Guest Bigfoothunter Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 ^^ I never thought that Byrne accomplished much of anything when in Nepal. He listened to some locals claim they had body parts of the Yeti, then he proceeded to have an alleged finger bone of a Yeti smuggled out of the country and later examined and tested. The results proved the bone wasn't from a Yeti ... as I believe it was found to be human. I am not a historian of Peter Byrne, but from what limited information I have learned over time is that he had a knack for raising money to hunt for Bigfoot, but my impression is that he fudged the truth when ever needed so to justify the funds he was looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 ^Agreed. But I was mostly referring to his work with a wildlife preserve in Nepal. He seems to have an organization that claims to have established the preserve and is supporting efforts there on behalf of the preserve. However, I couldnt find where he has any official connection except on his website. He also solicited donations via this website. IMO this does speak to his character and integrity and is now documented. The fact some here are so qucik to overlook that gives me pause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBeaton Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 So what did Mr Bryne acually get accomplished? You know he raised a lot of money and did a lot of good over the years, but mostly for Peter Bryne. What did all his fund raising and trips to Nepal accomplish? What are the results of his efforts in Nepal? Darrell, His work there establishin' the White Grass Plains Wildlife Reserve is quite the accomplishment if you ask me. I don't know "he raised a lot of money", do you ? An how do you know it was "mostly for Peter Bryne(Byrne)" ??? His fund raisin' was for the buildin' an maintenance of the wildlife reserve, his trips there were to work on the reserve, the protection of elephants an tigers etc. is a accomplishment in my opinion. Pat... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Urkelbot Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Looks like green knew all along. Old article from 95. "Peter Byrne is a fraud" And krantz "a sham a fake" http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1995-07-02/features/9507020116_1_sasquatch-bigfoot-research-project-academy-of-applied-science Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted February 11, 2014 BFF Patron Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) I will give Byrne this after reading that article. He changed from being a hunter of tigers to an observer and tracker of Sasquatch, not a hitman. To me, that earns him my respect. All the more if it made Krantz mad. I'd have liked to see Dahinden's response to it all is my only regret. As for Green, I'll put my lot with Byrne and his "near human". Until we know more about A. sediba and the transition to human in the paleoanthropology record, he may just be right and get the last laugh on Green (not a Green hater here just not a fan of the primitive ape hypothesis when it comes to Sasquatch). Edited February 11, 2014 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 It's hard to accept Byrne as a tracker of Sasquatch when the alleged track finds he claimed to have made were little more than the same photo shown reversed and flipped over three different times. And while I believe the Sasquatch to be an animal, mainly because of it being seen as having eyeshine that is an animal characteristic and something humans do not possess, I wouldn't mind if it was something in between. However, after reading 'Peter and the Rabbit', along with this latest 20 year long fiasco, I doubt that there will be anything he can do now that will give him the last laugh on anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xspider1 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 He changed from being a hunter of tigers to an observer and tracker of Sasquatch, not a hitman. And, that seems to have been after there was a decline in the number of people-eating Tigers. I too am not a fan of killing a Sasquatch for the purpose of proving that they exist(ed). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted February 11, 2014 Admin Share Posted February 11, 2014 ^^^^^^^^ I am! How old is Byrne again? It would seem that Byrne's non lethal method of a Huey chasing down Bigfoot and Byrne shooting a biopsy dart while standing on a skid in a temperate triple canopy rain forest has failed....... Let's get this done and over with! And for gosh sakes develop a strategy that Tom, **** or Harry can employ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Needless to say, he is a legend, and his contributions to sasquatch research laid the foundation for modern day cryptozoology. Does him having legal problems today affect his efforts 50+ years ago? I don't see how. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Needless to say, he is a legend, and his contributions to sasquatch research laid the foundation for modern day cryptozoology. Does him having legal problems today affect his efforts 50+ years ago? I don't see how. It certainly doesn't help to have combined proven evidence of his hoaxing alleged Sasquatch related matters seen in conjunction with a more recent history of further deceptions that seems to have expanded its borders elsewhere over the past 20 years. It raises the question of what it is that he really has done vs. what he wanted people to believe that he has done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I want to say that I have referenced a piece called 'Peter and the Rabbit' on several occasions, which is something I also read years ago, but the data mentioned in this thread should be said to have come in part from a piece called 'Peter and the Sasquatch'. I hope that my mis-wording of the title has not caused any confusion. Bigfoothunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See-Te-Cah NC Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Even though I've no doubt that an oversight such as referencing materials and attributing them to an incorrect source is an honest mistake, it could be seen as a reason to doubt opinions on the matter. After all, if someone makes a mistake in one area it affects their credibility in another, wouldn't you say? Just putting it out there. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 ^Very true See. But I also see a witch hunt mentality as well. For ANYONE to cast a stone at Peter must first reflect a bit on oneself. Meaning, EVERY single member of the BFF has at one time broken the law, stolen something, or swindled someone to some degree. It's the 'degree' apparently that has some folks up in arms. But there is not one innocent soul that is judging Peter. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bigfoothunter Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) I remember my father sometimes telling me about something I had done as a child while at the same time calling me by my brothers name. Because I knew who he was talking about - I seldom corrected him. Those things happen. I am at least happy that while I misstated the title of the piece I was referencing - the error was in plain view as I also posted the piece itself with the title right on it. (see above) I can only assume that no one else caught it at the time as no one corrected me or that they knew what I was talking about and just didn't care about the simple error. And while I am no saint, I cannot think of a time as an adult that I fabricated evidence for personal gain or committed fraud at a criminal level. And I do not wish Byrne any il-will and hope that he learns from his mistakes so to better himself. I do however confess that I do not appreciate hoaxers. Edited February 11, 2014 by Bigfoothunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 "I cannot think of a time as an adult that I ........ or committed fraud at a criminal level." ^I'm sure the IRS, if it wanted to, could find a time. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts