LeafTalker Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 OK, let's look at the facts here. Rick Dyer is a serial hoaxer. That is the only fact we know. That's not a "fact". That speaks to "character" (or what SEEMS to be "character"). Why fall back on that? Oh, right, because we don't have anything else at the moment. Not a good enough reason, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 @leaf talker, you seem to give an almost dramatic praise on Violet and Jacki....is this because they are on the same side of the debate as you? lol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 That's not a "fact". It is not a fact that Rick Dyer is a serial hoaxer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 That is a brilliant rant LeafTalker! Very interesting. Particularly this statement: If you look into the background of every "hoaxer", in almost every case, you will find someone who had an honest, real interest in BF in the beginning, and then got slammed so hard by all us "judgers" that they couldn't think straight anymore and went off the deep end (or appeared to do so). I am very very new to the Bigfoot community and one of my impressions from my first week of exploring Bigfoot blogs, was the amount of angry people there were. Angry and very paranoid people too. Defensive, hostile, aggressive - all very strange. Of course there are other people in our bigfoot world too who arent like that at all but many unhappy souls too. Now I am not saying that I feel sorry for Rick Dyer but I too have ignored his past and instead I see someone who is desperate for acceptance and praise and when people are driven mad with a desire for something, they do often achieve it. I think therefore that Rick Dyer may well have tracked down a bigfoot and in his desperation to prove he had achieved this, he shot it. I think it could be killing him inside too if he did shoot one. Maybe he is hoaxing again as he wants people to throw even more hatred and scorn at him. That would be so sad. But I think he is not lying. I think he wants acceptance and praise. That analysis makes a lot of sense to me. Also, this, which I forgot to say in my rant (and which ties in totally with what you're saying): When we judge people -- even in what WE might think is the teeniest, tiniest way -- it causes hurt. And when we're hurt, some of us lash out; that is, become hoaxers. So the cessation of judging leads to (ta da!) less hoaxing! That's what we say we all want, right? Fewer hoaxers to have to 'analyze'? If we're slower to pull the trigger ourselves, we won't have the trigger pulled on us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 It is not a fact that Rick Dyer is a serial hoaxer? Well he could be a serial hoaxer but maybe this time it isnt a hoax? It is possible to be a serial hoaxer and also tell the truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 We have a saying around here "Even a blind hog will find an acorn once in awhile". Maybe he has found an acorn??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 It is possible for a liar to tell the truth. However, as with the classic "Boy Who Cried Wolf" story, when the liar gets around to telling the truth there isn't anyone left to listen. I'm paying as much attention to RD as I do the price of lipstick in Katmandu. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 @leaf talker, you seem to give an almost dramatic praise on Violet and Jacki....is this because they are on the same side of the debate as you? lol! I didn't HAVE a "side" until I heard their arguments. I went to their side of the debate because of the great way they analyze the information they've either found themselves or been given. (You, too, have had some great info.) I'm trying to use my brain here, too, just like everyone else. Life is tricky, eh? We have to use everything we've got. But we can't fail if one of our instruments for getting through it all is love (and all the related things: trust, generosity, courage.) I want to "praise" Jacki and Violet because I think we need as much of that TYPE of thinking as we can get! That is, generous thinking. Fearless thinking. There's still "thinking" in there. But it's kind. How can you go wrong with that? And we're all so afraid of "going wrong". Jacki and Violet offer a way to be less afraid, is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Rick Dyer is not a BF believer who retreated from the route of honesty because he was abused and ridiculed by others in the bigfoot community. He did not perpetrate a hoax because his feelings were hurt. Rick Dyer has openly said MANY times, he did not believe in bigfoot before and after the 2008 hoax. He did it because he thought it was funny and realized he could also make a profit from it. If you go by the very definition of the words "Serial Hoaxer", it is a FACT that RD is a hoaxer. Serial: performing a series of similar acts over a period of time Hoax: to trick into believing or accepting as genuine something false and often preposterous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 That analysis makes a lot of sense to me. Also, this, which I forgot to say in my rant (and which ties in totally with what you're saying): When we judge people -- even in what WE might think is the teeniest, tiniest way -- it causes hurt. And when we're hurt, some of us lash out; that is, become hoaxers. So the cessation of judging leads to (ta da!) less hoaxing! That's what we say we all want, right? Fewer hoaxers to have to 'analyze'? If we're slower to pull the trigger ourselves, we won't have the trigger pulled on us. Yes I think if you were to do a search on the word 'bigfoot' or 'sasquatch', you would probably find that the second most common word that sat alongside these words were the word 'hoax'. Even if there is actually no hoax in a story or a sighting or an interview the fear of a hoax is always written between the lines. Its a paranoid world and as you rightly say, the more people judge other peoples views and actions the more this leads to a negative 'hoaxing' environment. This is one of the reasons why we want someone to capture a bigfoot and show it to the world so we can all relax with a feeling of 'see, I told you i'm not crazy'. We are desperate for this and until then, people are scrutinized and judged incase they maybe about to 'show us up'.If Rick Dyer has shot a bigfoot - do you think many people will shake his hand? I bet the guy will get just about no recognition and it'll leave him empty (yet rich)! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest njjohn Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Leaf - while I respect what you say, I absolutely, wholeheartedly disagree. Character is very important. Who you are, what you've done and who you're connected too are all very relevant, especially when the goal is to make profit. RD didn't start out with a healthy interest and because of judging turned into a hoaxer. He came onto the scene as a hoaxer and has repeated the same pattern over and over. The only thing that has changed is protecting the info better. From a journalistic point of view, no story is about the present alone. What happened before is very important into why things are the way they are, and why things that will happen, happened. If you want to ignore the multiple hoaxes and fakes that RD and crew have put out there, that's your right. For me, trust is earned, not given. Because of his past, he's in the negative and has to earn his way towards my trust. Would you trust your children with someone that once was a pedophile? Even if he'd rehabbed himself, I'd never leave him alone with children. I've never attacked Violet or Jacki. I admire them. I just have too many unanswered questions and see too many trends to just believe with the simple snap of a finger. And it's not fear that makes me that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 I'm speechless leaftalker........I think it's better I keep it that way friend! LMBO Well guys, I'm done for the day. Hope everyone has a nice SUPERBOWL SUNDAY! Leaf - while I respect what you say, I absolutely, wholeheartedly disagree. Character is very important. Who you are, what you've done and who you're connected too are all very relevant, especially when the goal is to make profit. RD didn't start out with a healthy interest and because of judging turned into a hoaxer. He came onto the scene as a hoaxer and has repeated the same pattern over and over. The only thing that has changed is protecting the info better. From a journalistic point of view, no story is about the present alone. What happened before is very important into why things are the way they are, and why things that will happen, happened. If you want to ignore the multiple hoaxes and fakes that RD and crew have put out there, that's your right. For me, trust is earned, not given. Because of his past, he's in the negative and has to earn his way towards my trust. Would you trust your children with someone that once was a pedophile? Even if he'd rehabbed himself, I'd never leave him alone with children. I've never attacked Violet or Jacki. I admire them. I just have too many unanswered questions and see too many trends to just believe with the simple snap of a finger. And it's not fear that makes me that way. Well stated njjohn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 It is possible for a liar to tell the truth. However, as with the classic "Boy Who Cried Wolf" story, when the liar gets around to telling the truth there isn't anyone left to listen. I'm paying as much attention to RD as I do the price of lipstick in Katmandu. Ah, another one of my heroes shows up!!!! My guess is you don't NEED to pay attention to this story, because you already know what you know (about BF). This story won't add to that knowledge for you. Nor will it for me. So that's fine if you don't pay attention to it. (Although, um, you ARE here right now..... ) But who gets hurt in this story? The boy, right? Not the village he lived in (except in the fact that everyone is precious, and the village will be poorer for the absence of any little boys who get separated from it). The cautionary part of this tale is for the BOY, not his audience. The audience is not harmed by this. Not at all. Not in any way. We all need to stop acting as if poor RD can "harm" us. He cannot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 Well he could be a serial hoaxer but maybe this time it isnt a hoax? It is possible to be a serial hoaxer and also tell the truth? Could be a serial hoaxer? He IS a serial hoaxer, that is the only known fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted February 2, 2013 Share Posted February 2, 2013 I absolutely, wholeheartedly disagree. Character is very important. Who you are, what you've done and who you're connected too are all very relevant, especially when the goal is to make profit. How much character would it take to bait something that has come to trust people, & then shoot it in the back? If he did it, it doesn't speak much of his character IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts