The members of the BFRO are continually striving to improve the organization as a whole, and are deeply committed to our efforts. What we are proud of is serving as catalyst to increase the public awareness and consciousness related to the Sasquatch phenomenon. Nothing is more satisfying to me than transforming the thought processes of the classic skeptic, to one who subscribes to the existence of this marvelous creature. We indeed do our very best to educate our attendees to the reality of this creature and offer then guidance and instruction, regarding the many things we have learned through the years.

Does all this follow suit with a purely scientific method that satisfies the world of academia? Of course not, as anyone who truly applies themselves to the study of Sasquatch is ultimately engaged in pseudo-science. No carcass/remains have ever been discovered, or live subject captured and studied. That is precisely why the scientific community considers any Sasquatch research as merely fodder for the back page of most tabloids. Our line of research and discovery has come a long way in recent years, and I am proud of my part in this process. I am currently working with two universities, regarding my projects in the field, and I have been able to gain some consideration for our line of research. This involves evidence collected in my personal investigative efforts, and in BFRO community. That is why when you state, “no serious scientist or sasquatch researcher would touch you guys with a ten foot pole, and you know it”, you just might be off base. In fact, the anthropologist/primatologist I am meeting with this weekend might have something to say about that. She has stated to me in the past that she has become rather impressed with the tracks that I have cast and vocalizations that I have recorded through the years. I don’t make mention of this to find favor with you, only to give you consternation when not fully informed about who and what you level animosity towards.

In closing, I myself would never even consider leveling the types of accusations and opinions towards you or your group, that you have myself and my organization. I prefer to view us all as brothers in research with a common cause. We can all learn from one another and enjoy the camaraderie that comes with our great quest. We can also choose to be destructive and demeaning towards one another, which yields nothing to the fellowship and goal that accompanies the heart of genuine research. I have long ago made my choice, and I subsequently wish you and others the very best in your research, and related endeavors.

In fact, for someone who routinely touts the TBRC, I have to say that BFRO trumps them on geographic scope (which is, OK, understandable) and volume and frequency of updates. And the reports are every bit as compelling for the most part. (I mean, it’s the same thing, right? People reporting their experiences.) And, as I have said here, even “Finding Bigfoot” may have a plus side: Every time new reports go up since that show started, there’s an encounter from this year or last.

All that’s required is the expertise to set up a database; turn it loose; and find some people out there who can follow up with witnesses and ask the right questions. (Follow-up is key; not only is every witness not necessarily Shakespeare, but many don’t want to say much until they know they’ve hooked up with a bona fide group.) One does not have to be a scientific superstar to let the people have their say, and help them out with follow-up visits and interviews. Quality of follow-up is uneven but there are some very good investigators on the BFRO network.

MM’s articles on the Minaret skull and “Deer Kills and Bigfoots” are actually pretty good reads with some interesting stuff in them.

I don’t like negative critiques either, but sometimes it’s required, and there are some smart people here. We’re on the frontiers of science in crypto; and the bold few need all the eyes and ears to help that they can get. Because even the pioneers here are learning.

Like you too though; I mince no words; I expect and invite critique of anything I do publicly and I expect others to at least not lie about things (hoax etc).

Thanks for pointing out this issue.

If you’re looking for the sasquatch the same way you’re looking over this thread, well my bet’s on one person not to prove its existence.

By your own stats would those be?, you have perused one HECK of a lot of stuff not to get any of it. (Including the abundant positivity.) I might not want to admit that.

Good day, sir, and, um, good luck.

I’d say more, but I’ve been ordered to “… stop subjectively defending MM and the BRFO. Got it? You stand corrected!”

“Case closed”? What a circus!

“In my rejoinder to “fuzzy”; I go so far as to praise the BFRO for both the excellent geographical database and the “follow up” investigators.”

Had to single this out.

Too many people will look at what ….well, “has turned” let us just say about the BFRO, and the things on which reasonable people may disagree – e.g., big paying groups and what they do for the cause – as sufficient to dismiss the entire bushel as bad apples.

It can’t be said enough what a mistake that would be; and the two things you cite are primary reasons.

Moneymaker’s Lucid Moments have also generated a couple of the best articles on that site.

It is perfectly possible – in fact, easy in the extreme – to hold in one’s mind the two positions that BFRO does some bad/questionable stuff…and some of the key stuff being done in the field.