dopelyrics Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) duplicate Edited January 24, 2013 by dopelyrics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Definition of the word "Documentary" It does not say - No fictional additions. It says - little. You define little.. If word were to get out that this film had the body of a dead bigfoot - there is no way this company would say a word about it not being true - until the movie hit the theaters. That would draw people in just with the thought that it might be true. That is box office gold there. If it is not true, and they know it - there will be pressers and such so they can tell their side and how the body thing happened - and how they couldn't believe people bought into the story before the documentary was released ----- which I am sure they will put their own spin on. Add in other mythical creatures and the people who hunt for them - and this very well could be a well rounded - in your face - psychological evaluation of us all..... Why not? No I disagree. We're not talking about a dead horse or a dead elephant, we're talking about a dead animal that most people think it mythical. The complications and implications of releasing a film of this nature would be incredibly complicated. For starters, they didnt expect a real BF to turn up, and then they didnt expect RD to shoot the creature. The legal /moral /social complications of this (if its true) must be huge. As soon as they put one word out there of it being true - all hell will let loose. Where is the evidence? Why was it shot? Why did you film it being shot? What will happen to the protection of Bigfoots now? If this story really did happen, then there must be loads of red tape and stuff to be sorted before it hits the press? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Because if the claims were false and there wasnt a bloody thirsty shooting scene, then it would portray their film in the wrong light. And if RD is lying, they could drum up even more publicity by coming forward and saying no this never happened? No no no. Stop mentioning the word hoax as that is just a rumour. Only mention hoax if you have definitive proof that their film is about hoaxers!!! ....where did RD says that....? Ah JackiLB...if Rick Dyer says it...it must be true. Er, no no no. And actually, the shooting of the Bigfoot and subsequent collection of the body is just a rumour, started by...Rick Dyer. Oops. As for portraying their film in the wrong light, Minnow haven't made any comment on it!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Everyone has their obsessions whether its beer, sex, tv, music, fashion, cars, food etc etc....they chose Bigfooters because our obsession is more interesting and unusual. lol And lets face it - most people think we are nuts - or there is at the minimum something wrong that could use the attention of a psychiatrist. If they can get that on film - good night Irene. I think they went to the right person though. I applaud your defense of Dyer - but I am afraid at the end of all this - you will be very disappointed. You are entitled to your opinion - I just hate seeing people depressed when the thing they hope is true, turns out to be anything but.... No I disagree. We're not talking about a dead horse or a dead elephant, we're talking about a dead animal that most people think it mythical. The complications and implications of releasing a film of this nature would be incredibly complicated. For starters, they didnt expect a real BF to turn up, and then they didnt expect RD to shoot the creature. The legal /moral /social complications of this (if its true) must be huge. As soon as they put one word out there of it being true - all hell will let loose. Where is the evidence? Why was it shot? Why did you film it being shot? What will happen to the protection of Bigfoots now? If this story really did happen, then there must be loads of red tape and stuff to be sorted before it hits the press? Right now - the only thing you have to go on - is the word of Rick Dyer.... Minnow films has said nothing. We don't know if any of this story is true - and I would never take the word of Rick Dyer about anything - not even a dinner selection at a 5 star restaurant. Why - because he is an admitted hoaxer - and proud of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Ah JackiLB...if Rick Dyer says it...it must be true. Er, no no no. And actually, the shooting of the Bigfoot and subsequent collection of the body is just a rumour, started by...Rick Dyer. Oops. As for portraying their film in the wrong light, Minnow haven't made any comment on it!! No Dopelyrics, I dont believe this story because Rick Dyer says its true, I believe it because of various factors that are contained within this story. I dont give a monkey's about what RD has to say - I really dont. I just think this story has too many factors contained within it that dont equal hoax.Sorry Dopelyrics - I am really not a gullible person who believes anything anyone tells me and I certainly dont have a girly crush on Rick Dyer. Really didnt buy the whole Daisy story one bit lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 @jacki If Minnow Films came forward and said, Ok, he is lying there is no dead BF....you really think that is going to increase their publicity? In two days they would be yesterday's news. I mean look at the "Daisy in the Box" story now. It's the mystery around not " knowing" that draws crowds, curious if they are going to see a new discovery or the ramblings of a mad man. I agree that anyone who wants to believe this story is certainly entitled to do so, I just am confused why is all. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 And lets face it - most people think we are nuts - or there is at the minimum something wrong that could use the attention of a psychiatrist. If they can get that on film - good night Irene. I think they went to the right person though. I applaud your defense of Dyer - but I am afraid at the end of all this - you will be very disappointed. You are entitled to your opinion - I just hate seeing people depressed when the thing they hope is true, turns out to be anything but.... Right now - the only thing you have to go on - is the word of Rick Dyer.... Minnow films has said nothing. We don't know if any of this story is true - and I would never take the word of Rick Dyer about anything - not even a dinner selection at a 5 star restaurant. Why - because he is an admitted hoaxer - and proud of it. Well I dont think people really think we are that nuts. Not when you watch the news and see the kinds of horrible things some people do to others. Infact I think its just a jerk reaction or a tradion we view Bigfooters as nuts, but if you really tied someone down, then would probably say 'no you're not really that bad' We are harmless nuts lol!I'am not defending Dyer perse but I am defending the 'story' the 'greater picture' which entails many people and many factors. God I'm shaking. I feel like I have been thrown into a pit of snakes for daring to wonder if this story is true LOL ....but I like a good fight ....come on bring it on..hehe btw...I give this story until the end of April and then I quit and then you can all just laugh at me HAR HAR HAR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But, I, along with others, see the handwriting on the wall. There are many in the general population - to include the media - who think we are certifiable. This is undeniable. I have never seen a serious media outlet treat this topic as anything other than a joke. In fact, they laugh at us - when these stories come about - to lighten the mood on bad news days.. But, that makes it no less wrong. Someone like Rick Dyer does not care what kind of attention he gets - as long as he gets attention (sounds like Biscardi doesn't it?). He was willing to stand in front of news cameras for a press conference - knowing his hoax in 2008 would eventually come crashing down... He knew - the world would know he was a hoaxer. He did not care because he did it anyway. Rick Dyer does not care about this community, this research or the animal itself. He is in this for what it can do for him. If that is good or bad - makes no difference. It's all about attention. What does he have to lose? Nothing. God I'm shaking. I feel like I have been thrown into a pit of snakes for daring to wonder if this story is true LOL Don't feel like that. I think many are just interested in what about this latest story - makes you think he might be telling the truth. We all have our own opinions about the person and his latest story.. And if its true - I will happily eat my shoe. But - I am not going to lose sleep over the idea.. Could Rick Dyer have gotten lucky enough to shoot a bigfoot with a Documentary film crew in the wings? I suppose.. But the odds of that are slim to none. Dyer has caused all this disbelief himself. He already proved once his word means squat. I would be shocked if this story survives until March. Edited January 24, 2013 by Melissa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Ok...using Occam's razor, ( yes we must,lol), I think I am going with Dyer on this one. 1. there was a San Antonio Bf sighting by homeless people documented by a police report 2. homeless people reported a BF that had been getting food in the campsites 3.. This possibly landlocked BF was used to people, possibly less wary than the average BF (-this is not a fact but if I may construe this frm point2 ; ) ) 4 Minnow films was making a documentary involving Rick Dyer 5 Minnow films was in the woods with Dyer 6 They were out in the field for 6 days; more likelihood of finding a landlocked BF? 7 Minnow does not deny anything about this story, despite numerous emails and possibly phone calls 8. The tent video has not been debunked 9. No mask has been found that fits the description 10 FB/FB confirms on all points-ok that was a joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Look, Jacki has the right to believe RD, just like I have the right not to. She's familiar with his background and, despite that, has decided to have some hope and see if it really pans out. We can try to convince her otherwise but, in the end, and as we all know, he can't keep this story under wraps for forever. It will end in one of the the following ways: 1. He has a Bigfoot body and we all eat crow 2. He does not have a Bigfoot body and admits it was a hoax 3. He does not have a Bigfoot body and claims we will never see it because the MIB took it away, the storage building burned down or (insert your own excuse) There are no other endings other than what I have listed. We all know this because we've been through it many times. What makes this whole thing entertaining is the process by which we discuss the pros and cons of why or why not it's real. Personally, I don't think he has a body but I'm interested enough to keep participating in this thread. I'm not the only one as there are 30 pages of discussion on this, so far, and I suspect it will continue. If our interest was based solely on our convictions, this forum would NOT exist. Think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Ok...using Occam's razor, ( yes we must,lol), I think I am going with Dyer on this one. 1. there was a San Antonio Bf sighting by homeless people documented by a police report 2. homeless people reported a BF that had been getting food in the campsites 3.. This possibly landlocked BF was used to people, possibly less wary than the average BF (-this is not a fact but if I may construe this frm point2 ; ) ) 4 Minnow films was making a documentary involving Rick Dyer 5 Minnow films was in the woods with Dyer 6 They were out in the field for 6 days; more likelihood of finding a landlocked BF? 7 Minnow does not deny anything about this story, despite numerous emails and possibly phone calls 8. The tent video has not been debunked 9. No mask has been found that fits the description 10 FB/FB confirms on all points-ok that was a joke! Exactly VX! Remember there is Ciscos account that on questioning some of the homeless people, they did infact confirm there was a film company there during early part of September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Ok...using Occam's razor, ( yes we must,lol), I think I am going with Dyer on this one. 1. there was a San Antonio Bf sighting by homeless people documented by a police report 2. homeless people reported a BF that had been getting food in the campsites 3.. This possibly landlocked BF was used to people, possibly less wary than the average BF (-this is not a fact but if I may construe this frm point2 ; ) ) 4 Minnow films was making a documentary involving Rick Dyer 5 Minnow films was in the woods with Dyer 6 They were out in the field for 6 days; more likelihood of finding a landlocked BF? 7 Minnow does not deny anything about this story, despite numerous emails and possibly phone calls 8. The tent video has not been debunked 9. No mask has been found that fits the description 10 FB/FB confirms on all points-ok that was a joke! I'm sorry, but that's the conclusion with the LEAST amount of assumptions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Look, Jacki has the right to believe RD, just like I have the right not to. She's familiar with his background and, despite that, has decided to have some hope and see if it really pans out. We can try to convince her otherwise but, in the end, and as we all know, he can't keep this story under wraps for forever. It will end in one of the the following ways: 1. He has a Bigfoot body and we all eat crow 2. He does not have a Bigfoot body and admits it was a hoax 3. He does not have a Bigfoot body and claims we will never see it because the MIB took it away, the storage building burned down or (insert your own excuse) There are no other endings other than what I have listed. We all know this because we've been through it many times. What makes this whole thing entertaining is the process by which we discuss the pros and cons of why or why not it's real. Personally, I don't think he has a body but I'm interested enough to keep participating in this thread. I'm not the only one as there are 30 pages of discussion on this, so far, and I suspect it will continue. If our interest was based solely on our convictions, this forum would NOT exist. Think about it. I have to say that I sometimes feel its a question of people 'not wanting' to believe the story rather than just 'not believing' the story and the reason is RD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 1. Assumes the homeless people did not misidentify something else. 2. Kind of the same as 1, not sure why it's a second point? 3. Well you highlight the assumption in this one yourself...nuff said. 4. Seems fine. 5. Again, how is this different than 4? 6. This is a big assumption. That because they were there for 6 days they must have had a great chance of finding a BF? People spend weeks at a time in a spot and have not produced tangible evidence. 7. Assumes Minnow is aware of this controversy and would deny it. We don't know that at all. We don't even know if they are aware and whether they would want to deny it. A couple of assumptions there. 8. That one depends on who you talk to really. This assumes everyone has the same view of that video..not true at all. 9. No mask has been made public, but there have been links to ones for sale on the web that could have likely been used. 10. Well, we'll leave that one alone. One statement that requires no assumptions? RD is lying, hoaxer of low character. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) ^^ 2- other homeless people, there is a bit of a history of it...should have said that it is not just the ones that dialed 911 5 just confirms that they were looking seriously for said BF, 6 days, meaning to stay 10; that is not just a weekender trip 6 oh they are aware,lol, that is if you believe the blogger who should not be named Jacki did speak with their receptionist and some of us have emailed. running out the door sorry this is so poorly written,lol! Edited January 24, 2013 by VioletX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts