For the last year or so I’ve been sitting around and pondering questions to myself and to others, as to exactly what effect is the information super-highway having on real Bigfoot investigation.
After much consideration and thought, I see it digressing in much the way traditional media has come about.
Television came to full bear in the 1960’s and news reported just that news. Speculation was a rarity. By the 1990’s news on TV was evolving into a 24 hour service.
Today, speculation, pundits and opinions are the filler between actual news stories.
In the 1990’s the internet slowly began to change the way Bigfoot information was transmitted. By the middle of the 2000’s printed newsletters such as Daniel Perez’s newsletter and Ray Crowe’s newsletter (The Track Report), have became antiquated.
The beginning of the new millennium public forums and discussion groups about Bigfoot were the rage. Now that too is slowly fading from view.
By the beginning of this decade, information has spun so far out of control, there is little hope to keep much under wraps.
Why is this? Because on a daily basis just as in the mainstream, there is very little real information to write about. So these sites, my own included, have to use speculative content to fill the time. In some cases some blogs have gone to vitriolic hyperbole to fill the time, others report rumor, rather than fact for some of the time.
Since the popularity of “Finding Bigfoot,” there has been an influx of new researchers and media that has entered the fray. The problem is, they come in and some don’t know anyone from anyone.
They report things such as captures, killings of Sasquatch, sensational footage, or blobsquatches, that this type of thing is new. It’s not. Far from it.
Look up the names of Kerlow, Marx, Wallace and Crook just to name the few.
Look up the names of the researchers that had to make the calls on these things, and had to report on them, such as Byrne, Green, Dahinden. What would the pundits be saying about them today if the technologies today existed then?
Do the new folks even know who the Four Horsemen are or were?
It seems to me, after watching a few documentaries, owning the box set of season one of “Finding Bigfoot,” and having the ability to create a Blogger, Word Press or YouTube site, some of the “noobs” feel they are some sort of authority to speak on the daily happenings on the community.
I take pause to wonder if this is what the older generation thought of us.
The majority however have been great, and have integrated nicely, however as usual it’s the exceptions that usual create the loudest noise.
As does every once in a while something brilliant does come out, but so often it can be twisted by opinion or naivety, I’m not sure which at times, but the problem is the point gets lost by hyperbole.
My mission has always been one of truth, so when I see opinions in spite of the truth that I’ve investigated, which in this case is not yet been made public, until now, it makes me cringe.
If we can’t get the truth in real life right, how can we even get close to solving the mystery of the Sasquatch?
While some do move with trepidation at first and exercise caution, some do not, and they act without restraint, in essence doing more damage than assist.
The old school way was to write letters and later telephone. That eventually graduated to blogging and email, and now has to digressed by some to the easy way out and just blog about it.
There is a hell of a lot of reporting, just no investigating.
The end result is people writing things with no real knowledge of anything, except what was written by others, speculated and talked about on a forum, and regurgitated in some other format.
The Melba Double Standard…
Remember 2011 everyone criticizing Dr. Melba Ketchum for not saying anything public about the study and results? Now the criticism has turned to she DID say something about the project, for whatever her rationale.
My original criticism was wrong that she made a statement, and I myself felt swayed by public opinion. My criticism still stands however, for including a political statement at the end of such.
But she was standing, at least in 2011 on scientific reasoning for not saying anything and we weren’t happy, now she did in contradiction to 2011 and now we’re criticizing her for it.
Stages of a Bigfoot Hoax…
Guy Edwards has written about stages of a Bigfoot Hoax, which he was spot on and brilliant, but unfortunately there is a major component missing.
And my points here are not to discredit Mr. Edwards, as he should be complimented for pointing these stages out in his model, but as an alternative to his opinions based on his model because it lacks a stage.
The essential component missing from Mr. Edward’s stages of a Bigfoot Hoax is the very first step. In every hoax, con and the like, there is a mark. The target. Remember that.
So the next time someone comes a knocking that says they have seen a Sasquatch, have them running over their property, have a body, a live one, and they are a hoaxer, YOU, not the public, not the community, are their mark.
As in every con, they prey upon the mark’s beliefs, naivety and faith in people. People have said to me, “but they were so confident I thought for sure…”
Hence the term con. It’s an abbreviation for confidence.
Now I don’t want to digress into, an argument of “The Boxed Bigfoot,” but some have forgotten Occam’s Razor, and this I feel duty bound to the truth to address.
Mr. Edwards’ last stage, “Claiming you are victim of a hoax” he is directing, or it appears such at the MABRC. No….NO… that should be directed at Ed Smith. That could have been Smith’s exit plan, which didn’t take.
And there’s a problem with Smith’s exit plan… Smith has no evidence that he was hoaxed. None..zip. And whatever did happen to “Smith’s Documentary?”
Now did the MABRC play things out as I would? Probably not, in some areas but they’re not me nor, I them. And so is no one else for that matter. They will be rethinking their methodology for sure, and rightfully so. We all do that on a constant basis, or should. It’s all too easy to be an armchair quarterback in these instances.
Mr. Edwards also brings out the point that Dr. Meldrum alone should have been enough to validate the claim. HUH?
If this hypothetically turned out to be real, the good Doctor would have come back and reported to the community, it’s real and his ass would have been barbequed as being bought, or some insidious plot how he was likely extorted, to say that, or worse yet, and unfortunately the most likely, the pundits would have attacked his good reputation by saying, he just wants to get his name in the paper and statements of that ilk.
That’s a lesson I learned the hard way even when you report something as a hoax. In these public debacles, NEVER, EVER go it alone. That’s also a lesson learned by some of the vets, and in my opinion, hence the BRG team, consisting of folks outside the MABRC, was formed, before anything was put into motion.
Smith named Meldrum and Hovey, and Darren Lee, Director of the MABRC chose Kathy, Abe and myself also to be part of the independent team.
We all knew that if Mr. Smith was lying, the public announcement of the team would be the quickest resolution to ending the claims. Darren, myself and a couple other members of the group spoke of that privately shortly after the announcement of the group was made. The clock was ticking for Smith.
The group was formed for four days prior to the public announcement and nothing Smith stated to Darren indicated that this would not move forward. Within hours of the public announcement, Smith called Darren with a potential problem and a day later, the group wasn’t needed. Yeah, go figure.
Let’s stop scapegoating, and put the blame on the real person, the VERY REAL Ed Smith.
YES… Ed Smith is real…
It’s very simple in my professional past to determine if someone is real or not. With Mr. Smith, a common name we needed something more, and we got one in a middle initial. With that info, I hit my resources hard, burning the midnight oil.
If he was fake the information would have been inconsistent., incomplete or more likely nothing at all. After I got the potential suspect, I pooled some information on what was known about Mr. Smith and confirmed this was indeed the very real Ed Smith, the phone numbers and email being the clincher.
Page one of a contact report confirming the existence of Ed Smith.
We know the names of his parents, siblings, his residence history, all consistent with the information known, his date of birth, phone number, which has been confirmed by sources as his own, his email, again confirmed.
The MABRC knew 75% of the information we uncovered, which helped greatly in verifying the data we collected was valid and consistent with the person they were dealing with the last several years.
What we did uncover they did not know, were the things that go against Smith’s claims, such as the lack of owned property, or any recent business ownership and work history not consistent with his previous claims and a purchase history, forensically indicative that this was a made up story from the get go, in 2008, when Smith first burst upon the scene claiming to have done this for ten years prior.
Matt Pruitt deserves the majority of the credit to this, as he has been researching the background of Mr. Smith for the last two years. Awesome job and hats off to him for his diligence.
I’d also like to thank Matt Knapp for obtaining property searches in the area as well.
My own involvement in the search was getting Mr. Smith’s work history.
So I hope that puts that issue to rest.
As to the impact of the MABRC…
A History Lesson…
There was a hoaxer that infiltrated a group of researchers.
They even paid him to track the activity in areas of the creatures. He came through with sighting reports and eventually led them to evidence that was hailed as great new convincing evidence.
He gave them frequent updates, which got the group excited that they were getting close. There should have been a lot of tell tale signs, which became apparent after the fact, that he was a hoaxer. But he seemed sincere and convincing so they believed him and even the evidence he had led them to.
He had been with them for about four years when it all came crumbling down for him.
They even were going to pay him $25,000 for his new ground breaking evidence.
The year was 1971, when Ivan Marx, (Biscardi’s mentor) claimed he had a film, which was obvious what it was.
The men associated with Marx before his claims, Roger Patterson, Rene Dahinden, Peter Byrne, Bob Titmus, John Green to name a few.
Oh and by the way… that wonderful piece of evidence that Marx led these men to?
The Bossburg Cripplefoot, the cornerstone of Dr. Grover Krantz’s thesis on Bigfoot evidence and he proudly displayed on all of the In Search Of… episodes and other documentaries.
Till Next Time,