SweatyYeti Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 An IP address and a total lack of denial- that's more than enough as far as I'm concerned. If he wasn't in on the hoax then he wouldn't have been able to state how "far off base" people's claims were. It's basically a self admission right there. But wait....there's more! Where is Tontar's response...to this community's questions/comments??? Tontar talks, and talks, and talks, and talks, and talks, and talks, and talks, and talks, and talks, and talks...about Bigfoot....and then...he talks some more, about Bigfoot........ad nauseum.....etc....etc....etc. But, where is his willingness to talk with fellow members of this community of people, concerning the Elbe trackway?? To me, his defiance is as inappropriate as anything else he may have done. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerhunter Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I may start drinking more wine since I'm am giving up Budwater Light.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I might suggest to anyone on the forum that if you really want to punish someone you do not need words to do it. Simply deprive them of the attention and recognition they so deeply desire. Put them on ignore and encourage others to do the same. Deprive the Gods of your prayers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Personally I don't see any crazy people here, but there are unstable people all over the internet- even in the skeptical . It's no excuse for anyone to play the victim, especially when they voluntarily take the risk. I think even more in the skeptical community, I don't buy into the whole ghost thing, but I would have to be about 48 cards short of a full deck to go on a GFF forum, post that it's all BS, file a report to a GFRO that I've seen a ghost at a cemetery a couple nights, then run around with a bed sheet on when they get there... But, if i lose 48 cards in my deck, and go for it, I learned not to use my computer and get caught, Ill use my phone with caller id block Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 There are two things that I have taken away from Elbe. 1) Tontar (allegedly) is prone to test his theories in a physical but reckless manner. 2) Bigfoot investigations tend to lead in with a confirmation bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) If it was done by him as an attempt to show that amateur researchers will be easily fooled by faked tracks and hail them as real with a laundry list of reasons, well then he accomplished that goal. But it was hardly necessary given the fact that that point has been historically proven over and over again.<p> Over in the PGF threads people are encouraged to build a Patty suit all the time. Maybe he just started with the feet and got lazy? Proving your point by showing how easily some of the BF "evidence" can be faked is not, in my opinion, that horrible. In fact it's downright encouraged and even taunted as a challenge in the PGF threads. This one probably went too far, but the basic idea has some merit. At least they looked more real than Chewtilda. Edited March 1, 2013 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I am not sure how one can sue a person on this. Someone found a set of tracks that looked real. They called other people to come and look at it. Was Hoaxer the one who called the other people to look at it? If not all the hoaxer did is create a set of tracks and sit back and watch. If the Hoaxer was the one that called then I would suspect the could sue him for money and time and maybe reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I doubt they could sue. It's not like he asked for money, or made them go out to investigate. I don't think people get sued for pranks very often. Was Dyer sued in 2008? He had major networks waste air time on him. His buddy got fired from the Sheriff's Dept., but nothing legal happened to Dyer. This is peanuts in comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) A hoaxer would be responsible for reimbursement if emergency personnel were involved with the investigation of the hoax. Edited March 1, 2013 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) ^^ That's true. But I don't imagine any sires were blaring on the way to investigate these tracks. Just that image alone is cracking me up. Here comes the BFRO-Mobile lights flashing and sirens blaring. Faster, faster! We have to get there and confirm this before someone reveals it as a hoax. Edited March 1, 2013 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) ^^ they wouldn't of had to go far. It was 100 yards, in clear view, from town. In fact I just google mapped it and the fire station right there. If the investigator would have turned 180 degree and snapped a picture the fire station may have been in the shot around 300 - 400 yards away in the center of town.. http://maps.google.com/maps?q=elbe+fire+station&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS496US496&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&ei=9tQwUYSZN6rHigLAkoH4Dg&ved=0CAsQ_AUoAg Edited March 1, 2013 by Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Hmmmm...This topic is a double-edged sword for me, personally. I personally hold no animosity towards Tontar. I view it as a learning experience, personally. When I first heard about the track-line, I couldn't believe that people were taking it seriously, based on the location, and knew for a 99.9% fact that it was a hoax....Until I got out there. I am an extremely objective investigator in my profession, and always keep my emotions in check, but I noticed right away that I was wanting the pieces to fit the puzzle, based on the hype and my personal bias. The track-line was really cool looking in person, and the second you start picturing an 8 foot mythological beast strolling along the beach, the objectivity starts to diminish. You start getting caught up in the buzz of the event, and the collective feeling amongst all of the researchers. I still wonder, if not for the IP look-up, if the Elbe Track-line would've gone down as the best track-line ever amongst the BF community? I know not everybody was sold, but it definitely appeared as if most people were bamboozled by it at the moment. I'm sure every researcher has had their moments where they want something to be real so bad that they start looking for the reasons that it could be real, as opposed to looking for the reason that it's not, no matter what the evidence may be. I hate to say it, but any evidence collected by somebody, short of proving it through DNA, is suspect to me now. And if the evidence wasn't witnessed being left, it is even more suspect. Lately, we have all of these hair samples that were proffered as possible BF hairs, and it's starting to appear as if researchers had bear, cat, dog, and human hair, but couldn't properly identify the subject that left them, and hoped that they were BF hairs based on whatever circumstances there may have been surrounding it, as opposed to looking at the probable list of suspects, and identifying them properly. I think this is what fuels the skeptics fire, and it's our own fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Thanks PacNWSquatcher. +1 It's ok not to be objective but it's not ok to pretend to be objective. I wonder if investigators are working as hard at getting to the bottom of the Matilda fiasco as they did trying to out Tontar. Now that would be impressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I guess it depends on how valuable you consider your own time, or if you had signifigant travel expenses to investigate. I average 60-90 hour work weeks. Each free minute is a precious commodity to me. If you are investigating Sasquatch, you are probably going to lose some time to investigating reports that are not legitimate, but the way this circumstance was described leaves a very sour taste in my mouth. To participate in this forum, and to continue to lead on well intentioned investigators? I would definitely hold some animosity towards someone who wasted my time and resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MoMoMafia Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 If it was done by him as an attempt to show that amateur researchers will be easily fooled by faked tracks and hail them as real with a laundry list of reasons, well then he accomplished that goal. But it was hardly necessary given the fact that that point has been historically proven over and over again.<p> Over in the PGF threads people are encouraged to build a Patty suit all the time. Maybe he just started with the feet and got lazy? Proving your point by showing how easily some of the BF "evidence" can be faked is not, in my opinion, that horrible. In fact it's downright encouraged and even taunted as a challenge in the PGF threads. This one probably went too far, but the basic idea has some merit. At least they looked more real than Chewtilda. Ha! Chewtilda, thats great! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts