Popular Post OldMort Posted August 1, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted August 1, 2017 38 minutes ago, norseman said: Who did I miss? Some are ex-military internet "tough guys" who like to fantasize in great detail about baggin' themselves a squatch. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted August 1, 2017 Admin Share Posted August 1, 2017 Plussed. I can relate to that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 (edited) From what l've gathered, the fake researchers who have been posting here have initially all had a genuine interest in this subject, but their desire to obtain attention and play a fantasy character quickly became too great. These people can't help themselves, and little do they know that this is actually a real phenomenon, and that anyone with the right skill set will eventually be able to tell that they're not being truthful about their experiences. In my experience, one is far more likely to get a legitimate report just by randomly picking one from the BFRO or any other database than from active members of online forums. Edited August 1, 2017 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patterson-Gimlin Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 (edited) 7 hours ago, norseman said: There is way more silliness than Moneymaker out there..... The way I see it is thus. 1)For most this subject is simple a campfire ghost story. They do not want to prove or disprove anything....pass the marshmallows please. 2)Some get frustrated by the lack of results and start seeking answers that defy modern physics. 3)Some seek to profit from the subject in one form or another. 4)Some blatantly make up stories about hidden "knowledge" in order to garner attention unto themselves. 5)Some stay grounded, looking for the facts, find none and move on to greener pastures. 6)Some are the knowers that have " seen" the creature and stay in the fight. 7)Some just want to argue the PGF in a circular fashion until death do us part. 8 ) Some are skeptics that are doing research on the human brain. 9)Some are professors that seem to like to talk about the reasons for the lack of evidence over the last century. 10)Some are self proclaimed scientists that dismiss your opinion in favor of their own while touting your lack of understanding of the evidence....of which there is very little. Who did I miss? You did great . Fourth plus was me. We all fit in there somewhere and I noticed very recognizable characteristics of many who post here. Awesome job. Self included. Perhaps you should start a poll and have us choose which one we are. Edited August 2, 2017 by Patterson-Gimlin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twist Posted August 2, 2017 Share Posted August 2, 2017 Lol, great thread to break up the monotony of the boards. Light hearted yet effective at getting one to take an introspective view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 On 8/1/2017 at 1:13 PM, norseman said: Who did I miss? Some consider virtually any photographic or video submission to be true by default. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted August 7, 2017 BFF Patron Share Posted August 7, 2017 On 8/1/2017 at 2:56 PM, OldMort said: Some are ex-military internet "tough guys" who like to fantasize in great detail about baggin' themselves a squatch. Longtabber PE types used to be a dime a dozen around here. It was rather fun watching the ducks get knocked down by the .22 like at the old carnival side-shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted August 7, 2017 Share Posted August 7, 2017 1 hour ago, bipedalist said: Longtabber PE types used to be a dime a dozen around here. It was rather fun watching the ducks get knocked down by the .22 like at the old carnival side-shows. There was a more recent example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiiawiwb Posted August 7, 2017 Share Posted August 7, 2017 Several if you ask me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted August 7, 2017 Share Posted August 7, 2017 You're seeing just the tip of the iceberg so to speak. There have been at least a couple dozen attention-seeking fake researchers here since 2015, and there's at least 7 or so still around. It's a very similar situation with the denialists, except they don't have awareness of their own motives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted September 11, 2017 SSR Team Share Posted September 11, 2017 On 8/1/2017 at 7:13 PM, norseman said: There is way more silliness than Moneymaker out there..... The way I see it is thus. 1)For most this subject is simple a campfire ghost story. They do not want to prove or disprove anything....pass the marshmallows please. - Cool 2)Some get frustrated by the lack of results and start seeking answers that defy modern physics. - Not a great character trait. 3)Some seek to profit from the subject in one form or another. - Chancers, they come and go and always will. 4)Some blatantly make up stories about hidden "knowledge" in order to garner attention unto themselves. - Mentally unstable. 5)Some stay grounded, looking for the facts, find none and move on to greener pastures. - Not a great character trait. 6)Some are the knowers that have " seen" the creature and stay in the fight. - Cool, these ones can grow tired however but will always remain. 7)Some just want to argue the PGF in a circular fashion until death do us part. - Appear to be huge ego people and aren't capable of accepting that they're wrong, probably ever. 8 ) Some are skeptics that are doing research on the human brain. - I have real issue with these. These people offer zero to the subject, but sadly are there in force. 9)Some are professors that seem to like to talk about the reasons for the lack of evidence over the last century. - Possibly big ego people that have a pretty closed mind, despite their positions and platforms. 10)Some are self proclaimed scientists that dismiss your opinion in favor of their own while touting your lack of understanding of the evidence....of which there is very little. - Huge ego's and self obsession. Who did I miss? So i guess the conclusion is that there aren't too many good people within this subject.. Hahahaha For what it's worth, i'd never say that MM is hurting this subject. The guy had the nous and foresight to build an amazing database that will directly/indirectly take this subject further forward in the next few years, than it has moved forward in the last 50 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SackScratch Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 is Bobo or Leroy Blevins a member of this forum? I like "Finding Bigfoot" but I also enjoyed "Killing Bigfoot" TV show, did it get cancelled? the more TV shows and documentaries the better in my opinion! What's the deal with the Finding Bigfoot DVD sets? I can't get season 1 complete, got season 2 through 4 on Amazon but nothing available after that one DVD just downloads available... Doesn't look like MoneyMaker is trying to make money in the DVD marketing realm! BTW, is MoneyMaker a member here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiiawiwb Posted December 17, 2017 Share Posted December 17, 2017 8 hours ago, Olevrec said: I think his approach reflected his goal fame/money. As to the data base, it's worthless, cool stories for sure, but no way to verify any of them. Unless of course "they sounded sincere" is the bench mark. Can't really see how it's moved the ball forward in anyway other than generating more reports. And how would you propose a report be verified? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted December 17, 2017 Moderator Share Posted December 17, 2017 Quote As to the data base, it's worthless, cool stories for sure, but no way to verify any of them. Unless of course "they sounded sincere" is the bench mark. Can't really see how it's moved the ball forward in anyway other than generating more reports. I can honestly say that the reports that I investigated without belonging to the BFRO are true. With this said that these reports had led me to having my own encounter in the state of Michigan. So I have no doubt that the reports reported were sincere and true to the best to their knowledge. You just have to put the effort in searching the reports yourself and see for yourself how true they are on your own. Why should you take the word of the witness when you can explore it your self and know the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted December 17, 2017 BFF Patron Share Posted December 17, 2017 (edited) Element of truth to that post SB ^, I would never have even been interested or believed BF could possibly be in the mtns of NC if I had not read a ton of reports and researched some state reports and joined a few chat groups in the state first. It became obvious from reading the reports that BF probably get caught cruising ditches for roadkill for example. Tons of patterns can be determined from reading the reports. I even derived a strategy from them to set up a scenario to facilitate an encounter and sighting, that happened, for example. You get out of the database what you put into researching it, like a lot of lfie experiences. Edited December 17, 2017 by bipedalist 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts