The "How To Hunt" Channel and Sasquatch Commentary

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, SWWASAS said:

Are the Illuminati the organized skeptics?   

 

Radical skeptics certainly consider themselves illumined, but they seem switched to the "off" position to me.

[Arvedis]

I have noticed that Russell Acord only appears on podcasts where there is no chance of being asked difficult questions. No bigfoot podcasts: Tom Green (a non-popular comedian) and some thuggy boy named "Vinny Roc."

 

I wonder though, since the "international" Bigfoot conference is his event, how he plans to avoid questions. Maybe he will pose proudly like he does in his promotional photos and change the subject.

 

Edited April 25, 2020 by Arvedis

[GuyInIndiana]

On 4/24/2020 at 11:13 AM, Acolyte said:

Allow me to rant on this dude for a moment. 

 

 

I've been interested in bigfoot pretty much my whole life. ************

 

It's time for him to put up or shut up. Stop with all of the vague B.S. Stop pretending he's so much better than everyone else when he provides laughable evidence. Stop making half his  videos a low rent version of the sasquatch chronicles. He needs to sit down and make a 30 minute video clearly explaining his thoughts, opinions, and exactly what he "knows" at the least.  Because at this point he's just coming off a borderline schizophrenic.

 

 

I "kind of " liked him up until recently when I heard him quote how much he spent on his camera (I swear he said $10k? and $4k on a computer and software) to make his videos, and that was apparently supposed to make you take him seriously. And then he rambled on about people who think they're bigfoot experts because they claim to be experts on primates, then does the 'gesture' and announces that 'you don't know anything about these things because they aren't primates' then moves on to get away from having just said that. He could be right. Since none of us can prove anything about them at this point... but his arrogance alone made me realize he's just another blow-hard whether he has any experience or knowledge to pass along. I've tuned him out. I'm just waiting for a break in the weather and a chance to not violate the Wicked Witch of Michigan's ban on travel so I can get back to my campsite up north and get the 2020 season rolling.

[trapper]

On 12/26/2019 at 1:05 PM, zeebob889 said:

I hope he doesn't but if he drags in the one to prove it, respect given.

Steve has stated pretty often that he is not remotely interested in trying to prove they exist.  His whole take on the subject is that obviously they do exist and thousands of people see them so lets move on to "why is their existence not widely known".   He has also said often that he has no desire to see one again and does not care to ever see one again.   He thinks the entire debate about weather or not they exist is a waste of time as is trying to prove they exist.

[trapper]

On 2/12/2020 at 8:49 AM, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Let me preface this by saying that I enjoy his videos and subscribe to his channel.  I find his personality engaging, but I am a sucker for a curmudgeon. However, my impression of him is changing a bit over time...as you can see by my posts in this thread.

 

That being said... enough with the teasers already.  The constant claims of the great things that 'they' are doing.  What things?  Who are 'they'?  He kind of alluded to this powerhouse team of Bigfoot superstars.  I can put 2 and 2 together and deduce that he is somewhat aligned with the Carpenter/Paulides/Ketchum crew.  Is he building a coalition of non-BFRO Bigfoot researchers to compete with Moneymaker?  

 

And what are all the great things that they are doing?  Giving people a platform to have their accounts read off of a cellphone screen?  The internet is filled with podcasts and YouTube channels that already do exactly that... albeit with better production values, more polished delivery, and less impressive backdrops.  Maybe they are going to do some sort of big reveal soon, but the constant allusions are getting old.  

 

So far his videos are 1/3 bragging about his accomplishments in the Bigfoot world without giving any specifics, 1/3 attacking other members of the community, and 1/3 reading accounts off of his phone.  He is turning into Steve Kulls without the airsoft quality tactical gear.  

 

I have to agree with @NatFoot on this one.  He is uniquely positioned and qualified to be able to put one of these things on slab and do more to further the subject than everyone else in the field put together.  Instead, he reads supposed accounts off of his phone, busts on other researchers, and talk about all the great things that he and his allies accomplish without providing even a hint of a detail.  

 

I honestly don't know how popular his pure hunting channel was, but I do know that he was all over social media celebrating his 100,000 follower in YouTube.  He obviously wants attention, either for himself or for the subject of Bigfoot.  If it is to further the research and understanding of the subject matter...then enough with the hints and teasers already.  Throw something specific our way already.  

He has no interest whatsoever in proving they exist.  He thinks if you cant take the word of good honest people who say they have seen them something is wrong with YOU.   He is only interested in helping people come forward and lose their fear of being ridiculed and calling out bullies and such who abuse others within the community.

 

Proving they exist is a dead end from his perspective and had kept the entire movement from going foreward in his opinion.

[BlackRockBigfoot]

11 hours ago, trapper said:

He has no interest whatsoever in proving they exist.  He thinks if you cant take the word of good honest people who say they have seen them something is wrong with YOU.   He is only interested in helping people come forward and lose their fear of being ridiculed and calling out bullies and such who abuse others within the community.

 

Proving they exist is a dead end from his perspective and had kept the entire movement from going foreward in his opinion.

Then why take the time (of which he has so very little) to post up the evidence that he has?  Evidence that he repeatedly states that he doesn't care about?

 

If his goal is "helping people come forward and lose their fear of being ridiculed and calling out bullies and such who abuse others within the community" how is he accompanying that goal?  By reading random emails off of his phone?

 

We're there really millions of Bluff Creek Massacre proponents who were out there anguishing under the boot heel of the Bigfoot mainstream?  

 

Take a quick listen to some of the more popular Bigfoot/paranormal podcasts.  If anything, those people with encounters of a stranger nature have more of a platform and support than ever.  I guess that his goal is to FORCE the flesh and blood ape/remnant hominid groups in to accepting the paranormal folks and placing their ideas equal to or above their own.  Maybe eventually the flesh and blood camp will become the persecuted minority and a version of Isdahl will rise up in a few years and carry their banner.  

 

It's obvious that he has tapped into something...his support online dwarfs any other recognizable name in the Bigfoot community by a wide margin.  

 

There are some aggressive naysayers who come out of the woodwork when paranormal elements of the Bigfoot phenomenon are discussed.  You see it on here.  Obviously that community feels like they need an attack dog to defend and promote their point of view.  Seeing the venom that some of the names already mentioned in this thread spew (Rictor, Kulls), maybe Isdahl's approach is correct.  Maybe his rise in popularity is a direct and natural result of the attitudes of people like that.  

 

Maybe his approach (which many find distasteful) is necessary.  The whole situation just an interesting and amusing sideshow.

 

 

[norseman]

Regardless of his motives in this subject?

 

Steve is a conservationist. I follow some of his stuff through High Caliber Jet boats on Facebook. Jamie rebuilt my boat after a unplanned encounter with a rock on the snake river. The last article I read he was helping BC Mulies...

 

So despite my original assessment that the guy wasn’t going to contribute much to this field? I’ve changed my mind about him over all.

[trapper]

40 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Then why take the time (of which he has so very little) to post up the evidence that he has?  Evidence that he repeatedly states that he doesn't care about?

 

If his goal is "helping people come forward and lose their fear of being ridiculed and calling out bullies and such who abuse others within the community" how is he accompanying that goal?  By reading random emails off of his phone?

 

We're there really millions of Bluff Creek Massacre proponents who were out there anguishing under the boot heel of the Bigfoot mainstream?  

 

Take a quick listen to some of the more popular Bigfoot/paranormal podcasts.  If anything, those people with encounters of a stranger nature have more of a platform and support than ever.  I guess that his goal is to FORCE the flesh and blood ape/remnant hominid groups in to accepting the paranormal folks and placing their ideas equal to or above their own.  Maybe eventually the flesh and blood camp will become the persecuted minority and a version of Isdahl will rise up in a few years and carry their banner.  

 

It's obvious that he has tapped into something...his support online dwarfs any other recognizable name in the Bigfoot community by a wide margin.  

 

There are some aggressive naysayers who come out of the woodwork when paranormal elements of the Bigfoot phenomenon are discussed.  You see it on here.  Obviously that community feels like they need an attack dog to defend and promote their point of view.  Seeing the venom that some of the names already mentioned in this thread spew (Rictor, Kulls), maybe Isdahl's approach is correct.  Maybe his rise in popularity is a direct and natural result of the attitudes of people like that.  

 

Maybe his approach (which many find distasteful) is necessary.  The whole situation just an interesting and amusing sideshow.

 

You just don't understand his motives.  I don't mind if you disagree but disagree with what he is doing not what you THINK he is doing.  I have watched every video he has put out so its easy to see  his motives for what he is doing-- like them or not. He is already accomplishing his goal by providing comfort and solace to people who normally would not have been comfortable sharing the stories.   Many of these people have found the courage to use their full names when before Steve came along they were afraid to do so.   These people already feel unafraid and unashamed when before they did not.   Goal accomplished.

You just don't understand his motives.  I don't mind if you disagree but disagree with what he is doing not what you THINK he is doing.  I have watched every video he has put out so its easy to see  his motives for what he is doing-- like them or not. He is already accomplishing his goal by providing comfort and solace to people who normally would not have been comfortable sharing the stories.   Many of these people have found the courage to use their full names when before Steve came along they were afraid to do so.   These people already feel unafraid and unashamed when before they did not.   Goal accomplished.

 

He also really doesn't like bullies and so when he heard that there were certain members of the bigfoot community (I don't know who) that slander and bully, intimidate and change the testimony of witnesses to fit a particular narrative (anti woo) he decided to start calling them all out.

 

 

 

On the evidence.  Steve is just a fly by the seat of your pants guy.  This has created some inconsistencies with his approach.  I think he has put his foot in his mouth a number of times and will have to eat crow because of it.   He is way too hard on researchers and people out there looking for evidence because that is not HIS stated goal.    I see this as an immaturity on his part.  He is not interested in gathering data because he knows they already exist and people ought to be able to trust the world of good people withing their community.  I agree with these sentiments but not the part about researchers being useless.   That is just a dumb point IMO and he picks on Meldrum which is one of my favorite people within the community.

 

In this respect he is being narrow minded.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2020 by trapper

[BlackRockBigfoot]

19 minutes ago, trapper said:

You just don't understand his motives.  I don't mind if you disagree but disagree with what he is doing not what you THINK he is doing.  I have watched every video he has put out so its easy to see  his motives for what he is doing-- like them or not. He is already accomplishing his goal by providing comfort and solace to people who normally would not have been comfortable sharing the stories.   Many of these people have found the courage to use their full names when before Steve came along they were afraid to do so.   These people already feel unafraid and unashamed when before they did not.   Goal accomplished.

 

He also really doesn't like bullies and so when he heard that there were certain members of the bigfoot community (I don't know who) that slander and bully, intimidate and change the testimony of witnesses to fit a particular narrative (anti woo) he decided to start calling them all out.

 

 

Motives?  

 

You know what his motives are by watching his videos?  

 

I have watched many of them, and honestly couldn't tell you if his motivation is helping people or developing a successful YouTube channel.  If he isn't interested in proving anything than why post up the 'evidence' that he has so far.  I am not sure how that helps people who feel that they have been bullied.  I do see how it gets views and subscriptions though.  Anyone who claims to know his motives other than Isdahl himself is projecting their own desires upon this.

 

More power to him.  If he can have a success YouTube channel than have at it.  I don't begrudge a man his success.  

 

But, let's be honest here.  This is just more of the same name calling that seems to go in this community.  This is nothing ground breaking.  Someone said something mean about a witness, and now a guy is going to say something mean to them and then read an email off of his cellphone?    The community is filled with nothing but bullies and a-holes.  No matter what position you take, someone is going to come along to mock and insult you.  If all it took to fix the problem was a few insults and read aloud emails, was it that big of a problem to begin with?

 

Again, who really knows?  I am not in either camp, belong to none of the groups, and really don't have a dog in this fight.  I had high hopes for Isdahl, which fell pretty quickly.  I do know that I find many of the same people distasteful as Isdahl, so maybe he is on to something.  Heck, maybe he and Davis are right and they stacked bodies up like cordwood at Bluff Creek. The story doesn't make sense to me, but  either way it doesn't effect me or my efforts to research in my little corner of the world.

[trapper]

^^^^^

 

I really appreciate his calling out of members within the community that bully and intimidate and use others for monetary gain and to control a narrative about what these beings are and are not.  I like people who have the courage to do things like that.  The problem is I dont have enough knowledge of the people involved to know weather he right about them.   That is part of my interest in joining this forum.  Id like to hear more about the status of the kinds of people Steve is calling out and see if he is on the right track or not.   He better be because he sometimes names names.......

7 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Motives?  

 

You know what his motives are by watching his videos?  

 

I have watched many of them, and honestly couldn't tell you if his motivation is helping people or developing a successful YouTube channel.  If he isn't interested in proving anything than why post up the 'evidence' that he has so far.  I am not sure how that helps people who feel that they have been bullied.  I do see how it gets views and subscriptions though.  Anyone who claims to know his motives other than Isdahl himself is projecting their own desires upon this.

 

More power to him.  If he can have a success YouTube channel than have at it.  I don't begrudge a man his success.  

 

But, let's be honest here.  This is just more of the same name calling that seems to go in this community.  This is nothing ground breaking.  Someone said something mean about a witness, and now a guy is going to say something mean to them and then read an email off of his cellphone?    The community is filled with nothing but bullies and a-holes.  No matter what position you take, someone is going to come along to mock and insult you.  If all it took to fix the problem was a few insults and read aloud emails, was it that big of a problem to begin with?

 

Again, who really knows?  I am not in either camp, belong to none of the groups, and really don't have a dog in this fight.  I had high hopes for Isdahl, which fell pretty quickly.  I do know that I find many of the same people distasteful as Isdahl, so maybe he is on to something.  Heck, maybe he and Davis are right and they stacked bodies up like cordwood at Bluff Creek. The story doesn't make sense to me, but  either way it doesn't effect me or my efforts to research in my little corner of the world.

 

 

Yes.  He has stated his motives more often than not and is very clear about them.  His motives are the most important thing about him and to him.  

 

I have already stated I think it is an immaturity on his part to go after researchers.   I cant think of a worse group out there to pick on.  People dedicating their lives to improve human knowledge are filling an essential role for humanity.  I think Steve is self centered here and conflating HIS path in life with others.   There is room for both IMO.

 

edit    you can not take the intent to prove the existence of these beings seriously and still find pics interesting.   there should be no problems seeing this imo.

   

Edited April 26, 2020 by trapper

[SWWASAS]

Seems like some sort of character flaw to me for someone to get off on calling people out for any reason.   People should make their own decisions on who they believe are straight shooters and who are full of it.    I give anyone the benefit of the doubt initially and the ones that are full of it,   eventually reveal themselves.      The list is long when you are looking at bigfoot.     That applies to both proponents and skeptics.     Both have been known to make things up.     All you have to do it look for inconsistencies in what they say over a period of time.    I disagree in principal with a lot of researchers.      Usually because they have formed opinions or theories not supported by much in the way of evidence or their theories are contrary to what little evidence is available.    I  respect someone with a PHD,  but like they do,   will argue a point they make without evidence to back it up.    That is how science is supposed to work.   

[BlackRockBigfoot]

38 minutes ago, trapper said:

^^^^^

 

I really appreciate his calling out of members within the community that bully and intimidate and use others for monetary gain and to control a narrative about what these beings are and are not.  I like people who have the courage to do things like that.  The problem is I dont have enough knowledge of the people involved to know weather he right about them.   That is part of my interest in joining this forum.  Id like to hear more about the status of the kinds of people Steve is calling out and see if he is on the right track or not.   He better be because he sometimes names names.......

 

 

Yes.  He has stated his motives more often than not and is very clear about them.  His motives are the most important thing about him and to him.  

 

I have already stated I think it is an immaturity on his part to go after researchers.   I cant think of a worse group out there to pick on.  People dedicating their lives to improve human knowledge are filling an essential role for humanity.  I think Steve is self centered here and conflating HIS path in life with others.   There is room for both IMO.

 

edit    you can not take the intent to prove the existence of these beings seriously and still find pics interesting.   there should be no problems seeing this imo.

   

I guess that we are just different in that regard...I don't take someone's stated motives at face value.  Another poster on here who is far more familiar with Isdahl than I am stated that, while Steve has always been interested in the topic of Bigfoot, his YouTube activity on the subject ramped up just as his hunting guide business took a hit due to the political climate of Canada.  

 

I don't think that the Bobby Short/Bluff Creek Massacre story makes much sense. But, I wasn't there and don't know any of the principle witnesses personally.  I do think that the BFRO molds and edits reports to fit their narrative, but they have introduced a lot of people to the subject who might not have been open to it otherwise.  Think that the jury is still out on whether the BFRO is going to be beneficial or detrimental to the field when all of their actions are considered.

 

However, if someone has had an experience with these creatures that they interpret as paranormal, then there are plenty of avenues to have your story be told.  The BFRO and like minded groups may attack that person's story, but they are not the only game in town anymore. 

 

The allegations of threats of violence by these researchers to silence people just doesn't make sense.  Matt Moneymaker is going to send one of these overweight housewives that are in his group to kneecap me or cut my brake lines if I don't stay quiet about an experience that doesn't toe the BFRO line?  I am going to wake up one night with Dr. Meldrum standing over my bed ready to suffocate me with a pillow?

 

I know that most of the people who want to use this topic to gain some sort of level of fame jealousy guard their little piece of the Bigfoot pie like starving rats, but death threats and intimidation? 

12 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

Seems like some sort of character flaw to me for someone to get off on calling people out for any reason.   People should make their own decisions on who they believe are straight shooters and who are full of it.    I give anyone the benefit of the doubt initially and the ones that are full of it,   eventually reveal themselves.      The list is long when you are looking at bigfoot.     That applies to both proponents and skeptics.     Both have been known to make things up.     All you have to do it look for inconsistencies in what they say over a period of time.    I disagree in principal with a lot of researchers.      Usually because they have formed opinions or theories not supported by much in the way of evidence or their theories are contrary to what little evidence is available.    I  respect someone with a PHD,  but like they do,   will argue a point they make without evidence to back it up.    That is how science is supposed to work.   

That's why I don't see the value in the self proclaimed watchdogs of the Bigfoot community. 

 

Frauds will out themselves just fine without any help from the Bigfoot Evidence Purity Guard.  

Edited April 26, 2020 by BlackRockBigfoot

[trapper]

39 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

I guess that we are just different in that regard...I don't take someone's stated motives at face value.  Another poster on here who is far more familiar with Isdahl than I am stated that, while Steve has always been interested in the topic of Bigfoot, his YouTube activity on the subject ramped up just as his hunting guide business took a hit due to the political climate of Canada.  

 

I don't think that the Bobby Short/Bluff Creek Massacre story makes much sense. But, I wasn't there and don't know any of the principle witnesses personally.  I do think that the BFRO molds and edits reports to fit their narrative, but they have introduced a lot of people to the subject who might not have been open to it otherwise.  Think that the jury is still out on whether the BFRO is going to be beneficial or detrimental to the field when all of their actions are considered.

 

However, if someone has had an experience with these creatures that they interpret as paranormal, then there are plenty of avenues to have your story be told.  The BFRO and like minded groups may attack that person's story, but they are not the only game in town anymore. 

 

The allegations of threats of violence by these researchers to silence people just doesn't make sense.  Matt Moneymaker is going to send one of these overweight housewives that are in his group to kneecap me or cut my brake lines if I don't stay quiet about an experience that doesn't toe the BFRO line?  I am going to wake up one night with Dr. Meldrum standing over my bed ready to suffocate me with a pillow?

 

I know that most of the people who want to use this topic to gain some sort of level of fame jealousy guard their little piece of the Bigfoot pie like starving rats, but death threats and intimidation? 

That's why I don't see the value in the self proclaimed watchdogs of the Bigfoot community. 

 

Frauds will out themselves just fine without any help from the Bigfoot Evidence Purity Guard.  

 

 

Not taking peoples stated motives at face value is maybe an ok choice.  Assuming false motives is its own kind of character flaw and defect though.  

 

On the rest of your take about intimidation and such I don't know.  I think there is something to it but don't know for sure as I was not there.   Maybe Steve has evidence and maybe he doesn't, he might be right and he might be wrong.  I am watching this unfold with great interest on lots of levels.   

 

Would a petty person who has made their name and money off of any topic on earth slander and threaten someone who calls their reputation into question?  Yes.  All the time.  Insecure people do this everywhere I have ever seen people gather, workplaces, social organizations etc.    I remain undecided on all of that though.

 

 

I appreciate Steve's work for really only two things I will hang my hat on.  

 

1- people ought not be made to feel ashamed for speaking of experiences that the "herd" is afraid of or judges.  In principle this holds all of humanity back in very serious ways on all levels of human engagement.   I support his energy and motive to get people to stand up on this level and call BS.

 

2- I support his point 100% that there is something wrong with peoples thinking who cannot accept the testimony of honest trustworthy people, or in this case thousands or honest trustworthy people,  many of them experienced woodsmen who have seen bigfoot.   The scientific bias and need for evidence, as needed as that is in its field, should not have us distrusting one another experiences across the board like it does in this present time.  For some people if it didn't happen in a lab-- it didn't happen.    That is dumb IMO.

 

The above principle is why Steve doesn't give a dang about people demanding proof and I agree with that completely.

 

I think he is dead right about that.  

[Arvedis]

2 hours ago, trapper said:

He also really doesn't like bullies and so when he heard that there were certain members of the bigfoot community (I don't know who) that slander and bully, intimidate and change the testimony of witnesses to fit a particular narrative (anti woo) he decided to start calling them all out.

 

No way! Bullies in the BF community?  

 

I can think of a few cases of that. What tends to happen is people get intimidated and influenced by the court of opinion.  FB encourages an "us vs them" arena of conflict.  Bigfootery has always been contentious so the mud slinging fits right in.  People with valid experiences can be swayed by organized communities of strangeness like Dr. J and dummies like MK and all kinds of people who like to influence others with rubbish.

[BlackRockBigfoot]

52 minutes ago, trapper said:

 

 

Not taking peoples stated motives at face value is maybe an ok choice.  Assuming false motives is its own kind of character flaw and defect though.     

Must be a character flaw on my part, because when someone feels the need to continually tell you how honest they are it raises suspicion.