Woodslore Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 If not mistaken I never said don't dismiss it. Think I said more along the lines not saying this is or is not a hoax. more can we say this was for sure falsehood. Were we there? Rather than throw a guy under a bus look at the facts not what we want to see. As for the video again if not mistaken does he not in the interview on SC (or is that allowed to be quoted) that the body was another time. The video I saw had no body and the interview I heard mentioned no body at the site for the video shown ( it was on YouTube they talked about what was being seen while the video played). Not saying believe it. I'm saying can you prove what you are saying and the claims you have made. Why do we eat our own. Might be young but I know you want to claim something best put the cards on the table otherwise your just spreading dirt. As for the hypocritical comment what I was getting at was this saying they are lying or hoax because they have a pay to view secturn on their site is dump. We have pay to view does that mean people here are hoaxing? To complain and say that, that is a sign of hoax when we have it here on our site as well (pay for it or not doesn't matter) that is hypocritical. Can't say because they do it it is a sign of a hoax and here it is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Well we see it differently. He wasn’t complaining, he was making a point. Complaining is your word not his. I didn't say Woodslore was complaining. That is your word. But Woodslore wasn't making a very good point since I'm not sure they understand the meaning of hypocrisy. You can't be hypocritical in this context unless you are charging money for access to an area of a website. That is your stated opinion. Were you there with Bob Garrett? Just wondering. I wasn't with RD when he supposedly shot one either, but I didn't need to in order to know he was lying. Do you really believe three people's family would not raise a fuss about this? Or their friends, employers? Are the government keeping them quiet as well. All that is needed in this instance is common sense. As for the hypocritical comment what I was getting at was this saying they are lying or hoax because they have a pay to view secturn on their site is dump. We have pay to view does that mean people here are hoaxing? To complain and say that, that is a sign of hoax when we have it here on our site as well (pay for it or not doesn't matter) that is hypocritical. Can't say because they do it it is a sign of a hoax and here it is not. Plenty of people here have been accused of being and even outed as hoaxsters. That's one of the best things about this site, ferreting out the BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) Hmmm, well I'm Stop with the shadow boxing and say what you mean so that it can be understood. I want to understand what you’re saying but it’s difficult sometimes. I have two questions to ask, were you there in Texas on the day where this incident allegedly occurred? If not, how can you then proclaim something is true or false? Last question, who is the self-promoter on the thread trying to promote another hoax? LOL, What specific sentence can I slowly explain to you? If your not familiar with the names, and the topic, not sure what else I can do, its pretty clear what I am stating. As I have just stated, some people WANT to be fooled. I listed a pile of para-bigfoot nonsense, I linked a video showing the same Garrett story ver batim, Gee, aren't ''detectives'' supposed to be the MOST hard boiled people out there? Intensely skeptical of peoples claims? Really, there is lots of nonsense, I sit here and predict, no one else went in WRITING and predicted the demise of Falcon or any other thing, lots of Johnny come latelies, but no one sticks there neck out other than the Amazing Wag. The question of was I there in Texas is not relevant. Im NOWHERE there are Bigfootsies reported. There is a gigantic pile of Panda-Poo piling UP and UP and UP. I just gave exellent posts detailing not only Bigfoot nonsense, but parallels in the UFO/Alien field. Problem is, you have to corrolate all the data, process it, and see "the" pattern. Not many can do that. Sorry. Not many predict the ''future'', except the ''Amazing Wag'' I typed this just for R/A, instead of your legendary $20.00 I owe, so you could read it in awe, and misunderstanding. What is the Quote from Barnum and Bailey? Just put that here, again, because some people want to be fooled, its a BF site, what else can I say? ''Were you there with Garret?" Thats pretty thin soup. Actually, someone already in that camp is doing a great job entertainment wise, flopping around like a fish out of water. And the thread goes on, and on and on and oooon... Edited June 1, 2015 by Wag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Pretty sure RD was outed as a liar with the while body in a freezer. So his credibility was shot before the second shooting. Has Bob ever been proven out right to be a hoaxer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) Pretty sure RD was outed as a liar with the while body in a freezer. So his credibility was shot before the second shooting. Has Bob ever been proven out right to be a hoaxer? He appears to be associating with one (accused) at the least. Not to say that media people don't associate with ''hoaxers''. Les Stroud did a great show with Todd Standing. Said before, all this could be half and half stuff. sounds like Garrett got his other half of the story from Youtube, when the campers were allegedly killed in California... Really, I posted on Dual Survival guy who got fired because he DIDN'T WANT TO "HOAX" PEOPLE for fear of loosing integrity. Really, is it that difficult for y'all to see that particular comparison, on top of the massive piles of data I've posted? No wonder the hoaxing continues, people want to be fooled, or are easy to fool. Edited June 1, 2015 by Wag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) I didn't say Woodslore was complaining. That is your word. But Woodslore wasn't making a very good point since I'm not sure they understand the meaning of hypocrisy. You can't be hypocritical in this context unless you are charging money for access to an area of a website. I wasn't with RD when he supposedly shot one either, but I didn't need to in order to know he was lying. Do you really believe three people's family would not raise a fuss about this? Or their friends, employers? Are the government keeping them quiet as well. All that is needed in this instance is common sense. Plenty of people here have been accused of being and even outed as hoaxsters. That's one of the best things about this site, ferreting out the BS. Thank you for the rebuttal but we’ll stay on the Bob Garrett issue for the moment if it’s all the same. I've asked this question several times on this thread and received no answer. Perhaps someone with your credentials would care to provide some insight, were you there with that man on that day when he claims the alleged incident occurred? I wasn’t and said as much several times so how it is that anyone can definitively say that it didn’t occur if they were not there? Logic dictates this would peak anyone’s curiosity to know how that can be so, how that is remotely possible without being present on scene at that very moment is beyond me. Remember that it is with our intellect that we apprehend truth and if we care to stand in judgment of others by dictating some self-imagined edict then let’s clear the table and decide who here amongst us was physically there with that man at that very time and location to witness what may or may not have occurred? Otherwise we all should sue on suppliant knees to be knighted for the masterful ability to determine from the seat of our chairs through our fingertips innocence or guilt in this charade of judge of jury. Without being witness to such event all we have is a remarkable claim. Your claim is the best things about this site, ferreting out the BS and yet it appears this discussion skirts the question of eye witness accounts and your claim to have this ability is not predicated on eye witness evidence of the highest order of evidence rather you base it on some dictum or whim and fancy which is I do not think your argument doesn’t hold any water and why this site is not the best site ferret out hoaxers at best the topic continues to be a hotly contested question. The answer remains somewhere with the person making the claim and not with you. So where is the common sense? Where pray tell in anyone’s people’s court are people sitting in judgment of others where the accusers are allowed to attach colorful names as has been the case all through this thread using words such as con, fraud, hoaxer and liars on the accused before the people or accused state their case? Nowhere but as you say, the site has been pretty good in ferreting out hoaxers. Yet, when the basic question is asked who here amongst us was present with the accused as eye witness to testify all you hear are crickets. I don’t care one way or another if SC radio program fails or succeeds, if the Wes and his brother ever produce another episode or if the Garrett fellow ever says another peep, I wasn’t the one duped for paying subscribership. I simply point out the foolishness of anyone knowing something for a fact when they were not present to attest to it. It’s impossible. Edited June 1, 2015 by Gumshoeye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 It's hard to make any sense from that word soup jumble of a post but if you want to believe this guy go right ahead. I choose not to and I have the right to express why I don't believe him whether you or anyone else likes it as long as I stay within the guidline of the forum rules. You come to praise him, I come to bury him. My common sense tells me it is a load of horse hooey. We take these things very seriously in the state of Texas and two people being murdered is not going to go un-noticed or un-reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Divergent1 Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) Were you there in Texas on date and time this incident occurred yes or no? We’re not discussing circumstantial evidence we’re trying to figure who was there in Texas when Garrett says this thing happened. I thought we were talking about all of the evidence. Based on what's been discussed so far, no one was there, not even Garrett. He didn't even get the moon phase right at the time this event supposedly occurred. If not mistaken I never said don't dismiss it. Think I said more along the lines not saying this is or is not a hoax. more can we say this was for sure falsehood. Were we there? Rather than throw a guy under a bus look at the facts not what we want to see. As for the video again if not mistaken does he not in the interview on SC (or is that allowed to be quoted) that the body was another time. The video I saw had no body and the interview I heard mentioned no body at the site for the video shown ( it was on YouTube they talked about what was being seen while the video played). Not saying believe it. I'm saying can you prove what you are saying and the claims you have made. Why do we eat our own. Might be young but I know you want to claim something best put the cards on the table otherwise your just spreading dirt. As for the hypocritical comment what I was getting at was this saying they are lying or hoax because they have a pay to view secturn on their site is dump. We have pay to view does that mean people here are hoaxing? To complain and say that, that is a sign of hoax when we have it here on our site as well (pay for it or not doesn't matter) that is hypocritical. Can't say because they do it it is a sign of a hoax and here it is not. It depends on what you are selling. If they are promoting the story as true, then that is a con. The BFF promotes the old archived forum, the Tar Pit, nothing about any of that is stating the events discussed are true. Edited June 1, 2015 by Divergent1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChasingRabbits Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I thought we were talking about all of the evidence. Based on what's been discussed so far, no one was there, not even Garrett. He didn't even get the moon phase right at the time this event supposedly occurred. I think you're mixing up Wes and Garrett. Wes is the one with the wonky moons. Garrett had the torn up camp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Based on what's been discussed so far, no one was there, not even Garrett. Oh my, yes, Garret didn't see any bodies, he was supposedly told there were "people missing". Gumshoe, that's what you call "being hoisted by your own pitard". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I wasn’t and said as much several times so how it is that anyone can definitively say that it didn’t occur if they were not there? Logic dictates this would peak anyone’s curiosity to know how that can be so, how that is remotely possible without being present on scene at that very moment is beyond me. In a thread about hoaxing and absurdity, really, it is out of control Gumshoe, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT A ''DETECTIVE'' IS SUPPOSED TO DO, DETECTIVES ARE NOT ''THERE'' WHEN THE CRIME IS COMMITTED. YOU CLAIM TO BE A ''RETIRED DETECTIVE'' (Which some of us think rather dubious considering the gullibilty issue) What a Merry Go Round, Im gonna throw up pretty soon here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) You come to praise him, I come to bury him. My common sense tells me it is a load of horse hooey. We take these things very seriously in the state of Texas and two people being murdered is not going to go un-noticed or un-reported. Who is praising him? Also if Sasquatch did kill 2 people would it be murder or an animal attack? To say it was murder wouldn't that mean Sasquatch is human? It depends on what you are selling. If they are promoting the story as true, then that is a con. The BFF promotes the old archived forum, the Tar Pit, nothing about any of that is stating the events discussed are true. Can you prove this is fake? Can you show proof prior to this of the man being a hoaxer? I mean can you link him directly to a known hoax? If not then how can you say it is a for sure a hoax? You want believe it is not real fine go ahead you are free to believe that, but saying it is a hoax because of these reasons which are speculation then what are you proving? I am not saying it happen I am not saying it didn't. I am trying to look at the idea that to say that this is a hoax simply because the issues raised of pay to view, and no report doesn't make it a hoax. Might smell a little fishy but so does a salmon, does that mean it an't a fish? I am not saying this guy is the greatest, I am asking can you prove a claim that has been made? If not it is speculation and until proven speculation remains in the realm of theory not fact. Might be how we get to truth but it is also how we kill our own name. I just don't think it is right speculate it is a hoax or a con and not show any proof or pattern for it. Wag you feel like throwing up bucket at your feet. Edited June 1, 2015 by Woodslore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) I think you're mixing up Wes and Garrett. Wes is the one with the wonky moons. Garrett had the torn up camp. Thats ok, they are merging to become one and the same. Garett is the new ''Jevings'', Sas Chron sidekick with ''street cred''. Was the last sas chron show any good? didn't catch it. I am trying to look at the idea that to say that this is a hoax simply because the issues raised of pay to view, and no report doesn't make it a hoax. Do you have me on block Woodsi? Ah, bucket helps. Need another one. Edited June 1, 2015 by Wag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodslore Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Do you have me on block Woodsi? Ah, bucket helps. Need another one. You're welcome for the bucket. Though what do you mean by on block? Am I ignoring you? Am I not listening (well in this case reading)? If that is the question being asked, nope. I wonder what is the point you are trying to get at. You say there is a promoter here on the forums, here on this thread. How there was someone there at the camp who is now flopping around like a fish out of water, entertaining people. You talk about all the nonsense in the Sasquatch/Paranormal/UFO circles and how it is all show-biz. You seem to be against this yet do not name the promoter? Why is that? Are you afraid to name them? If you has such insight and such dislike of this matter why not make it known and put it to rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChasingRabbits Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 (edited) Thats ok, they are merging to become one and the same. Garett is the new ''Jevings'', Sas Chron sidekick with ''street cred''. Was the last sas chron show any good? didn't catch it. I am trying to look at the idea that to say that this is a hoax simply because the issues raised of pay to view, and no report doesn't make it a hoax. Do you have me on block Woodsi? Ah, bucket helps. Need another one. No it's not "ok" to merge them together at this point. These are two separate issues. March 18 when Clubbed Foot brought up the SC upheaval, this thread moved from Bob Garrett to Wes and Woody's Wild Woodland Adventure and now it's turning into a witch hunt. Gum's been accused of being Bob Garrett or associated with him, Diana has been accused of being Wes Germer. Betty and Abigail would be proud of this thread. I wouldn't know if the last "sas chron" was any good because I'm not an avid listener. Oh wait....I get it.....yeah, the girls would have been very proud of you Wag, very proud indeed. Edited June 1, 2015 by ChasingRabbits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts