chelefoot Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 OK TIME OUT! Since there are umpteen posts that I would have to edit with replies and comments coming from several members and the report button was not used, I will just address this openly for everyone to read. Rock gave his opinion of the campsite incident and of Bob G.... just like we all have. BobG is not a member here, therefore is not afforded the protection against being labeled a liar, hoaxer that he would have if he were a member. While I get that you were trying to make a point, CR, you still are not allowed to call Rock a Liar, hoaxer. The only time that is remotely ok is if you have rock solid evidence that someone has told a lie or perpetuated a hoax. That's not the case here. This thread is not about Rock's character, based on his opinion. Not sure why everyone else was able to voice their opinion, including myself, but Rock gets blasted for his. But again, that is not what this thread is about, so let's move on. And guys... use the report button rather than carrying on and on about the rules in the thread. You have no idea how much work it would take for me to remove, edit all this stuff. Now let's get back to the topic. I'm done with the ifs, buts and maybes.I've came my logical conclusion on this story sometime ago.So a slight change of tack here folks...Now Bob Garrett was a pretty low profile researcher who had a solid reputation among those who knew him and his work. I'm just wondering what happened to him which led him to make the claims that he did?Was he coerced by the SC guys to come up with something that fitted with murderous, beheading BF agenda?Or did he come across the wrecked camp and decide to concoct a tale that would gain him primetime on the on what was one of the biggest BF radio shows around and maybe a little notoriety too?Has anyone heard anything from Garrett recently? Just wondering about the health angle here.A normal, reasonable, everyday guy gets caught up (unwittingly?) in the hokey SC world of belligerent Bigfoot brutality and suddenly he's claiming Black Helicopter sightings and Feds shutting him down because he 'knows too much'.If I was a friend of Bob Garrett I'd be hoping my buddy was okay. Thanks Mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Well, I've not known R/A to lie, but I do have some advice for him, BE MORE LIKE A LANISTER! No charge for this post, whats the point anyway?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Divergent1 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Well, I've not known R/A to lie, but I do have some advice for him, BE MORE LIKE A LANISTER! Yeah, right. The last time I gave you a credit card number I lost everything I had. The only thing I saved was my laptop which I'm using to type this while living in a cardboard box next to a hipster cafe so I can steal wi-fi. I don't get it. Just a little comic relief. He sez I owe him money, I sez he owes me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChasingRabbits Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) You seem to have some personal investment in this and it seems your temper is getting the better of you, so I'm going to do you a favor and leave it alone for now. But don't say I didn't warn you. I have no personal investment in this. No wait, I'll take that back. I do have a personal investment in this. That personal investment is to stop this nonsense of calling people liars or hoaxers because their opinions/conclusions/deductions don't jive with your own opinions/conclusions/deductions. FYI: that mentality does not foster or promote meaningful discussion, debate, and exchange of ideas; that mentality only promotes quarreling and bullying. No, CR called me a liar a hoax and a fraud. He attacked me because the Bob garrett story doesn't hold water and he has nothing to close those holes. If this is allowed here in the general forum, I'd like to know when the rules changed. And if you don't want someone to discuss this story, perhaps you shouldn't start a thread about it. Let's get this straight. 1. I am not a "he" rabbit. I am a "she" rabbit. 2. I am using the Rock Ape Criteria For Liar Detection to determine if you, Rock Ape, are a liar. So if you are a liar, a hoax and a fraud, pat yourself on the back because it was your criteria that determined it. Not attacking you, just stating a fact. Edited June 4, 2015 by ChasingRabbits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Divergent1 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) I guess you missed the moderator warning Alice. What is your criteria for deeming something a hoax? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOyasacx9vQ Edited June 4, 2015 by Divergent1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChasingRabbits Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) I'm done with the ifs, buts and maybes. I've came my logical conclusion on this story sometime ago. So a slight change of tack here folks... Now Bob Garrett was a pretty low profile researcher who had a solid reputation among those who knew him and his work. I'm just wondering what happened to him which led him to make the claims that he did? Was he coerced by the SC guys to come up with something that fitted with murderous, beheading BF agenda? Or did he come across the wrecked camp and decide to concoct a tale that would gain him primetime on the on what was one of the biggest BF radio shows around and maybe a little notoriety too? Has anyone heard anything from Garrett recently? Just wondering about the health angle here. A normal, reasonable, everyday guy gets caught up (unwittingly?) in the hokey SC world of belligerent Bigfoot brutality and suddenly he's claiming Black Helicopter sightings and Feds shutting him down because he 'knows too much'. If I was a friend of Bob Garrett I'd be hoping my buddy was okay. I bolded the things that don't make sense to me. The big Foot world scrutinizes every claim, so there is a very high probability that a fraudulent claim will be uncovered. Someone mentioned in another post about insurance frauds. Insurance frauders do that because they think the risk of being found out is low. Ditto for narcotic pill diverters who go from one doctor to another from one pharmacy to another to get narcotics that they sell. Before the days of computer data bases that has the very detailed information on these prescriptions, the risk of them getting caught was low. Currently, it's very high and that problem isn't as great as it had been 10 to 20 years ago. So it doesn't make sense to me why anyone who wants to gain or maintain credibility as a Big Foot researcher would engage in an elaborate hoax that will be highly scrutinized and has a high probability of being debunked. Additionally, it doesn't make sense to me why anyone who isn't currently monitored by the government would make claims that they are. the old joke was that you can request a copy of your FBI file, but if you don't have one the FBI will investigate you to see why you think they have a file on you. Most people want to stay off the government radar, not intentionally get on it. Those two factors prevent me from labeling this a hoax. I guess you missed the moderator warning Alice. What is your criteria for deeming something a hoax? Didn't miss it, Alice. But I felt I needed to respond to accusations. My criteria for determining if something is fake is as follows. 1. Collection of all possible information. 2. Objective, non-biased examination of that information. (Please note the words objective, non-biased.) 3. Thoughtful examination of that information. (Please note the word thoughtful. This means examining how and why it makes sense or how and why it doesn't make sense. ) 4. Determination of the probability of the event occurring. Low probability = most likely a fake, High probability=most likely not a fake. (Please note the terms 'most likely', to account for the margin or error.) What's your criteria? Edited June 4, 2015 by ChasingRabbits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I have no personal investment in this. No wait, I'll take that back. I do have a personal investment in this. That personal investment is to stop this nonsense of calling people liars or hoaxers because their opinions/conclusions/deductions don't jive with your own opinions/conclusions/deductions. FYI: that mentality does not foster or promote meaningful discussion, debate, and exchange of ideas; that mentality only promotes quarreling and bullying. Let's get this straight. 1. I am not a "he" rabbit. I am a "she" rabbit. 2. I am using the Rock Ape Criteria For Liar Detection to determine if you, Rock Ape, are a liar. So if you are a liar, a hoax and a fraud, pat yourself on the back because it was your criteria that determined it. Not attacking you, just stating a fact.Do Do you always attack people who live in cardboard boxes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Divergent1 Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) My criteria for determining if something is fake is as follows. 1. Collection of all possible information. 2. Objective, non-biased examination of that information. (Please note the words objective, non-biased.) 3. Thoughtful examination of that information. (Please note the word thoughtful. This means examining how and why it makes sense or how and why it doesn't make sense. ) 4. Determination of the probability of the event occurring. Low probability = most likely a fake, High probability=most likely not a fake. (Please note the terms 'most likely', to account for the margin or error.) What's your criteria? Avoid being so open minded that your brains fall out. Edited June 4, 2015 by Divergent1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodhi Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I'm done with the ifs, buts and maybes. I've came my logical conclusion on this story sometime ago. So a slight change of tack here folks... Now Bob Garrett was a pretty low profile researcher who had a solid reputation among those who knew him and his work. I'm just wondering what happened to him which led him to make the claims that he did? Was he coerced by the SC guys to come up with something that fitted with murderous, beheading BF agenda? Or did he come across the wrecked camp and decide to concoct a tale that would gain him primetime on the on what was one of the biggest BF radio shows around and maybe a little notoriety too? Has anyone heard anything from Garrett recently? Just wondering about the health angle here. A normal, reasonable, everyday guy gets caught up (unwittingly?) in the hokey SC world of belligerent Bigfoot brutality and suddenly he's claiming Black Helicopter sightings and Feds shutting him down because he 'knows too much'. If I was a friend of Bob Garrett I'd be hoping my buddy was okay. Could it be possible B.G. and W.G. met or became associated through the texas entertainment who is thought to own the trademark to the S.C. website and name? I have no idea, but it would be interesting if that were the case. Idle speculation only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodhi Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Dang it... can't see how to edit the above post. SHOULD have read: *texas entertainment ATTORNEY who is thought/shown on corportionwiki to own the S.C. website/trademark. Apologies for any confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 I have no personal investment in this. No wait, I'll take that back. I do have a personal investment in this. That personal investment is to stop this nonsense of calling people liars or hoaxers because their opinions/conclusions/deductions don't jive with your own opinions/conclusions/deductions. FYI: that mentality does not foster or promote meaningful discussion, debate, and exchange of ideas; that mentality only promotes quarreling and bullying. You spoke the truth there because you have done nothing but try to quarrel with me and bully me. Please show where I have insulted you. So you are as much a liar, fraud and hoaxer as Garrett because you no facts but your deductions, conclusions and opinions. 2. I am using the Rock Ape Criteria For Liar Detection to determine if you, Rock Ape, are a liar. So if you are a liar, a hoax and a fraud, pat yourself on the back because it was your criteria that determined it. Not attacking you, just stating a fact I see I'm still a liar. What exactly am I lying about? That there were no BF footprints found? That there are no missing persons? Bob Garrett says that on the islands in the lakes it is a virtual boneyard of human remains, that they are everywhere and the remains of 20 people have been found. Utter BS. The only report of human remains being found there did mention 20 bones being found, but they were from one person, found off a roadway, not on an island, and were found several years before Garrett concocted this story. Just some more facts you can accuse me of lying about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ChasingRabbits Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 Avoid being so open minded that your brains fall out. I wouldn't expect that from someone who is "divergent", but more power to you. Could it be possible B.G. and W.G. met or became associated through the texas entertainment who is thought to own the trademark to the S.C. website and name? I have no idea, but it would be interesting if that were the case. Idle speculation only. Yes, that is a good bit of speculation. And in a few days it will be spouted as a 'fact' on this thread. Rock Ape, if you don't think you fulfill your own criteria of a liar/hoax/fraud, then you shouldn't worry about it and keep doing whatever it is you do. The only people quarreling and bullying here are the ones who are presenting their opinions/deductions/conclusions as fact and labeling anyone who isn't on their team naive, gullible, liars, hoaxers, and frauds. They are also the ones accusing people who do not agree with them being Bob Garrett and Wes Germer and who get upset when they get a taste of their own medicine. If the SOP* here is to agree with the prevailing opinion and to suppress opposing opinions about Big Foot, then that's the SOP. *SOP= standard operating procedure (I'm only including this to make sure no one misinterprets this very common acronym to be anything else.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 (edited) Rock Ape, if you don't think you fulfill your own criteria of a liar/hoax/fraud, then you shouldn't worry about it and keep doing whatever it is you do. I'd just like you to show me where I have lied, since you are the one making accusations about other members and calling them names. The only people quarreling and bullying here are the ones who are presenting their opinions/deductions/conclusions as fact and labeling anyone who isn't on their team naive, gullible, liars, hoaxers, and frauds. They are also the ones accusing people who do not agree with them being Bob Garrett and Wes Germer and who get upset when they get a taste of their own medicine. Again, please show me where I have quarrelled with or bullied anyone in this thread. If the SOP* here is to agree with the prevailing opinion and to suppress opposing opinions about Big Foot, then that's the SOP. This is standard operating procedure here... Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. On the BFF we accept very little at face value. We may have a tendency to over-analyze claims and be more skeptical than some other forums dedicated to this topic, but we think that is preferable to the alternative. http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/29306-bff-rules-guidelines/ Edited June 4, 2015 by Rockape Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 4, 2015 Share Posted June 4, 2015 See R/A, you don't pay up, you get hassled. Ready to pay up? $20 at a time is fine... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts