Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Vx - Since I remember but don't feel like going page by page through the previous thread say that Musky told you a few times that the picture on his facebook was his brother? But now that's him two years ago in London? Sorry ronn, but he's definitely a shill. He's agitated because he can't keep his story straight. His beef with Kulls is because he outed him. Kulls's story is well known. He was contracted by Biscardi to help with his investigations because that's his specialty. Unknown to Dyer and Biscardi, Kulls was infiltrating Biscardi to out him on his hoaxing. It's all a matter of public record, just like Dyer's past, but this is Dyer's MO and seeing Musky trying to bash people just makes me laugh. They figure since people forget what they did yesterday, people will believe the stuff about Kulls too. And no one's going to bash Derek. Derek is a respected member of the community. No one bashed Noel either. They asked him tough questions about his source, but that's it. If Noel's rep took any hit, it's because of his own comments to Kulls. That's not anyone's fault here. I know of no source that said the FB pic of Musky was his brother. I did read speculation about this..no confirmation. Let's see what Musky comes up with on Kulls. Dyer will post the audio of Kulls provided by Musky..supposedly incriminating himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 I'm listening to the interview Skyla posted. He is so full of ****! Interesting comments about the fist fight with the camera crew. approx 19:30 They were upset that he shot the weapon. Not so much that he killed the BF, but they're from the UK and don't like guns and it (RD shooting the weapon) scared them so they started a fight. No mention of saving the cameraman. hmmm. Fits perfectly into my theory. Well the account is that the BF knocked over the cameraman and then carried on circling them. Thats different to attacking the cameraman. But yes us Brits are animal lovers (supposedly) but we do alot of game shooting though. Maybe they felt that RD could have wounded it so that it could be caught but not go for the kill? I used to make jewelry as a hobby, bigfoot pendants and brooches would be easy to make and the designs Hey I just bought a glass pendant from ebay the other day with a picture of Patty on it and it says 'i believe'. One of yours? He also says that photo of him ( the older one ) is him in 2010 in London England. OK....if that is Musky he has considerably aged in the three years that passed and gained quite a bit of weight. Ah ha! I thought it looked like Camden Passage in London in the background! Skyla, thats a bit personal. Some people can put on weight look tired etc etc from photo to photo. Can you compare pictures of yourself with a 3 year difference and say that you look exactly the same in them? I couldnt. For a start I keep changing my hair colour! Rick also said that all of his supporters get to see the Body! Seriously!!!! WOW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 VioletX, I would actually love to get to see and study the Minnesota Iceman from a professional perspective. It is one of those things that is either FAKE, or real. If REAL it is a game changer. 2 Minutes of examination would let us know if it was real or not. I wish someone still had it, and we could check it out. The thing that sort of freaks me out is that the 2 best examples of BF: the PGf and Iceman have been on the record for over 40 years. BF could have been proven before I was born, but issues with believability etc have caused us to have to wait. Now we have Dr. Ketchum's study, and are waiting on Dr. Sykes'. The egenetic proof seems to be there. If we had the Iceman, a few chips into the ice, and a small sample would prove without a doubt what we were looking at. The shame is that we have to wait on the next body. Dr. Ketchum's work, although groundbreaking, will still unfortunately need a body for final proof. St. G- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 I noticed that right off..night and day. No one ages THAT much in 2 years...so I agree with you on this. Ok. Since you are all questioning this. As you know I am a FB friend of Muskys now. I have gone into his profile and looked through his other pictures and he does look the same and they are dated 2010. Also his profile picture says it was created on 2010 too. Mind you, I cannot prove this so you just have to take my word for it. Maybe Musky could friend you Ronn and you could go in check too? Just an idea?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest njjohn Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 This was from Violet from Musky earlier in the month. psstt- Ronn1, Yesterday Musky Allen said that the pix was his brother-in-law or someone like that, Edited by VioletX, 06 February 2013 - 01:43 PM. And since some said none of his lies have been proven (The Meldrum one was btw), here's one he posted right here through Vx: Musky Allen']Lastly, I do NOT think Rick Dyer has a body. I'm here to show the community he's a fraud. This was the same position i took with Moneymaker in 98' when he threatened to sue me when i exposed the BFRO after several of his admin's joined my AOL Bigfoot site and spilled their guts...this was way before Youtube and Facebook `existed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Anything else? VX - Musky has been accused of the terrible crime of 'aging' Da Da Da!!!!! Quote njjohn - why does his quote taken prior to his viewing the body, show him to be a liar? I am confused? Musky Allen ']Lastly, I do NOT think Rick Dyer has a body. I'm here to show the community he's a fraud. This was the same position i took with Moneymaker in 98' when he threatened to sue me when i exposed the BFRO after several of his admin's joined my AOL Bigfoot site and spilled their guts...this was way before Youtube and Facebook `existed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 VioletX, I would actually love to get to see and study the Minnesota Iceman from a professional perspective. It is one of those things that is either FAKE, or real. If REAL it is a game changer. 2 Minutes of examination would let us know if it was real or not. I wish someone still had it, and we could check it out. The thing that sort of freaks me out is that the 2 best examples of BF: the PGf and Iceman have been on the record for over 40 years. BF could have been proven before I was born, but issues with believability etc have caused us to have to wait. Now we have Dr. Ketchum's study, and are waiting on Dr. Sykes'. The egenetic proof seems to be there. If we had the Iceman, a few chips into the ice, and a small sample would prove without a doubt what we were looking at. The shame is that we have to wait on the next body. Dr. Ketchum's work, although groundbreaking, will still unfortunately need a body for final proof. St. G- Someone does have the iceman, it sold on eBay recently. You do know it was fake? Go check it out http://www.ebay.com/itm/Genuine-Minnesota-Iceman-Sideshow-Bigfoot-1960s-/261166454223 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest njjohn Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Jacki - the bolded part. Moneymaker never threatened to sue him. And the picture on his facebook back then he said was his brother, or brother-in-law to Violet. Another lie since you've seen multiple pictures of him and he today said it was him. His entire backstory is a lie. He was a liar then, he's a liar now. Lying doesn't have an expiration date. And I posted the whole quote so he couldn't come back tomorrow and say I took it out of context. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 Jacki - the bolded part. Moneymaker never threatened to sue him. Dont know about the brother/brother in law bit. But Matt Moneymaker did threaten a Law suit on Musky in 1998. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest njjohn Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 No, he didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 (edited) No, he didn't. njjohn. Its a question over who is the liar and I dont think either of us can prove that. Shall we wait for Derek Randles trip and if DR says yes there is a Bigfoot, we will atleast know that Musky has not lied about his trip to Vegas, which is the most essential bit of Musky information for this story rather than spats between him and Matt Moneymaker. Matt Moneymaker didnt sue him, but threatened to sue him (apparantly). I cannot prove this via quotes from Twitter though. Edited February 24, 2013 by JackiLB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 No, he didn't. btw..you notice how Matt Moneymaker says on his twitter quote that he didnt sue Musky. Well thats right. He didnt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 (edited) Tune into BlogTalk radio Sunday evening "The Bigfoot Tonight Show" and the guest, Derek Randels, will end this once and for all. Most of you ravaged Christoher Noel will you do the same for Mr. Randels. If Randels backs Mr. Dyers claim then most of you posters should find another hobby. So what if derek randals in on the show? He hasn't seen the body. We already know a date has been confirmed....until he has seen a body, nothing has changed. Skyla, thats a bit personal. Some people can put on weight look tired etc etc from photo to photo. Can you compare pictures of yourself with a 3 year difference and say that you look exactly the same in them? I couldnt. For a start I keep changing my hair colour! In no way was I attempting to degrade MR Musky, whatever his name is, but was only pointing out the huge differences in photos take 3 years apart. If it just so happens those differences are age advancement and weight gain....that's just facts. Musky is the one calling into radio blogs and posting rants on Facebook. He is the one putting himself out in the open in the eye of the public( bigfoot community ) A photo is fair game to scrutinize if it is meant to support that this person is in fact real. If we weren't questioning who musky really is and if he is/isn't a shilll, the differences in his photos would personally be irrelevant to the topic at hand. Edited February 24, 2013 by simplyskyla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 I said it before, Musky in the picture with RD out side the hotel, looks like he was partying all night. If anyone saw a real BF they would be pumped up and excited. He has his eyes closed, why? to cover the fact he wasn't crying, if he were his eyes would be red. Look at the picture in the car he's bright eyed and bushy tailed............ just my $0.02. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hawk-o Posted February 24, 2013 Share Posted February 24, 2013 I said it before, Musky in the picture with RD out side the hotel, looks like he was partying all night. If anyone saw a real BF they would be pumped up and excited. He has his eyes closed, why? to cover the fact he wasn't crying, if he were his eyes would be red. Look at the picture in the car he's bright eyed and bushy tailed............ just my $0.02. Speaking of Partying in Vegas..... Rick set up a website for all of his believers to register to get a personal viewing of the Body. I am thinking it will probably coinside with the BIG BIGFOOT PARTY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts