or her own criteria for determining "real", "fake", "hoax", or "genuine"; at least for things that have not ACTUALLY been proven to be a hoax (Georgia, I'm looking in your direction). Then we can all DISCUSS our different opinions if we so choose to. I'd say that's a much better way to approach the subject of footage, pictures, and hoaxes.
bipedalist Posted July 15, 2012 BFF Patron Posted July 15, 2012 (edited) He owned a movie production company at one time remember? I imagine that he still does. He has lots of practice, a cadre of actors and producers, some of which were outed as family members. The ingredients were there. He got the press exposure with his protection effort, the rest is self-evident. For more, try ghosttheory expose and SquatchDetectives expose on the net for historical and evidential accounts of my statements above. Or, you could just payup for PMP and see the lengthy threads where the exposure was rife and the dude busted. +1 Cisco. I'm not tripping over myself to defend Standing by any means, but I don't know that he's a hoaxer. No opportunity to allow my curiosity to grow, no opportunity to actually learn anything about it, no opportunity to make up my own mind on anything. This is why I see these bash sessions as more destructive than helpful. Hardly a bash session, and plenty of opportunity for learning with citations I should think?! As there are those whose posts lead to central repositories that collate large amounts of information, even larger than the archives of the BFF perhaps to enable people who are not lazy to reach their own conclusions since some information has been conveniently removed from the net?! Guess I'll be more specific re: ghost theory and SquatchDetective's Hall of Shame Edited July 15, 2012 by bipedalist
Guest Peter O. Posted July 15, 2012 Posted July 15, 2012 They are completely fake He has been on blog websites posting as other people trying to gain leverage. His ip address was proof of that. I agree. What is this thing? The Cowardly Lion?
Guest wudewasa Posted July 15, 2012 Posted July 15, 2012 (edited) Wow, Timothy Treadwell flashback! Oh wait, that comment might be construed as a bashing against someone that behaves strangely and has no data to back up his claims. WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH! Edited to say that anyone that stands in the cold rain without proper rainment is a red flag to me. Edited July 15, 2012 by wudewasa
Guest Posted July 16, 2012 Posted July 16, 2012 I don't believe in Todd Standings videos; the point I was making was not about him specifically. I was only making a point about the way an outsider might view the Bigfoot community. If anyone thinks the appropriate response is to be condescending and ridiculing instead of giving what I said even a moment's consideration, then that says much more about yourself than it does about me. Don't worry guys, I love it here and I can take it!
Sasfooty Posted July 16, 2012 Posted July 16, 2012 Yep. All that ridiculing & condescending gives the whole bigfoot community a bad name.
Guest BFSleuth Posted July 16, 2012 Posted July 16, 2012 If one is interested in the subject, one will come up with his or her own criteria for determining "real", "fake", "hoax", or "genuine"; at least for things that have not ACTUALLY been proven to be a hoax (Georgia, I'm looking in your direction). Then we can all DISCUSS our different opinions if we so choose to. I'd say that's a much better way to approach the subject of footage, pictures, and hoaxes. +1 to your post, especially for this point. I for one do get a little impatient when there seems to be a consensus opinion that is formed more by broad statements rather than having an honest look at evidence or facts. We sometimes see this in particular when looking at new video or new images, with short opinions of "This is fake", etc. without any apparent review of why they formed this opinion. I much prefer to see someone explain why they reached their conclusion, because the path to the opinion is more important than arriving at the opinion.... IMHO... I will say this for the BFF, the level of discourse seems to be on an improved level since the advent of BFF 2.0, with more critical analysis and sharing of ideas than before.
Guest wudewasa Posted July 16, 2012 Posted July 16, 2012 Yep. All that ridiculing & condescending gives the whole bigfoot community a bad name. Hoaxers give the bigfoot community a bad name. 1
Guest wudewasa Posted July 16, 2012 Posted July 16, 2012 A hoax is a hoax, portrayed on us folks So who can reveal this hoax on folks? Unless those folks who dispell the hoax Are the ones who won't be led!
Recommended Posts