Guest Posted January 29, 2013 Share Posted January 29, 2013 The point is the film company could have used their make-up artists to create the bigfoot in the tent video. He has a valid point. Have u seen the show face off ？ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JenJen of Oldstones Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) Does anyone actually know if Rick Dyer does NOT have a Texas hunting license? Or is that speculation? Regardless, according to the TPWD webpage on hunting licenses: A hunting license is required of any person, regardless of age, who hunts any animal, bird, frog or turtle in this state (except furbearers, if the hunter possesses a trapper's license). No license is required for nuisance fur-bearing animals, depredating hogs or coyotes (see below). Non-residents under 17 years of age may purchase and hunt with the Youth Hunting License (Type 169). Exceptions: a hunting license is not required to hunt the following: Coyotes, if the coyotes are attacking, about to attack, or have recently attacked livestock, domestic animals, or fowl. Depredating feral hogs, if a landowner (resident or non-resident) or landowner's agent or lessee is taking feral hogs causing depredation on the landowner's land. Fur-bearing animals, if the hunter possesses a trapper's license or if the fur-bearing animals are causing depredation. Couldn't RD make a case for the BF being a nuisance fur-bearing animal? Anyway, he would still have to have had to take and pass a hunter's education course. ETA: Info about hunting nuisance fur-bearing animals. I'm interpreting the passage below starting "fur-bearing animals or their pelts taken for these purposes" to mean that they can't keep the animal or pelt if they harvested the animal for its pelt outside of trapping season or something. But if they just kill the animal (say a feral hog) to keep it from being a nuisance, they can do whatever they want with it? NUISANCE FUR-BEARING ANIMALS Landowners or their agents may take nuisance fur-bearing animals in any number by any means at any time on that person's land without the need for a hunting or trapping license. However, fur-bearing animals or their pelts taken for these purposes may not be retained or possessed by anyone at any time except licensed trappers during the lawful open season and possession periods. Edited January 30, 2013 by JenJen of Oldstones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 He has a valid point. Have u seen the show face off ？ It just seems like too much trouble to go through...wait until the 6th day of a trip to pull out this make-up/costume, get some ribs, film it through a tent. If that it is part of the Minnow story than why are the other stories in the film involving legitimate researchers? Did these people also have monster props for re-enactments? There is no one coming forward, no make-up artist or monster designer leaking anything. Basically there is no evidence that he is hoaxing. Good thoughts Jen Jen, but I just do not know. He did say he has never even killed a deer or any animal I believe, and that he never would kill a deer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 VioletX!! Thank goodness you are here! I almost joined the other side! (not really)! Thanks for the plus Yes but people say that Minnow want him to spread this story as it promotes their film. I disagree with this though mainly because its only the bigfoot community that know of Dyers claims and the rest of world have no idea so Dyers story will only promote to a tiny tiny community. I would have thought that they wouldnt want a fictitious storyline to their film being rumoured on the net. No I dont buy that sorry So whats more likely? Dyer lured in a sasquatch into his camp in the middle of the day with a rack of ribs, filmed it, then lured it in again to shoot it. After that called federal authorities, drug the bigfoot out of there to a secret location, got university scientists studying it, people fighting over ownership of said body with out one single leak and Rick claiming nda's yet can't keep his mouth shut about it with no I'll effects from the other parties? Or a film company hires a known hoaxer to document the hoaxing aspect of the bigfoot community and provide Dyer with the products and crew to film how a hoax is perpetrated?I don't think Minnow Films is trying to sell this film to the small community of bigfooters, so I doubt they're concerned what Dyer because its all part of the plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 ^ It is all very difficult to believe, but why would Minnow include a hoaxing bit in this film, the one other person I know of in the documentary is not a hoaxer, but is respected. It does not really fit with the movie to include hoaxing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 I said earlier. He shot the video about 10 to 15 ft away. Even with a phone, is should be clear. The shooting video through a tent screen will do 2 things 1) make the video not as clear. At least it is not a blob squatch or grainy 2) shows only the head and neck, eliminating a whole suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WldHrtRnch Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Agree ss. Mark has said RD was cut loose. I can't see how Minnow Films would be aware of his claims to have a BF. I mean, if he does not have a body, and it is all just a lot of talk from him, they would not be concerned at all, neither to get publicity nor to squash negative rumors. And I do think he has plenty cajones to try and pull this off, he's done it once before, he has had practice, lol. Watching some of his videos, it's obvious he has plenty confidence in himself. He's used to running scams evidently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 I think people are forgetting that Minnow Films hasn't said anything about Rick Dyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Racer x's blog has been suspended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 (edited) It just seems like too much trouble to go through...wait until the 6th day of a trip to pull out this make-up/costume, get some ribs, film it through a tent. If that it is part of the Minnow story than why are the other stories in the film involving legitimate researchers? Did these people also have monster props for re-enactments? There is no one coming forward, no make-up artist or monster designer leaking anything. Basically there is no evidence that he is hoaxing. Good thoughts Jen Jen, but I just do not know. He did say he has never even killed a deer or any animal I believe, and that he never would kill a deer. I guess it makes as much sense as killing a bf on the sixth day and staying another 4? lol Also, the "no one coming forward" argument can go both ways. RD stated on his radio show that he is not a hunter and when he killed the Bf it was the first time he had killed an animal....so i'm going to go out on a limb here and say he doesn't have a hunting license. Another point to make here is about Minnow Films not coming forward and saying, hey this guy is a liar. there is no dead BF. Some of you stated that the bigfoot community is a a drop in the bucket compared to the audience Minnow Films is targeting for this documentary. If that is true, how would they even know he is making these claims. They are a british filming company.......maybe they have moved on to another project and could care less what RICK DYER is doing or saying. They got what they wanted from him....a man on film, obsessed with finding a "monster", AKA Bigfoot. I don't see why they would continue monitoring him. Edited January 30, 2013 by simplyskyla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 As good as it is to read what Cisco wrote about the property owners rights to the body, I feel like somebody in the group probably got some permission to be there. I always thought it was a bit weird that all of this could be going on behind the Home depot and the property owner not know anything about it. I feel fairly sure the production company would not go onto that land for that amount of time without some type of permission. That doesn't mean they got permission to keep a bigfoot body, but they probably at least had some sort of communication going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LarryP Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 "4. What happened just outside of San Antonio, Texas, on September 6th, 2012, has yielded several minutes of perfect, close-range film of a male Sasquatch—nearly nine feet tall—going about his business before being brutally gunned down. This footage, which matters to me far more than the frozen carcass, will soon be seen by millions as part of a Minnow Films documentary. The event occurred in a forest “tent city†where the towering visitor had been spotted for years, nabbing food from campsites, and where he had learned to lose his fear of humans and the natural stealth of an apex predator, surviving instead as a docile scavenger." - Chris Noel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WldHrtRnch Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Larry, source? Chris did post here he'd found RDs story to be true, but then nothing. Wish we had more clarification to why he believes this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 It just seems like too much trouble to go through...wait until the 6th day of a trip to pull out this make-up/costume, get some ribs, film it through a tent. If that it is part of the Minnow story than why are the other stories in the film involving legitimate researchers? Did these people also have monster props for re-enactments? There is no one coming forward, no make-up artist or monster designer leaking anything. Basically there is no evidence that he is hoaxing. Good thoughts Jen Jen, but I just do not know. He did say he has never even killed a deer or any animal I believe, and that he never would kill a deer. I have a friend that is a concept artist in hollywood, they sign NDA's to not release pictures of there work untill after a film is released. As for waiting untill the 6th day, perhaps the production schedual called for filming reinactments on that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 30, 2013 Share Posted January 30, 2013 Nice quote! Where did it come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts