The Motivation To Hoax

[Guest BFSleuth]

BFSleuth: I have been sitting here reading the comment by you that I quoted above... You're right. On all counts.

I see this alleged hoaxing as a kind of turning point for our community. Before this situation a known hoaxer would be run out. Now, it seems like there is a call to allow the hoaxers and trash the researchers.. But, in this particular situation, if this is a hoax (and I am willing to bet my life it is) I still don't know what we were all supposed to learn? There had to be an "end goal" - especially if the hoaxer was/is a part of this community.

Following the bread crumbs in the trackway thread it seems to me that the end goal was to have the track declared as valid by the "pillars" of bigfoot research, then come out with a documentary showing how they fooled all the "experts". Remember the little snippet in the thread about "wondering" whether he was being watched by trail cams while he was at the trackway site?

I understand the Bigfoot Times newsletter will have an article outing the hoaxer in the new issue.

[Guest]

You could very well be right BFSleuth. At this point, nothing would surprise me anymore.

Edited to add - When does that come out? Should be an interesting read.

Edited October 23, 2012 by Melissa

[Guest]

JohnCartwright - none of that was directed at you. I haven't read much by you for a long time. I don't know why you thought I directed anything at you.

Criticism should come from those privy to information. Not from second guessers. Only hoaxers would know things we are not releasing. There is only a few people that have all the information we collected.

I presented my observations, my pictures, my story... and at the time i did so, I saw nothing wrong with the tracks... The trackway had a few problems and the story was only relayed to me verbally, and so posted "Yes they are Real".

Trying to shame a person into doing what you want them to do or say what you want them to say is an old tactic, recognized for what it is. Ignored.

I presented clear images of the tracks and trackway and my story, for free to all the members here. Thought it would be nice to see and read about. That is what people can judge, of me. Thom and Cliff came almost a week later, casting tracks that were passed over, less than desired. Some that we cast, i hear, were cast again, even though the casting process destroys the originals integrity. What they saw at the site is undoubtedly different than what Scott, I and Derek saw. I assure you of that.

The reasons given so far from members that these were obvious fakes have yet to provide adequate explanation to their exceptions. I provided a picture of the cut bank and everyone can see the underlying content of the soils in that area. Depth of track was probably more about what it stepped on under the top soil than the weight applied to it. Stompers must have a person nearby, close enough to leave their own tracks. The track edges showed naturalistic curvatures, no monolithic edges. The step and stride naturally varied in length through out the trackway. Look, even Peter Byrne claimed to have come to the conclusion that these were obviously made by those barefoot looking rubber running shoes.

You are all entitled to your own opinions. Just as everyone else is. But that is all it is. An opinion. You weren't there, others were. If I wasn't involved at all with this, I would side with the ones who ave the most information. Information is better to use than shame.

[ohiobill]

Well whether you realize it or not, that is what it sounds like you are arguing for. Well learned and well earned? Who will decide when they have "learned" or "earned" enough? Yes. And in most circles - as soon as someone is out money - it can be called fraud.

What I am saying is that when you get lemons make lemonade. Use bad experiences to improve, get back up on the horse, etc. What you are hearing is not what I am saying.

Nope, but I bet they don't pat the hoaxer on the back and say "Hey, great job!!" In most professions - hoaxing can lead to a whole host of problems - financial and criminal.

In most cases that I've seen they learn a lesson and continue on a little wiser than before. They will have to decide when they've learned enough - as we've discussed repeatedly today it's impossible to control someone else's actions. If anyone feels they have the grounds to sue for damages I say go for it if they want to - I don't think it's a good idea and I think your bosses would agree w/me.

Interesting - again great examples of "hoaxing" that can lead to time away from home in a nice room with bars and/or big fines. Doctors can even lose their license to practice if they are found to be over prescribing. Using the example of a lawyer - really doesn't count - lawyers are paid to do the job whether they believe the person or not. That is the way the law works.

Hoaxing bigfoot prints is not a crime and feeble attempts to liken it to such make no sense. If your para-legal background says otherwise please cite the precedent. Yes, social workers, lawyers, and Dr's can get in trouble either way so they use their best judgement. They all get paid either way so I don't see any reason to seperate their work from lawyers - that is the way the world works. I expect nothing more (or less) from an unpaid but honest bigfoot researcher.

Yes, some lawyers have left practice. I have seen it happen. There are some attorneys that do have a conscious and practice other types of law.

Some social workers and Dr's have switched specialties as well to avoid dealing w/unsavory people. I know some bigfoot researchers have switched camps because of dishonest dealings as well. The world is full of liars which only makes preparing for hoaxes MORE prudent - not less so.

I agree with you on the first part of your comment. But, I learned an awful lot in College - and not once did they feel the need to deceive myself or classmates. They talked to me like I was a person capable of understanding English. They must have been pretty sure I would get it (or not) based on their instruction and not deception. It is possible you know.

I guarantee you right now, the only thing people are learning is - you can't even trust people in your own community. That is sad.

I'm glad we agree on something at least. I too learned a lot in college - some of it deals directly with this thread and how to avoid fooling myself or being fooled when conducting a study. I still remember it and have put it to use in both my professional and personal life. A key point I was taught was that even "good" people will lie to you - sometimes in an effort to "help" you in your job. Regardless, the lies have to be winnowed out prior to getting into the study results if possible or they will negatively impact the reliability of the study. You can focus on how sad it makes you or you can focus on doing the best job possible in spite of the lies/hoaxes. Which path do you think will produce the best results?

[Guest]

Ohiobill said:

What I am saying is that when you get lemons make lemonade. Use bad experiences to improve, get back up on the horse, etc. What you are hearing is not what I am saying.

You are not hearing what I am saying. There is NO lesson to be learned -- why? Because the person(s) responsible for this are not talking............. You can't learn from someone if they refuse to tell you why or how..

Well there will be a lesson learned - and as usual those who care about this field of research will go on. There may be big changes though whether some like it or not. I did see your other comments - but let me say this - I am not a moderator or administrator on this board - what they decide and the rules they make are theirs. I will not get into a discussion about what should or should not happen - but other researchers should have enough information to decide whether they want to associate with someone who would do such a thing.

Hoaxing bigfoot prints is not a crime and feeble attempts to liken it to such make no sense. If your para-legal background says otherwise please cite the precedent. Yes, social workers, lawyers, and Dr's can get in trouble either way so they use their best judgement. They all get paid either way so I don't see any reason to seperate their work from lawyers - that is the way the world works. I expect nothing more (or less) from an unpaid but honest bigfoot researcher.

Okay, first my thoughts are "simplistic" and now "feeble"? Wow.. LOL. Actually - I never said it was a crime, so I have no idea what you're talking about. I said - when money becomes involved in a hoaxing situation (outside this field of research) - it can be a crime. Fraud is a crime. Maybe I wasn't clear.

No one has ever pushed the issue of "hoaxing" in this field of research legally... Maybe that will change some day.

My path is my own. I have faith that the people in this community are smart - and won't stand for this being the new "status quo"..

Edited October 23, 2012 by Melissa

[Guest]

Yes Mulder, they were taken in as evidenced by their posts.

Not true.

What won't help is them not learning from their mistakes and you continuing to claim they made no mistakes.

Oh they learned, and said so: they learned not to say ANYthing that might be twisted out of context by a Skeptic with an agenda.

In no way is that the case. I believe you are wrong in the way you apply those methods.

So objectivity is "wrong application", but assuming people are liars is "proper application"...got it.

Yeah researchers are not allowed to get excited or be human. We must be machines of unfailing logic. Skeptics what are your restrictions?

None, as their posts clearly show, here and elsewhere.

Following the bread crumbs in the trackway thread it seems to me that the end goal was to have the track declared as valid by the "pillars" of bigfoot research, then come out with a documentary showing how they fooled all the "experts". Remember the little snippet in the thread about "wondering" whether he was being watched by trail cams while he was at the trackway site?

I understand the Bigfoot Times newsletter will have an article outing the hoaxer in the new issue.

Hopefully along with his co-consipirators.

I am heartsick at all the vitriol directed ad Derekfoot and DDA while not a single cross word is said by any Skeptic about the honor-less hoaxers.

[Guest]

JohnCartwright - none of that was directed at you. I haven't read much by you for a long time. I don't know why you thought I directed anything at you.

Criticism should come from those privy to information. Not from second guessers. Only hoaxers would know things we are not releasing. There is only a few people that have all the information we collected.

I presented my observations, my pictures, my story... and at the time i did so, I saw nothing wrong with the tracks... The trackway had a few problems and the story was only relayed to me verbally, and so posted "Yes they are Real".

Trying to shame a person into doing what you want them to do or say what you want them to say is an old tactic, recognized for what it is. Ignored.

I presented clear images of the tracks and trackway and my story, for free to all the members here. Thought it would be nice to see and read about. That is what people can judge, of me. Thom and Cliff came almost a week later, casting tracks that were passed over, less than desired. Some that we cast, i hear, were cast again, even though the casting process destroys the originals integrity. What they saw at the site is undoubtedly different than what Scott, I and Derek saw. I assure you of that.

The reasons given so far from members that these were obvious fakes have yet to provide adequate explanation to their exceptions. I provided a picture of the cut bank and everyone can see the underlying content of the soils in that area. Depth of track was probably more about what it stepped on under the top soil than the weight applied to it. Stompers must have a person nearby, close enough to leave their own tracks. The track edges showed naturalistic curvatures, no monolithic edges. The step and stride naturally varied in length through out the trackway. Look, even Peter Byrne claimed to have come to the conclusion that these were obviously made by those barefoot looking rubber running shoes.

You are all entitled to your own opinions. Just as everyone else is. But that is all it is. An opinion. You weren't there, others were. If I wasn't involved at all with this, I would side with the ones who ave the most information. Information is better to use than shame.

DDA, OK then I apologize. I just did not see many other people from Virginia who you may have thought criticized the tracks.

I was never interested in the hoaxers or what they did. I was interested in what you and DR were doing and the conclusions that were made and how they came about. You were the ones talking to us.

My opinion was based on what you showed me, and only that. Thank you for sharing the pics.

[Guest]

I am with DDA 1000% on all of this. Lets simplify just for a second. Again, none involved are paid for the research we try very hard to conduct. We all went out to see a track line. Yes, we were all pretty excited. Did we talk about it? Yes. Who'd we talk to? The Bigfoot community. Did we share things on this forum? Yes. Did we have to? No. Did we do it to everyones standards? No. To da.. bad. If you folks here that have a real problem with how we handled this would like step up and put us on the payroll, I'm quite sure all of us would strive to meet all your standards and criteria. Other than that, maybe you could cut a little slack for the people that get out from behind the computer from time to time and do the research so all you have something to talk about! My two cents, now back to deer hunting, much less drama! BTW, we have now had a chance to study the tracks in depth. Yes there are a lot of problems with them. but they will not be posted here if I have anything to do with it,nor will any of my future research. It's completely pointless.

DR

[Guest]

I plussed that as well Derek, it is pointless, and is more destructive than helpful to post any evidence on this forum at all now. All it does is serve as a launching point to start the the method of repetitive and persistence sabotage of any evidence. If your examination of any evidence starts from the default point of scoff-ism, and denial, then there really is no discussion of evidence. If evidence is created by hoaxers in an attempt to ridicule and discredit researchers, then again, there is no discussion of evidence, just malicious attack on those who attempt to bring validity and integrity to the study of this phenomena. I would discourage anyone from bringing forth any type of evidence to this board, no matter what it is, it will be declared a hoax. All I see is skeptics, scofftics, and so called proponents alike scrambling to be the first to proclaim something a hoax, then through ridicule, and criticism they are not even qualified to give, to maintain the conclusion of hoax, when most of the time their conclusion are unsupported and nothing more than unqualified opinion.

For what its worth BFF, I think you need to take heed to what your seeing here, and think seriously about the direction this board is going in. Is this a Bigfoot discussion forum? Is this really a place to discuss the topic, share info, and present evidence? Why would anyone show us a picture of foot prints found in some remote place? Why would anyone share something cool or anomalous in any way here? So someone can say "hoax!!, and your darn fool if you think otherwise, why look at how stupidly you all walked into the Elbe trackway trick!" Suddenly now by default, any serious consideration of evidence is greeted with insinuations that you are mentally infirm some how to think any of it could be real. I feel sorry for the eyewitness's and the discomfort they must feel when they come here.

John Carwright, I use to think there was some credit to your account, but I do not at all now. If you had seen what you claim you saw, you would not be the way you are today. Your own behavior discredits you, and I personally, will not read another post you make, I have no time for such things.

And before anyone asks, no, I do not want to pay twenty dollars to go to the tar pit, so you can call me names, or attempt to ridicule me, or "Tell me what you really think", nor in any way am I interested in "even more and enlightened information for the premium members"

Edited October 23, 2012 by slabdog
Staff edit

[Guest]

I can't blame anyone for wanting to see what they wanted to see in the tracks, but I'm still not understanding how we know these were definitely faked if you have no confession or prosthesis to assess for a match .

The lesson for me would be if hoaxing is this chronic, then yes, claim that the tracks are authentic for a few days to smoke out the hoaxer . If it was done maliciously then they will either ask, or have someone to take part in the discussion. It won't be hard to figure out who it is from there, and yes, IP addresses can be traced back to the owner of the computer.

At least that is the story I would go by if I wanted to avoid embarrassment, which is really unwarranted, I wouldn't expect anyone to know what a real bigfoot track looks like until we know what a real bigfoot foot looks like.

[Incorrigible1]

The hoax was quickly sniffed out and denounced. Elbe ain't no Piltdown Man, folks.

[yowiie]

So what's the verdict on the hoaxer, is it a skeptic or a researcher

Edited October 23, 2012 by yowiie

[Guest]

I plussed that as well Derek, it is pointless, and is more destructive than helpful to post any evidence on this forum at all now. All it does is serve as a launching point to start the the method of repetitive and persistence sabotage of any evidence. If your examination of any evidence starts from the default point of scoff-ism, and denial, then there really is no discussion of evidence. If evidence is created by hoaxers in an attempt to ridicule and discredit researchers, then again, there is no discussion of evidence, just malicious attack on those who attempt to bring validity and integrity to the study of this phenomena. I would discourage anyone from bringing forth any type of evidence to this board, no matter what it is, it will be declared a hoax. All I see is skeptics, scofftics, and so called proponents alike scrambling to be the first to proclaim something a hoax, then through ridicule, and criticism they are not even qualified to give, to maintain the conclusion of hoax, when most of the time their conclusion are unsupported and nothing more than unqualified opinion.

For what its worth BFF, I think you need to take heed to what your seeing here, and think seriously about the direction this board is going in. Is this a Bigfoot discussion forum? Is this really a place to discuss the topic, share info, and present evidence? Why would anyone show us a picture of foot prints found in some remote place? Why would anyone share something cool or anomalous in any way here? So someone can say "hoax!!, and your darn fool if you think otherwise, why look at how stupidly you all walked into the Elbe trackway trick!" Suddenly now by default, any serious consideration of evidence is greeted with insinuations that you are mentally infirm some how to think any of it could be real. I feel sorry for the eyewitness's and the discomfort they must feel when they come here.

John Carwright, I use to think there was some credit to your account, but I do not at all now. If you had seen what you claim you saw, you would not be the way you are today. Your own behavior discredits you, and I personally, will not read another post you make, I have no time for such things.

And before anyone asks, no, I do not want to pay twenty dollars to go to the tar pit, so you can call me names, or attempt to ridicule me, or "Tell me what you really think", nor in any way am I interested in "even more and enlightened information for the premium members"

AMEN JOHNC!!! This is the EXACT reason I quit posting here. You hit the nail straight on its head!!! That is one of the best posts I've seen on this forum in a very long time. Unfortunately, I think your post will be widely ignored. My hat's off to you sir. Not much more I could add to this because you've said it all.

[Guest]

John Carwright, I use to think there was some credit to your account, but I do not at all now. If you had seen what you claim you saw, you would not be the way you are today. Your own behavior discredits you, and I personally, will not read another post you make, I have no time for such things.

I don't care what you think. My encounter has nothing to do with this conversation about spotting obvious signs of hoaxing in those track pictures.

AMEN JOHNC!!! This is the EXACT reason I quit posting here. You hit the nail straight on its head!!! That is one of the best posts I've seen on this forum in a very long time. Unfortunately, I think your post will be widely ignored. My hat's off to you sir. Not much more I could add to this because you've said it all.

See above answer Willard.

I am with DDA 1000% on all of this. Lets simplify just for a second. Again, none involved are paid for the research we try very hard to conduct. We all went out to see a track line. Yes, we were all pretty excited. Did we talk about it? Yes. Who'd we talk to? The Bigfoot community. Did we share things on this forum? Yes. Did we have to? No. Did we do it to everyones standards? No. To da.. bad. If you folks here that have a real problem with how we handled this would like step up and put us on the payroll, I'm quite sure all of us would strive to meet all your standards and criteria. Other than that, maybe you could cut a little slack for the people that get out from behind the computer from time to time and do the research so all you have something to talk about! My two cents, now back to deer hunting, much less drama! BTW, we have now had a chance to study the tracks in depth. Yes there are a lot of problems with them. but they will not be posted here if I have anything to do with it,nor will any of my future research. It's completely pointless.

DR

DR,

If it makes you feel better to rant. Go ahead. I understand your anger at getting hoaxed. I have felt it.

So objectivity is "wrong application", but assuming people are liars is "proper application"...got it.

I did not assume they were liars. You assumed I thought they were because I asked questions. Practice what you preach.

Edited October 23, 2012 by JohnCartwright

[Drew]

Well whether you realize it or not, that is what it sounds like you are arguing for. Well learned and well earned? Who will decide when they have "learned" or "earned" enough? Yes. And in most circles - as soon as someone is out money - it can be called fraud.

All fraud starts with a false statement. What is the false statement in this case? Is it: "Mr. Barackman, there are Bigfoot prints on the beach"

Is that false? really? 'Your honor, the person said there were Bigfoot prints on the beach, and there were none.',

"Really Counselor? Your client drove four hours to look at some Giant footprints, allegedly made by a GIANT HAIRY, UPRIGHT UNDISCOVERABLE BEAST, on a beach, and is upset because they weren't AUTHENTIC Bigfoot prints? Really? Please show me one AUTHENTIC Bigfoot print, be prepared to show your work"