Rick Dyer Again (Continued)

[Guest thermalman]

Hey Leaf. RD brought it on himself, while you didn't. So you don't need to feel for him, as your stories are totally different.

[Guest]

No, I am here cause I want to know the second this whole mess falls apart

Ditto.

Also because I love reading what any of you have to say.

Ditto.

Also because I love reading what many of you have to say.

Oh hell I cant lie. I'm just here to see what Melissa will say next.

[Guest]

No JLB, it is a LADY!

And she knows you!

WHAT???? She knows ME???? Ah now I KNOW you are jesting. I dont know anyone who works in the movie industry except a cameraman who I only know slightly.

Oh dear Ihylda. You have blown your story wide open by saying that. Now I know atleast that its a load of baloney. You shouldnt have thrown that in as then we may have wondered if it was true *doh*

From my sources, forget the film!

Your sources who are friends of mine who are potters HAHAHA!!!!

Ok, so video 2 has the guy saying he was there when Rick left, no body. His dog had throat cut, and Cisco had pictures/video of that same dog. So it's definitely same area. The video of the tent shows the tree was up hill from the tent, so the costume was even shorter than originally angled out to be.

Crumbling by the second.

Crumbling? Hell no! Its building stronger by the day. There's time yet njjohn for you to come and join us

Oh forgot to add, the homeless witnesses were slipped a cool 2 mil. apiece under the table for being sprightly participants and diligent with the prepaid 911 callins.

Well its funny you should say that as there was mention of some not being homeless any more.

So tell me wise hawk-o? What is musky's real name and what does he do for a living?

Hint: I know! Lol

And you don't

Yeah but given the fact that you have not been honest about your 'source' being a friend of mine, I think from now on Ihylda I'm not going to take what you say very seriously. I do not want to hear you lying once more about me ok???? Edited February 28, 2013 by AaronD
to remove trolling

[Guest]

It was tied up when he left for work. He doesn't let the dog run free. It's throat was cut while it was tied up. Not cut then tied up lol.

Well the important thing about the film is that it gives EVEN MORE evidence to show that Rick Dyer was there with a British Film Crew and that there have been MANY sightings of bigfoot in that area. THAT evidence alone, is yet more to prove that SOME of this story is true. Is it not? So if you still think its a hoax, your hoax theory will have to start changing somewhat. It will have to start at the point after the expedition to San Antonio and it would have to accept that Minnow and Rick dyer filmed together?

Minnow cut his clip of bigfoot

NO! This statement ^^ cannot be taken seriously given that you have lied about your source. If you say you are not lying and this 'source' knows me, then please just ask them to drop me an email and identify themselves and then I will confirm? Yes?

[Guest]

Well the important thing about the film is that it gives EVEN MORE evidence to show that Rick Dyer was there with a British Film Crew and that there have been MANY sightings of bigfoot in that area. THAT evidence alone, is yet more to prove that SOME of this story is true. Is it not? So if you still think its a hoax, your hoax theory will have to start changing somewhat. It will have to start at the point after the expedition to San Antonio and it would have to accept that Minnow and Rick dyer filmed together?

Well yes, my hoax theory has always included that RD was at this location in San Antonio with a Minnow crew. My hoax theory starts with the tent video, which I don't believe shows a real BF.

You must think Mark Glasgow is lying as well?

Edited February 27, 2013 by Belmar

[Guest]

Well yes, my hoax theory has always included that RD was at this location in San Antonio with a Minnow crew. My hoax theory starts with the tent video, which I don't believe shows a real BF.

You must think Mark Glasgow is lying as well? We already know you think lhlya is lying and also Steve Byrne.

What did Mark Glasgow say? I know he thinks its all a hoax, but not sure from what point he believes it to be a hoax? Ihylda is definately lying about me being friends with his source. That lie is a FACT! Edited February 27, 2013 by JackiLB

[AaronD]

Ok folks!!! Things are getting a little too personal here! Stick to the subject or the thread will be locked! Last warning before we start deleting posts and awarding warning points!

Aaron

[Guest]

Ok Second Interview follow up at

It is correct he said he thinks RD killed his dog.

But he does say if he sees RD again he will kill him "And if i ever find him I will Kill Him" around 1:47-1:49

1st Video of it the Video-ographer States that he Thinks the person they were talking to was High on something "he wasn't positive" 1:43-1:45

1st Video the Guy says RD is a nice guy then 2nd video says when he says "I don't deal with Liers"

Video 1

Video 2

So even though he says things to support both sides. How is he credible he has been caught saying different things in both Interviews. Just don't get how some people take what he says here and not someone else.

[Guest]

What did Mark Glasgow say? I know he thinks its all a hoax, but not sure from what point he believes it to be a hoax? Ihylda is definately lying about me being friends with his source. That lie is a FACT!

I'm surprised you don't remember. He has a source who was present during filming. The two most important things were that his source didn't experience a life-changing event at the time (I think we can at least agree that the killing of a BF would be life changing), and that RD got fired. You don't remember this at all?

[Guest]

I'm surprised you don't remember. He has a source who was present during filming. The two most important things were that his source didn't experience a life-changing event at the time (I think we can at least agree that the killing of a BF would be life changing), and that RD got fired. You don't remember this at all?

Yes but how do we not know that his source just had to keep quiet? How do we know that his source wanted to say more but couldnt? And also, with the Steve Byrne prop theory, we had Benboy who is a professional prop maker and has been all his life, just a couple of days ago, say himself that it would be pretty difficult to create a prop of just a head and shoulders to that sophistication. Unfortunately it appears that only Steve Byrnes himself saw that film as no one else out there has come forward to confirm it. And now with Benboys statement, it doesnt give the film much credence. I never said Steve Bryne was lying anyhow, I wondered if he had been mistaken?

[Guest]

So with Adam saying the police are after RD from Texas.

I wonder if it is about the Possibility of him Killing the homeless guys dog?

[Guest]

This 2nd video muddies the waters even more. I have no reason to believe RD killed the dog so I'll leave that alone. Gunshots do not mean a dead BF. The guy who lives there says no BFs, but now there are some locals saying multiple BFs in the area?

[Guest]

Thats my Point Belmar,

Its can be point either way.

Its 1 person as a Interview. And as we know many people don't accept "Interviews" or Tales as a legit source of information, unless it confrims what they want.

I think its intresting sure. But i feel the guy presented himself 2 different ways. Was kinda of Indifferent to RD in the 1st then he outright hated liers and stuff and RD is a lier so he doesn't like him.

He confirms

1.) The film crew was there ... and British

2.) Now 1st Interview 1 shot heard, 2nd Interview 2 shots.

3.) Says 2 SUV's in the area.

4.) crew was up in the area for about 10days or so.

5.) Dead dog

6.) Ain't no Bigfoots Just mountain Lions (But the couple at the end confirm the 911 call and that bigfoots have been seen)

I am sure their is more

But it is also all over the map with stuff.

[dopelyrics]

Yes but how do we not know that his source just had to keep quiet? How do we know that his source wanted to say more but couldnt? And also, with the Steve Byrne prop theory, we had Benboy who is a professional prop maker and has been all his life, just a couple of days ago, say himself that it would be pretty difficult to create a prop of just a head and shoulders to that sophistication. Unfortunately it appears that only Steve Byrnes himself saw that film as no one else out there has come forward to confirm it. And now with Benboys statement, it doesnt give the film much credence. I never said Steve Bryne was lying anyhow, I wondered if he had been mistaken?

Benboy also said it could be a mask, or the real thing. That's a pretty broad statement to make, and Benboy will be the first to admit that it's not a conclusive statement either way as to the authenticity of the video.

Please, let's all try and give full accounts of what he said/she said intead of cherry picking parts to suit. Otherwise we are not going to get anywhere with this (after hundreds of pages, this is probably the stupidest comment in the whole thread :s)

It seems to be an extremely volatile topic for some reason.

Lee

Edited February 27, 2013 by dopelyrics

[Guest]

Please, let's all try and give full accounts of what he said/she said intead of cherry picking parts to suit. Otherwise we are not going to get anywhere with this.

I am not cherry picking. I am referring to the idea that the tent video is an articulated prop. This is what Benboy said:

I don't think the tent video is a bust being controlled by a puppeteer, it's either a mask (masks that articulate with actual face movements are available) or its bigfoot lol. In my opinion

You cannot make a realistic, fully articulating bigfoot suit/specimen for the money that your talking about. You couldn't make one for any price that would make you believe it to be real once your withing a few feet of it. Sure special effects, prosthetics makeup and prop building has come a long way over the years, but I just can't fathom how a fake body could trick someone.

Healy fx say they could do it for half the price, by that assume you mean 50k? They could build something, and it would look good no doubt, sure. They couldn't build something that would trick you into believing it could be the real deal. The firm who build the cadavers for medical training could do it for that price also, but they don't look real, they do look like what we view to be an actual body, but they don't look 'real' they don't look like an actual dead body...

Think about madame tussauds, their waxwork is awesome, obviously you go in there knowing what your viewing isn't real, but lets say you had never heard of madame tussauds, and were told your going to view a dead body. your walked into a room with a waxwork laid out on a table, by the time your within a few feet you could tell that what your looking isn't real and they make arguably the most realistic looking figures in the world. The same would go for this! Unless your eyesight is terrible you could spot a fake body. Dyer won't be making enough from this to cover the cost of the most realistic bigfoot prop ever. Because that's what it would need to be....