Where is the proof of Todd Standings hoaxing?

[Believer57]

Hi,

 

I don't want to start any turf wars here with this subject but it is one of my unanswered research questions. These questions are one reason I joined the BFF. I see lots of comments on other media and some where people cannot even hide their ire about either side of the issue. However, I have not seen any proof of hoaxing, only opinion. Granted, Todd's personality can rub people the wrong way, including me, but he has proven himself capable of field results and working with others.

 

With that being said, I invite you to enlighten me on the subject.

 

Cheers!

 

[NatFoot]

Hey, Les. Loved your shows back in the day.

 

[gigantor]

1 hour ago, Believer57 said:

However, I have not seen any proof of hoaxing, only opinion.

 

That is true. I don't know Todd Standing and have nothing against him.

 

IMO, the video of the head I've seen looks fake. I have nothing to base that on other than my observation.

 

 

 

 

[vinchyfoot]

He's a hoaxer plain and simple. The fact folks are even questioning that at this point is just sad.

[Arvedis]

3 hours ago, Believer57 said:

I don't want to start any turf wars here with this subject but it is one of my unanswered research questions. These questions are one reason I joined the BFF. I see lots of comments on other media and some where people cannot even hide their ire about either side of the issue. However, I have not seen any proof of hoaxing, only opinion. Granted, Todd's personality can rub people the wrong way, including me, but he has proven himself capable of field results and working with others.

 

With that being said, I invite you to enlighten me on the subject.

 

 

The amount of opinions on this subject does not make it easy to cut through and do the research.  Here is my take (not proof of anything either way).

 

Todd found out about an area in BC with BF activity. He explored and confirmed activity. BF experiences can be fleeting. Maybe he saw something, maybe he imagined it.  At the time, he was not equipped to capture any evidence. Later on he tried to manufacture it to recreate what he thinks he saw. He did so in a few poorly made and poorly edited films. This was back in...I want to say 2005 or whenever he tried peddling those DVDs for $25 or $50.  The problem was, he was pitching the DVDs as the ultimate BF evidence. He is more humble about those early experiences now but back when he was selling DVDs, he thought he was king bigfooter and wanted the attention for a few still photos of puppets. That is why everything he has ever done is not well received, because of this early failure to present his claimed evidence honestly.

 

In the early 200os, there is also a hilariously bad episode of a Canadian emergency responder show.  Todd made up a story about being chased by bears after escaping being chased by BFs. I'm sure the episode is on YT so you can judge for yourself how clearly out of bounds his claims are.

 

In his early days, he showed 1 interesting, very fast clip of something climbing rocks but that is all the video evidence he ever presented before the setups in Discovering Bigfoot (which is worth watching, even if people are not Todd fans).

 

Fast forward to the present, Todd has improved as a researcher. He can't overcome his early mistakes though. The ending of Discovering Bigfoot, when he trudges out in camo and facepaint...and the way he tries to explain away the puppet photos, just doesn't work. He is entertaining though, in a way.

 

Now he needs another reliable area since he scared away the BFs in his usual spot.

 

 

 

Edited December 12, 2020 by Arvedis

[Redbone]

3 hours ago, Believer57 said:

Hi,

 

I don't want to start any turf wars here with this subject but it is one of my unanswered research questions. These questions are one reason I joined the BFF. I see lots of comments on other media and some where people cannot even hide their ire about either side of the issue. However, I have not seen any proof of hoaxing, only opinion. Granted, Todd's personality can rub people the wrong way, including me, but he has proven himself capable of field results and working with others.

 

With that being said, I invite you to enlighten me on the subject.

 

Cheers!

 

I find this PDF by Phil Poling (and my own eyes) convincing evidence that Todd Standing is a hoaxer.

https://www.woodape.org/?smd_process_download=1&download_id=1278

 

And here is the link to his "Hall of Shame" web page at Squatch Detective.

https://squatchdetective.weebly.com/todd-standing--sylvanic.html

[norseman]

4 hours ago, Believer57 said:

Hi,

 

I don't want to start any turf wars here with this subject but it is one of my unanswered research questions. These questions are one reason I joined the BFF. I see lots of comments on other media and some where people cannot even hide their ire about either side of the issue. However, I have not seen any proof of hoaxing, only opinion. Granted, Todd's personality can rub people the wrong way, including me, but he has proven himself capable of field results and working with others.

 

With that being said, I invite you to enlighten me on the subject.

 

Cheers!

 

What field results are you talking about?

 

Here is what rubs me wrong about Todd. He wants science and the government to accept Sasquatch as a real species and set aside provisions for this new species based on ZERO tangible evidence.
 

Like a lot of researchers? He just side steps the scientific requirement of physical evidence. And doubles down on track casts and video footage..... And this is why 50 some years after the PGF? We are still at square one. If Todd doesn’t want to shoot one in the name of science? Then he should be sharpening his DNA collecting skills and pursue proving it that way.

 

To me his Bigfoot subjects in his films show progression. They look like muppets in the beginning but as time goes by they look better and better. Like watching a 1950’s Tarzan movie vs a 1980’s Tarzan movie. But it doesn’t matter how good a film looks. Not to science.

 

A solid DNA saliva or blood sample is worth x10000000 more than a film portraying a Bigfoot leaping tall trees for an hour, or whatever.

 

PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. We should all chant it repeatedly. Bone, blood, saliva, tissue, hair, etc. Biology isn’t glitzy or glamorous. It’s methodical in its approach. 

[ShadowBorn]

7 hours ago, Believer57 said:

I don't want to start any turf wars here with this subject but it is one of my unanswered research questions. These questions are one reason I joined the BFF. I see lots of comments on other media and some where people cannot even hide their ire about either side of the issue. However, I have not seen any proof of hoaxing, only opinion. Granted, Todd's personality can rub people the wrong way, including me, but he has proven himself capable of field results and working with others.

 

With that being said, I invite you to enlighten me on the subject.

That's just the thing that I am not someone will be able to prove he was hoaxing. About the only way to tell is by him admitting or some one actually catching him in the act. The pictures of what I seen that he has posted off his DVD is not actually what I had seen.  I have trouble believing that what was filmed on the PGF is real. I only say this since it was not what I have encountered in my own experience. But then this was my own experience not no one else's.

 

Sure it is easy to talk bad about some one. Some one that maybe people have never met. Just like I do not know who you Believer57 or anyone on this forum is. But you get an understanding of them by the way they write. The way they think about the subject. The one thing that I do know is that allot of us ( whether we are researchers/hunters ) are not tolerable about hoaxing. If you hoaxed once then you are considered a hoaxer. Not one of us want to be considered a hoaxer.

 

I think that this all comes from us all being a very critical bunch as far as field work comes. Hard evidence requires hard evidence. If Tod Standing had that chance to acquire that hard evidence then we would not be having this conversation. Everything that would be needed to be known of these creatures would be known today.  As far as I know I do not see this coming from Tod Standing. I am not trying to be harsh towards Tod Standing.

[BlackRockBigfoot]

As usual, I swim against the tide as far as Standing goes.  

 

The image that looks the most fake was the result of someone other than Standing digitally removing the branches from the original image.  It gave it a very fake look.  

 

The movements of the creatures don't like right to me, but that's not enough for me to label him a hoaxer and move on.  

 

As far as the 'Squatch Detective' goes...his opinion means nothing to me.  People whose relevancy and small level of fame are dependent on finding and exposing frauds depends upon producing said frauds on a fairly consistent basis... no matter what.  Nobody likes a self appointed hall monitor.  Well, maybe some people on here might.  

 

I will say the that Todd is probably somewhere on the spectrum, and I have heard from some other researchers that he would stab you in the back with a quickness in order to get access to an active area and the resultant possible attention.  

 

So, while he is most probably an unpleasant person...he is at best only MAYBE a hoaxer in my mind.  I believe that his self-aggrandizing ways were probably the factor that drove some of his earlier partners away as opposed to them suddenly changing their minds about the quality of his encounters.

 

At the end of the day, it's the cool thing to do in this field to hate on and dismiss Standing.  Seeing as how of most of the most of the other prominent names in this field are themselves fairly unlikeable people, I don't want to blindly take their word on who I am supposed to accept and who I am supposed to hate. 

 

For me, the jury might definitely be leaning one way on Todd, but it's still out.  

[RedHawk454]

Todd’s BIGfo0Ts all look different.  The face is the hardest to pass off as legitimate And his apEs looks more like an amalgamation of carpet, rocks,  And whatever you can find at hobby lobby. 
 

and as Aredis pointed out, it seems he combines legitimate research with hoaxes.

[Believer57]

Hi all,

 

Thank you for your responses! The combined opinions were worth the price of a book to me so I just donated to the site.

 

As an aside, this is the first site that I have ever used a screen name. The decision came based upon what seemed to be the consensus here and some small fear within me about not going public with the subject. As my screen name denotes, I am a believer in Bigfoot/Sasquatch and I was born in 1957. I am a retired Engineer from the radio communications industry (Industrial/Utilities/Military)

 

Cheers and Happy Holidays!

[Huntster]

21 hours ago, Believer57 said:

........he has proven himself capable of field results.......

 

I think your answer hides amongst your own words. Standing seems to have sasquatches revealing themselves to him every other time he goes out into the woods. He produces videos and close up photos of sasquatches that many think look fake. Yet he cannot seem to produce any evidence that stands up to any scientific scrutiny whatsoever.

 

He's a boy crying wolf. 

 

Welcome to the forum. 

 

 

[vinchyfoot]

20 hours ago, Arvedis said:

 

The amount of opinions on this subject does not make it easy to cut through and do the research.  Here is my take (not proof of anything either way).

 

Todd found out about an area in BC with BF activity. He explored and confirmed activity. BF experiences can be fleeting. Maybe he saw something, maybe he imagined it.  At the time, he was not equipped to capture any evidence. Later on he tried to manufacture it to recreate what he thinks he saw. He did so in a few poorly made and poorly edited films. This was back in...I want to say 2005 or whenever he tried peddling those DVDs for $25 or $50.  The problem was, he was pitching the DVDs as the ultimate BF evidence. He is more humble about those early experiences now but back when he was selling DVDs, he thought he was king bigfooter and wanted the attention for a few still photos of puppets. That is why everything he has ever done is not well received, because of this early failure to present his claimed evidence honestly.

 

In the early 200os, there is also a hilariously bad episode of a Canadian emergency responder show.  Todd made up a story about being chased by bears after escaping being chased by BFs. I'm sure the episode is on YT so you can judge for yourself how clearly out of bounds his claims are.

 

In his early days, he showed 1 interesting, very fast clip of something climbing rocks but that is all the video evidence he ever presented before the setups in Discovering Bigfoot (which is worth watching, even if people are not Todd fans).

 

Fast forward to the present, Todd has improved as a researcher. He can't overcome his early mistakes though. The ending of Discovering Bigfoot, when he trudges out in camo and facepaint...and the way he tries to explain away the puppet photos, just doesn't work. He is entertaining though, in a way.

 

Now he needs another reliable area since he scared away the BFs in his usual spot.

 

 

 

Or he's a known hoaxer who cgi'ed the heads in that video, and this been known information for years. Nothing he does is valid.

[norseman]

The muppet head. No one thinks this looks like a biological creature. And represents the starting point of progression. He even went so far with a later face to make it wink because of the earlier criticism of unblinking eyes.

 

The Todd head. This face is indeed a biological creature. The eye even blinks! And lo and behold after careful scrutiny? The face seems to line up very nicely with Todd’s own face.

 

And never mind the fact that these two faces are supposed to represent the same species.

 

 

[norseman]