Opinions on the BFRO?

[wiiawiwb]

25 minutes ago, norseman said:

Im a firm believer in caveat emptor, the buyer beware. People absolutely can spend their money on what ever they feel like.

 

But by the same token? I have to jump through the hoops and loops of government licensing and permits, etc in order to run a legitimate business.

 

Amen to that Norse.  I'm in the business world and know all too well about the myriad of regulations, rulings, filings, and fees a business faces.  Miss a payment or a filing and you are faced with penalties of epic proportion.

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, vinchyfoot said:

Maybe the "gateway to the feds" narrative has some merit.

 

It certainly does have merit. Allow me to expand on the point if I may. IF these creatures are out there then government knows. But without throwing a lot of money, personnel and resources at the issue how would government track the situation? By having an agency monitor every Bigfoot website to see what gets reported and from where? Doubt it. It would be much easier and more cost effective if the same thing can be accomplished through one publicly "trusted" entity that gets propped up with full media attention as well as having a large presence in the public eye like with TV programing. The majority of report get filed with the BFRO because a lot of witnesses don't know who to contact beyond the most prominent of sources. So what better channel to have for disseminating information on the whereabouts and activities of the Sasquatch than the BFRO?

 

It's all about controlling wealth and information. And like my signature states: "Knowledge is power, but in truth, holding back knowledge is even more powerful."

Edited August 5, 2020 by hiflier

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, vinchyfoot said:

.......If they only release 10% of the reports then what are they hiding? Maybe the "gateway to the feds" narrative has some merit. It's a business.... not research.

 

I suspect they weed out obvious BS reports (I'd guesstimate 50%-75% or more), and likely keep the best reports secret (at least for a while) so they can investigate without hordes of idiots flooding into the area. They are probably undermanned, too.

 

Just about all "research" is business. As a DoD official, we had several contracts with universities for various "research". It was easy money for them, and they competed hard for them. I found it interesting that when it came to corrupt contractors, they were at the top of the list. Look up the scandal about the missing laptop and the new Mustang sports car and the Los Alamos Laboratory university contractor...........

1 hour ago, vinchyfoot said:

I already alluded to some of this. A friend of mine asked them if they paid taxes on all this profit.........

 

I bet they're a non-profit organization.

[vinchyfoot]

26 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

I suspect they weed out obvious BS reports (I'd guesstimate 50%-75% or more), and likely keep the best reports secret (at least for a while) so they can investigate without hordes of idiots flooding into the area. They are probably undermanned, too.

They bring the hordes, paying hordes...

 

Quote

 

Just about all "research" is business. As a DoD official, we had several contracts with universities for various "research". It was easy money for them, and they competed hard for them. I found it interesting that when it came to corrupt contractors, they were at the top of the list. Look up the scandal about the missing laptop and the new Mustang sports car and the Los Alamos Laboratory university contractor...........

 

Leading Campers on guided tours isn't research, its tourism

Quote

 

I bet they're a non-profit organization.

 

There are websites where one can look up a 503c status or similar, if you want to dig into that.

 

Getting downvoted for telling it like it is, too funny.

Edited August 5, 2020 by vinchyfoot

[BlackRockBigfoot]

1 hour ago, vinchyfoot said:

 

Getting downvoted for telling it like it is, too funny.

I don't think that anyone is trying to silence your 'TRUTH', but I think that a lot of members are over people and their vendettas in the Bigfoot world.  

 

I don't particularly care for them, but they have zero effect on me or my research.  At the end of the day, if people think it's worth the fee that the BFRO charged, then let's hear it for capitalism!

 

It's not like this is Jonestown.  They aren't machine gunning people in the national forest parking lot.

[NatFoot]

^ Exactly!

[norseman]

2 hours ago, vinchyfoot said:

They bring the hordes, paying hordes...

 

 

Leading Campers on guided tours isn't research, its tourism

 

There are websites where one can look up a 503c status or similar, if you want to dig into that.

 

Getting downvoted for telling it like it is, too funny.

Upvote from me for telling it like it is.

I also followed up on a BFRO report in Montana when I was working in the oilfield. The location was not the location. There was no way to know if I was 500 yards away from the sighting or 5 miles.

 

Science is grounded on testable, repeatable results. Not secret handshakes and hidden data. I can’t go measure a tree at a sighting location if you hide the location from me but post it on your website as if it’s legit.

[hiflier]

^^ True that.

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, vinchyfoot said:

They bring the hordes, paying hordes......

How many people go on BFRO trips in any

particular location?

 

.....Leading Campers on guided tours isn't research, its tourism.......

 

Sorta' like the climate change expeditions to the Arctic and Antarctic?

 

.......There are websites where one can look up a 503c status or similar, if you want to dig into that.

 

Yup, but as a guy who really doesn't care, I'll let the guys who are passionate on the issue do so before they embarass themselves.

[BlackRockBigfoot]

16 minutes ago, norseman said:

Upvote from me for telling it like it is.

I also followed up on a BFRO report in Montana when I was working in the oilfield. The location was not the location. There was no way to know if I was 500 yards away from the sighting or 5 miles.

 

Science is grounded on testable, repeatable results. Not secret handshakes and hidden data. I can’t go measure a tree at a sighting location if you hide the location from me but post it on your website as if it’s legit.

I don't think that the BFRO is what I would consider scientific.  It seems to be a general consensus that they filter what reports make it into their database and edit those that do make it in. 

 

The fact that people are signing NDAs is completely crazy to me. 

 

Maybe I have an inaccurate assessment of the people who make up the BFRO, but from the two occasions that I interacted with some of their members...these people aren't looking for science.  These are a bunch people who are not going to drop money on equipment, packs, camping gear, etc. and hike out into the wild alone.  That's just not possible for them.  They are interested in the topic and want a Bigfoot 'experience'.  They are willing to pay for that.  Obviously there are enough return customers that the practice continues.  This is probably the only way that a lot of these people can get out into the 'field' and feel like they are actively pursuing their interest in Bigfoot. 

 

To me, it seems like a bunch of suburban baby boomers who want to dip their toes into the Bigfoot waters and are willing to pay for it.  It seems like a waste of money to me...but I didn't like Beanie Babies either when that was a craze, so obviously my personal tastes do not reflect the majority.  This seems like the Bigfoot equivalent of those rock star cruises, where people pay out exorbitant  amounts of money to go on a boat and see KISS for all of 5 minutes.  Seems crazy to me, but obviously it is fulfilling a need.  The BFRO people that I have met seemed extremely self satisfied that they were involved with it.  Who am I to deny them their hard bought outings?  

 

On the other hand, there are people who are extremely committed to research in this field, like MIB, who find value in going on these expeditions...so there must be something there that I haven't seen.  

 

I'm not a joiner, so I am obviously not the type that they are looking for so I probably have a different view of them than others might. 

7 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Yup, but as a guy who really doesn't care,

Quoted for truth.

 

Who cares?  It's not bothering me either way.

[MIB]

15 minutes ago, Huntster said:

How many people go on BFRO trips in any

particular location?

 

Less than 30.    Think we had 18, maybe 20, including the BFRO folks and the participants.   Pretty feeble horde.     I would say total for the year they'll run less than 15 expeditions.    They show 7 left on their calendar.   There aren't any scheduled for my state this year.

 

MIB

[Redbone]

26 minutes ago, Huntster said:

How many people go on BFRO trips in any

particular location?

Usually about 30 in Iowa (Including BFRO Personnel there to help). Iowa Expeds were highly productive as far as suspected BF activity goes.

Usually we'd break into groups of 5 or 6 for night ops.

Edit to note: I don't think I ever met anyone at a BFRO expedition who did not get excited to get the chance to return for another.

[VAfooter]

48 minutes ago, norseman said:

I also followed up on a BFRO report in Montana when I was working in the oilfield. The location was not the location. There was no way to know if I was 500 yards away from the sighting or 5 miles.

 

These statements reminded me that, at least in the past, when I went to collaborate the BFRO report with Google Earth, there were a number, more than I can attribute to just human error, that had identifying information about the location wrong. Sometimes little things, and sometimes it was a major mistake. Anyway, I got the distinct impression information was bein manipulated to throw other researchers/curiosity seekers off the track.

[vinchyfoot]

1 hour ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

I don't think that anyone is trying to silence your 'TRUTH', but I think that a lot of members are over people and their vendettas in the Bigfoot world.  

 

I don't particularly care for them, but they have zero effect on me or my research.  At the end of the day, if people think it's worth the fee that the BFRO charged, then let's hear it for capitalism!

 

It's not like this is Jonestown.  They aren't machine gunning people in the national forest parking lot.

 

Its not a vendetta, just distaste for their methods, but the downvoting does indicate butthurt.

8 minutes ago, MIB said:

 

Less than 30.    Think we had 18, maybe 20, including the BFRO folks and the participants.   Pretty feeble horde.     I would say total for the year they'll run less than 15 expeditions.    They show 7 left on their calendar.   There aren't any scheduled for my state this year.

 

MIB

 

Still large for an ideal sized group in my opinion, nothing but a loud convoy of vehicles, and too large to stay organized imo.

[Huntster]

2 minutes ago, MIB said:

Less than 30.    Think we had 18, maybe 20, including the BFRO folks and the participants.   Pretty feeble horde........

Yup. But imagine if they published a very fresh report (a couple of days old) in a very accessible area, like on the south side of Mt. Hood, just minures from Portland. I'd bet a real "horde" would show up.

 

For these same reasons many locations are publicly withheld or outright guarded, like Denisova Cave.  
 

While I would LOVE to get fresh reports to "research" on my own, I didn't invest in the infrastructure to receive such reports. BFRO did, and it was an excellent investment, IMHO.