norseman Posted Wednesday at 07:56 PM Admin Posted Wednesday at 07:56 PM 12 minutes ago, NorCalWitness said: I don't ignore any evidence and "deadfall" that falls into structures certainly is interesting. Paulides is making money off of lying to you. That isn't interesting. its sad. How is Paulides making money off of me? So by your logic then? Anyone associated with Bigfoot cannot make money? So Meldrum, Bindernagel, Roger Patterson? We should throw all of that out? Come on up. I can show you millions of acres of deadfall. The Forest service doesn’t do anything anymore.
NorCalWitness Posted Wednesday at 08:28 PM Posted Wednesday at 08:28 PM (edited) 34 minutes ago, norseman said: How is Paulides making money off of me? So by your logic then? Anyone associated with Bigfoot cannot make money? So Meldrum, Bindernagel, Roger Patterson? We should throw all of that out? Come on up. I can show you millions of acres of deadfall. The Forest service doesn’t do anything anymore. paulides sells books, ads on his youtube and charges for appearances. by all means, make money. I have no problem with that. my issue is when the person making the money is lying. thats the rub. Edited Wednesday at 08:31 PM by NorCalWitness
norseman Posted Wednesday at 08:37 PM Admin Posted Wednesday at 08:37 PM Just now, NorCalWitness said: paulides sells book, ads on his youtube and charges for appearances. by all means, make money. I have no problem with that. my issue is when the person making the money is lying. thats the rub. Selling books and charging for appearances? 🤔 That’s every notable speaker in Bigfootdom. But he isn’t lying. I.e. Dennis Martin was a child. That child went missing under very weird circumstances. The search was done under very weird circumstances. And he was never found. And his parents still have no answers. Are all of the facts surrounding the case spot on? Probably not. Does Paulides embellish? I am sure. But the fact still remains that without Paulides I would have no clue about Dennis Martin.
NorCalWitness Posted Wednesday at 08:38 PM Posted Wednesday at 08:38 PM 1 minute ago, norseman said: Selling books and charging for appearances? 🤔 That’s every notable speaker in Bigfootdom. But he isn’t lying. I.e. Dennis Martin was a child. That child went missing under very weird circumstances. The search was done under very weird circumstances. And he was never found. And his parents still have no answers. Are all of the facts surrounding the case spot on? Probably not. Does Paulides embellish? I am sure. But the fact still remains that without Paulides I would have no clue about Dennis Martin. Paulides is a con man. I am surprised to see you prop him up. That is all.
norseman Posted Wednesday at 08:51 PM Admin Posted Wednesday at 08:51 PM 4 minutes ago, NorCalWitness said: Paulides is a con man. I am surprised to see you prop him up. That is all. You can keep repeating the same thing over and over again. But you have not shown that David Paulides or more importantly the Dennis Martin case is a “con job”. It happened. Along with a lot of other weird cases. And if following a YouTube channel guy that walks around in the woods looking at sticks supposedly placed there by Bigfoot isn’t a con job? I don’t know what is. 🤷♂️
RedHawk454 Posted Wednesday at 10:54 PM Posted Wednesday at 10:54 PM (edited) 2 hours ago, norseman said: Selling books and charging for appearances? 🤔 That’s every notable speaker in Bigfootdom. But he isn’t lying. I.e. Dennis Martin was a child. That child went missing under very weird circumstances. The search was done under very weird circumstances. And he was never found. And his parents still have no answers. Are all of the facts surrounding the case spot on? Probably not. Does Paulides embellish? I am sure. But the fact still remains that without Paulides I would have no clue about Dennis Martin. A skeleton of a boy around the size of dennis martin was found in the 80's by ginseng poachers. The skeleton was found in the general vicinity of where he was reported missing. If i recall he disappeared in 1969. I'm not saying it was an open and closed case but if a skeleton of a boy that was around the size of dennis martin was found in the area that he went missing it kinda looks less likely that sasquatch abducted him. To be fair tho, it was never proven to be dennis martin. Heres Googles gemini overview. Again, if i recall, it was a skeleton and not just remains. No, the skeletal remains found in Tremont's Big Hollow in the Great Smoky Mountains were not those of Dennis Martin. In 1985, a ginseng hunter reported finding the remains of a small child, but a search of the area yielded nothing. The remains were never identified as Dennis Martin, and the mystery surrounding his 1969 disappearance remains unsolved. Edited Wednesday at 10:56 PM by RedHawk454 1
norseman Posted yesterday at 12:29 AM Admin Posted yesterday at 12:29 AM 1 hour ago, RedHawk454 said: A skeleton of a boy around the size of dennis martin was found in the 80's by ginseng poachers. The skeleton was found in the general vicinity of where he was reported missing. If i recall he disappeared in 1969. I'm not saying it was an open and closed case but if a skeleton of a boy that was around the size of dennis martin was found in the area that he went missing it kinda looks less likely that sasquatch abducted him. To be fair tho, it was never proven to be dennis martin. Heres Googles gemini overview. Again, if i recall, it was a skeleton and not just remains. No, the skeletal remains found in Tremont's Big Hollow in the Great Smoky Mountains were not those of Dennis Martin. In 1985, a ginseng hunter reported finding the remains of a small child, but a search of the area yielded nothing. The remains were never identified as Dennis Martin, and the mystery surrounding his 1969 disappearance remains unsolved. Awesome. Yah if Paulides isn’t accurate? I not here to “prop him up”. And I am sure that the Martin family wants closure. Too bad that it wasn’t him.
NorCalWitness Posted 2 hours ago Posted 2 hours ago On 8/20/2025 at 1:51 PM, norseman said: You can keep repeating the same thing over and over again. But you have not shown that David Paulides or more importantly the Dennis Martin case is a “con job”. It happened. Along with a lot of other weird cases. And if following a YouTube channel guy that walks around in the woods looking at sticks supposedly placed there by Bigfoot isn’t a con job? I don’t know what is. 🤷♂️ Norseman, You keep defending David Paulides like he’s some kind of truth-teller, but let’s call it what it is: he’s profiting off lies about people’s deaths. That isn’t “investigation,” it’s exploitation. He takes real tragedies, bends the facts to fit his storyline, and then sells books and lectures off other people’s grief. That’s not respectable — it’s predatory. The ethical problem with propping him up is simple: when you defend him, you’re defending someone who manipulates families’ worst moments for money. Imagine losing someone you love and then watching a stranger twist the circumstances of their death into some “mystery” just to move units. It’s disgusting. You can’t just shrug this off by saying he “raises questions.” Questions built on distortions aren’t curiosity, they’re snake oil. If Paulides really cared about truth, he wouldn’t have to lie about the details. But he does, over and over again, because mystery sells. So yeah, keep backing him if you want, but understand what you’re actually defending: not the pursuit of answers, but a business model built on misleading the public and exploiting the dead. That’s the ethical weight on your shoulders when you prop him up. I get that you don't think Sasquatch makes tree structures, but at least that guy isn't standing on the graves of the dead, harassing families of the dead, and making money off of lying. I am done responding to this thread. Carry on.
Recommended Posts