Guest Thepattywagon Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 If indeed a University was currently studying the alleged body, have they considered the possibility that they can be implicated in a murder of a creature possibly close enough to us to be considered human? I guess if that can apply to Justin Smeja, it can apply to 'Tricky ****' Dyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 The biggest clue for everyone that this is just an outright hoax should be that anyone who had a BF body, ESPECIALLY someone who was associated with a news corp. like the BBC, would still be sitting on the body and not have already broadcast it near and far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 If indeed a University was currently studying the alleged body, have they considered the possibility that they can be implicated in a murder of a creature possibly close enough to us to be considered human? I guess if that can apply to Justin Smeja, it can apply to 'Tricky ****' Dyer. If you listen to the BTR show Dyer explains that the BF was termed , (cannot recall exact words), a new species of animal by the "proper authorities", and given over to him and "another entity". Although Dyer says the face looked more human than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 If you listen to the BTR show Dyer explains that the BF was termed , (cannot recall exact words), a new species of animal by the "proper authorities", and given over to him and "another entity". Although Dyer says the face looked more human than anything else. If authorities were in on this we would see leaks...no way law enforcement would be bound to silence. The biggest clue for everyone that this is just an outright hoax should be that anyone who had a BF body, ESPECIALLY someone who was associated with a news corp. like the BBC, would still be sitting on the body and not have already broadcast it near and far. Dyer said there are several (I think 7?) *2nd party* partners that Dyer had to sign an NDA with. I do agree though..sitting on something like this is absurd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Dyer had to sign an NDA with. Oh no, not an NDA again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 I'm beginning to think NDA stands for No Definitive Answers.... Ugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 I'm sorry but I just don't have any hope for this and I'm quick to jump on board any band wagon that's beating the BF tune... Dyer does not have a BF body or else it would already be in the media. We're dealing with a man that has very little self control. He would have blown the lid off this thing if he really had a body. Just watch his videos! Does he look like a person that could sit on the greatest discovery of the century? This is just part of the documentary about people that hunt monsters. They will show the willingness of the community to follow, even the most disreputable people, for the chance to see a real live Bigfoot. When this documentary comes out, we're just going to be portrayed as a bunch of weirdos. After all, who's more pathetic, the maniac that claims to have shot a Bigfoot or the bunch of people that believe him. Maybe I'm wrong but I have a strange feeling like we're being made into part of the act; if this makes any sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RedRatSnake Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 I'm beginning to think NDA stands for No Definitive Answers.... Ugh. NDA Sure seems like the new thing to do, it gives a person the way out in case the door going in slams him or her in the behind. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 Guys...you have got to understand how very deceptive and imaginative this guy is. Back in September, he called into coast to coast to share his wolfman sighting report, pretending to be a man named david. He went so far to look up a university in spain and explain he was an exchange student there and went into portugal with a friend. He then proceeds to tell an elaborate story about this man turning into a werewolf and chasing him into town. This is the same guy who yes told us he had a bigfoot in the freezer. Do you get how is pulling you along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkGlasgow Posted January 15, 2013 Share Posted January 15, 2013 The big 'reveal' in April will be Dyer's appearance in the BBC documentary. I wonder how he will be portrayed? Perhaps as an honest, hard working, intrepid field researcher desperate to find the creature that has so far eluded him. Or... perhaps just plain desperate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I'm sorry but I just don't have any hope for this and I'm quick to jump on board any band wagon that's beating the BF tune... Dyer does not have a BF body or else it would already be in the media. We're dealing with a man that has very little self control. He would have blown the lid off this thing if he really had a body. Just watch his videos! Does he look like a person that could sit on the greatest discovery of the century? This is just part of the documentary about people that hunt monsters. They will show the willingness of the community to follow, even the most disreputable people, for the chance to see a real live Bigfoot. When this documentary comes out, we're just going to be portrayed as a bunch of weirdos. After all, who's more pathetic, the maniac that claims to have shot a Bigfoot or the bunch of people that believe him. Maybe I'm wrong but I have a strange feeling like we're being made into part of the act; if this makes any sense? Absolutely makes sense. I'm amazed that Dyer is really commiting to his story 100%. Guess he'll get the last laugh...but if it's the hoax we think it is..it'll be his LAST as far as BF goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I'd much rather admit I was wrong and Dyer was right once this all blows over than to have egg on my face for believing another one of his stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I just don't have any faith in this and it's not because of his history with hoaxing. My problem is with his character and the fact that he's imbalanced. He's too volatile to sit on anything longer than a day. There's no NDA in the world that would keep him from opening his mouth. Think about it. If he really had an NDA that prohibited him from saying anything; don't you think he would have been prohibited from even telling us he had shot one? They would have had him sign the NDA the day of the shooting and not 4 months after the fact. So the NDA only prohibits certain details but he's allowed to discuss everything else....please? He's trying to string everybody along and, I promise you, he will not have any logical answer for what I just pointed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I just don't have any faith in this and it's not because of his history with hoaxing. My problem is with his character and the fact that he's imbalanced. He's too volatile to sit on anything longer than a day. There's no NDA in the world that would keep him from opening his mouth. Think about it. If he really had an NDA that prohibited him from saying anything; don't you think he would have been prohibited from even telling us he had shot one? They would have had him sign the NDA the day of the shooting and not 4 months after the fact. So the NDA only prohibits certain details but he's allowed to discuss everything else....please? He's trying to string everybody along and, I promise you, he will not have any logical answer for what I just pointed out. I think he's doing a *movie documentary* that shows what a BF hoax is like and convincing it can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 (edited) I have made it Principle One in my attendance to this field to never hold my breath for anything. Not doing it here either. A hank of hair is not a bigfoot. Neither is a corpse of one, for that matter. (Steaks? Definitely not.) Nor a DNA string pulled from anything that isn't a bigfoot. What's to wait for? Edited January 16, 2013 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts