Guest vilnoori Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 So...do you suppose a fairish place to scoop Todd would be in Radium Hot Springs these days? Or back to Calgary... Not that far apart by Canadian standards. A mere day's drive. But if he is a hoaxer, what is he doing spending days alone in the backwoods of the Kootenays, showing up 3 days late and having got up the search and rescue? I think, personally speaking of course, that he is simply overselling, overstating, given to hyperbole if not out and out inaccuracy, and jumping the gun BUT he is still on to something and could very well have some good evidence some day to present to the world. He does seem very serious. Too serious maybe...and not at all willing to share. None of this is all that unusual in this field, really, TBH. I'd say he is simply one of dozens, but the thing is, he is Canadian and has the most wonderful, productive back yard to search in. At least he has some decent images to offer, instead of pictures of moss, trees, or fuzzy stumps that have been doctored. I'm still settling in for a wait and see attitude in the long run, and not dismissing him yet. And no, I am not paying anything for pictures or fancy hiking trips, and if that leaves me out of the picture then so be it. If it is a significant finding then it will come out into the free public sooner or later. I can wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 Well the FB statement is the most encouraging thing I've heard all week on the matter. There is hope. Vilnoori, I believe his getting lost may be the only legitimate thing that has happened to him. Maybe. Remember the video of him during that solo trip where someone else was filming while he was running from a bigfoot? Either way, don't allow his actually getting lost to legitimize his prior claims that were never verified. Anyone can get lost. As you guys know, I don’t give Standing much rope. Mainly because I’ve closely followed his claims and have inspected how he has advanced forward using them, essentially leapfrogging to the next. While his recently getting lost is substantiated as happening, some people allowed that incident to validate his prior claims, when it shouldn’t. From his 2′ X 2′ hole under a mountain, to 16mm film of bigfoot being ruined by magnetic fields, to days travel to get there under the harshest of conditions (and little sis tagging along), to Sylvanic being a Native name (Sylvan being a Latin term), to the teens that disappeared there, and the guy named Dan Hamilton as well, etc. There were a long series of non-validated stories that Standing used to move his claims forward with promotion surrounding each event, none of which were ever proven to be true, but he moves to the next and never verifying the last. That’s how he operates. I am however curious about the latest image on his site. No not the pasty looking fake facial. If this other image is legit, its only because it was taken by someone else, so Standing is once again able to leapfrog forward, this time using someone else. Erickson seems to be doing the same for him but doing a disservice by ignoring his prior methods. Erickson needs to recognize that Standing has significant video and makeup talent available to him, and that Standing’s prior melodramatic claims are going to follow him everywhere. That may negatively affect credibility of the larger effort of Erickson's. The key to Standing’s moving forward is his talent at leapfrogging from one claim to the next and never validating the past outlandish ones. Same method as he used at Ghosttheory and forums by Shilling different people’s identities to build up his image and claims. Only thing is, he got caught! They weren’t different supporters, they were Todd and his makeup artist little sis. That’s the real Todd Standing as far as I am concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Biggie Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 he expects to have DNA results by October. Thanks for the heads up. Lets just hope there is not a delay longer than that. Also glad to see the BFRO's stance on him. "Usually the four investigators are not unanimous when some of us feel a witness is not credible. In Todd's case we all came away feeling that he is not credible, and we said so afterwards." Good to know that is their unanimous stance. Thanks for posting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 1, 2011 Share Posted September 1, 2011 (edited) Hairy Greek said: Unless I would be allowed my AR-15 in hand and 1911 on my side, zippy chance this is happening. Susi exclaims:Yikes! You forgot your rocket and grenade launchers, and the machine gun! Truly I would wish to be prepared with any and all defensive weapons that could drop an elephant so it would be sure to take out an attacking BF. BTW,I would only shoot to kill if I had no other choice. Overkill with the weapons I suggested? Yes. But I'd be still living if a BF attacked my hunting party. IMVOHO. Edited September 1, 2011 by SweetSusiq Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jimmy simpson Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 This whole thing does what its intended to do ... spikes interest. One of the homebuilders I work for (who knows nothing about my interest in BF), comes up to me yesterday and says "I seen they might have finally found BF in banff"... To the general, uninformed public, this whole deal sounds like it could be legit. And will garnish viewers... gauranteed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 See, I told ya.............no black nose on his images. Fails the mm test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slabdog Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Yeah....looks like Standing will get his on national TV. Hey....where did Alpinist go? I'm surprised he's not here defending himsel......errr...I mean.. defending Todd Standing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 Is that who you think Alpinist is? LOL... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 ^^^ I wondered the VERY same thing, almost immediately, and didnt say/accuse anything. Keep in mind... "He" (Mr Standing) was a very active participant on several Bigfoot/Crypto boards.... including BFF 1.0 As pointed out by PT- it was also sometimes in a 2nd person role- as a fictitious character who supported TS's efforts... To his own detriment in my opinion.... Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alpinist Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 I actually offered up the idea that this new face picture popping up is actually from the Erickson Project. We shall see I guess. Things keep on getting interesting. That's technically correct, as the EP bought Todds best footage according to my leak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HairyGreek Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 ^^^ I wondered the VERY same thing, almost immediately, and didnt say/accuse anything. Keep in mind... "He" (Mr Standing) was a very active participant on several Bigfoot/Crypto boards.... including BFF 1.0 As pointed out by PT- it was also sometimes in a 2nd person role- as a fictitious character who supported TS's efforts... To his own detriment in my opinion.... Art Hmmm...interesting. Check your PMs.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alpinist Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) Thomas Steenburg- I am very encouraged to here that the recording of a BF that MM presented for your listening, sounded like a peacock One of the two audable encounters I had at Prairre Creek State Park, Ca. in 1961 sounded like a tremendously load peacock. A peacock, go figure, but that what it sounded like. I have listened to hundreds of recording of BF screams, howls, growls and all sorts of soundes but the volume and lung power from possible 75-100 yds. answered by two toungue pops was the start of my own personal interest in the whole BF subject. Man, would I ever like to hear that recording. ptangier Note to people who don't get out much, and I dont mean ptangier, Sasquacth imitating birds is considered common and is very confusing in the field. The depth and volume of the call never translates to the recording device, but is what the acute researcher keys into. MM likely had a recording of a bf imitating a peacock Edited September 2, 2011 by Alpinist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alpinist Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) Yeah....looks like Standing will get his on national TV. Hey....where did Alpinist go? I'm surprised he's not here defending himsel......errr...I mean.. defending Todd Standing. Spent the last three days on Pitt Lake, BC. Camped at Osprey Creek, no Sasquatch activity whatsoever but lots of signs of gun play including almost 50 cal sized damage to trees. It's BC dope grower vacation spot now. few challenges I have seen here are worth responding to, my forum time is limited Edited September 2, 2011 by Alpinist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 few challenges I have seen here are worth responding to I would politely disagree to part of this statement. I will agree that you could view them as challenges, but disagree that they are not worth responding too. That implies that what's been said is not "worthy" of your time... Just about everything that i said in my posts, as well as what was said by the two or so other detractors that have joined me, are opinions formed over several years, and the facts put forth in defense of those opinions are easily verifiable- since they are archived on several peoples sites.... I have had a somewhat successful professional career where I deal with people on a daily basis. I have had to (in order to be successful) to determine what exactly it is im dealing with in regards to these people. In other words- over time, to feel them out, determine whether they are worthy of partnering with. Part of that decision is based on assessing their truthfulness, their integrity, and how they present themselves. In case your curious- my background is in the building materials industry, and over the years I've dealt with everyone from the handy-man guy with a pickup and a ladder- to the multi-million dollar custom home developers just north of the metro NYC area. You might find it surprising to hear the term "fire a customer"- but it does in fact happen. Within the new home construction and remodeling markets you run the complete range from finding honest decent people, to dealing with the lowest of the low- people completely devoid of truth, and willing to partake in any number of shady activities to further their cause. Having done so for almost twenty years now, I find myself a decent judge of people's character. When I do so, it doesnt come quickly, and it doesnt come without putting in the time and effort to ferret out as much information as I can. That being said, I don't believe that for those of us that have found Mr Standing's past actions undesirable, that I/we find it easy or enjoyable to "out" him on here or anywhere else. In my case I can state emphatically that its not the case. I'd like nothing more than to be able to find his work credible- unfortunately that is no longer the case. The simple problem I have is that this person wants to be taken seriously now, as an experienced researcher, and yet much of his past (and even current) work is fraught with inconsistencies and unexplainable holes and gaps. To compound it, this person has chosen numerous times to put himself in a position by joining in on these forums, where he creates the negative atmosphere that now surrounds him, by going back on previous statements, by stating things that do not hold up under scrutiny, by ignoring reasonable requests to answer questions about the inconsistencies and gaps, and finally by offering forth evidence that most view and find to be extremely "wanting" in regards to appearing legitimate. This isnt a personal crusade, and I do not wish this person any ill will. I just have a problem with someone wanting national attention, and recognition from government agencies, and wanting to get paid along the way- when so much of what we are asked to believe is, well, simply unbelievable. I sincerely hope that explains where I am coming from in regards to the comments I've made above about Sylvanic..... Art Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alpinist Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 (edited) Art I agree it's clear Standing has huge issues and is addicted to hype, dabbles in film production and is a flake by definition. I was told the EP bought his footage because it stands on it's own regardless of the shooters behaviors, this was pretty much Jason Ericksons position, when I queried him about Standings sequences. Digital footage standing on it's own has pretty much been the premise of many of my posts here since joining. There will be future assessments of past footage, post discovery, and it won't be done by the same people who have been doing so in the past. Hence my hypothesis that future sequences, and perhaps past ones, will be judged against benchmarks not employed today. The challenges I refer to earlier are the ones that may be directed at me, by certain parties here on the forum, trolling me. Edited September 2, 2011 by Alpinist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts