Guest njjohn Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 ugh that sentence... don't must verify... remove the don't lol. fixing my original comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WldHrtRnch Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 What is sweeps week? Neilsen ratings? PCH sweepstakes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 ugh that sentence... don't must verify... remove the don't lol. fixing my original comment Now who needs hooked on phonics Nj? hehe just kidding friend! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 The tent video shot with a cell phone? Your the world's best bigfoot hunter/tracker and your only have a cell phone camera and video to record a sighting? Right there it's a gonna for me. Be real and get real equipment, then go out. Nothing but a cheap two bit HOAXER trying to cash in on people beliefs. HELLO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest njjohn Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Wld - yeah, it's a ratings week that networks base their advertising off of. But it's still a few weeks aways. He wants time. Skyla - it didn't work for me! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 If rick's intent was on shooting this bigfoot and he knew people were around with professional camera's on hand filming....why would he waste his time trying to get a crappy video on his cell phone. makes no sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thepattywagon Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Rick sure has a lot of "brothers." <snicker> He's no brother of mine. My brother speaks in complete sentences. He doesn't say "it AIN'T", or "I SEEN" or any other 'Southern' grammatical nightmares that can be attributed to a partial Public School education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 (edited) If rick's intent was on shooting this bigfoot and he knew people were around with professional camera's on hand filming....why would he waste his time trying to get a crappy video on his cell phone. makes no sense! EXACTLY!!!! Heck most of us who go out use better equipment The WORLDS BEST?! a cell phone? even if I were doing a HOAX I wouldn't be that dumb. Edited February 10, 2013 by Joey Rebar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Anyone got the blogtalk radio link? I can't seem to find the live stream only the google plus hangout thing which doesn't allow you to hear the callers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Rick says he is a former Hoaxer, but he has changed. hello rick welcome to the boards Anyone got the blogtalk radio link? I can't seem to find the live stream only the google plus hangout thing which doesn't allow you to hear the callers. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hawk-o Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Anyone got the blogtalk radio link? I can't seem to find the live stream only the google plus hangout thing which doesn't allow you to hear the callers. http://bigfootevidence101.blogspot.com/2013/02/bigfoot-evidence-news-live-radio-starts.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 I'm still confused as to Muskys explanation, regarding this Medrum invitation. I read what Musky wrote and it's very clear what he intended to say. So, now he's saying that it was taken out of context because his statement was referring to an email he sent to Meldrum in 2009? What did he invite Meldrum to see in 2009? Why didn't he just say that the first time? Ok, so if I rewrote his statement, to match his claimed intent, would the following be true? "In 2009, I sent an email to Dr. Meldrum, inviting him to be part of something. He declined, unless I would pay him a $5500 fee, as well as travel expenses. I did not email him this time because I was the only one invited. Regardless, I didn't exhaust myself even trying because he would have turned me down, based on my experience in 2009. He's a snob and too mighty to degrade himself to view a Bigfoot body that was taken by RD." Boy..this Musky RED HERRING is taking on a life of it's own..LOL Cisco..your *re-write* is PERFECT..and hindsight is 20/20 isn't it? Musky has his *limitations* It's quite apparent. Bottom line here>>> His explanation is believable and it was NOT clear what he intended to say...that's the problem! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam2323 Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Hes still spinning is yarn!!!! its actually comical now. He wont let Meldrum see it evvvvvvvvvver!! LMAO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest njjohn Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 It was perfectly clear. There was no verification in 2009. What else would he be verifying? There is no red herring. It's backtracking. He got caught, and tried to lie his way out of it. Whether he would know him as Musky Allen or Allen Issleb, he NEVER emailed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam2323 Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Boy..this Musky RED HERRING is taking on a life of it's own..LOL Cisco..your *re-write* is PERFECT..and hindsight is 20/20 isn't it? Musky has his *limitations* It's quite apparent. Bottom line here>>> His explanation is believable and it was NOT clear what he intended to say...that's the problem! It was very clear Ronn1. He got caught in a lie plain and simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts