At this point I am with fuzzy, above.

Spring has sprung ~ let’s all put on our boots and cammies, grab our lights and cameras and get out there!

DON’T DRINK THE KOOL-AID ! ! !

What?

When the book comes out I’ll be able to leaf through it, see all 14 photos and still decide not to spend a cent if I want to.

To the contrary - if financial gain was the prime concern, then surely, releasing a single image would be the best thing for book sales!! It would give the market a few months to salivate in anticipation (and maybe lodge a pre-order or two)!

Let me ask this: based on what you currently know today of the situation, are you booking plane tickets to, and accommodation in, Malaysia? No.

Once this book is published, do you think there will be all manner of scientists and film crews interested in booking plane tickets to, and accommodation in, Malaysia? Yes.

I would like to think that a team who claims to have spent 11 years working with the species are actually attempting to ensure some manner of protection for it - preferrably legal - before revealing its presence to the world.

And if it’s all a hoax? Well it’s been an entertaining discussion!

Examples: “Taking pot-shots at him and the organization misses this crucial point entirely. (And by the way, making fun of the man based on his name is sophomoric and off the mark;”

So name calling is ok when not directed at someone’s own name?

“Having attended many expeditions now under his steady leadership, I can say that the BFRO is a robust and innovative organization, by far the most comprehensive source of information on the topic.”

I would have to call this a “biased opinion.” Have you studied and interviewed every source of information on Bigfoot to come to this conclusion, or does the money you were charged to attend expeditions validate this conclusion?

“Any one of the monthly expeditions contains a greater number of excited, engaged, discriminating researchers (both veteran and beginner) than the total of all those who have a personal axe to grind with the organization, especially those who have been removed from the BFRO (including, with all due respect, Mr. Coleman), for various good reasons.”

Do you know any of these “good reasons”? How do you know what field researchers do what? How do you know who in the research community knows more than anyone else on the subject? Do you know any field researchers outside of the BFRO personally? Have you been on multiple research outings with anyone other than the BFRO?

“He spends more time doing actual field work, learning concrete lessons about sasquatch habitat and behavior, than any other researcher in the world.”

Any other researcher in the world? You’re joking right? I truely hope your initial post was meant to be taken with sarcasm, because otherwise you should nominate yourself as the BFRO poster child for brainwashing and naivety. The main problem I see as an outsider, with no direct relation to the BFRO or Matt Moneymaker, is that the powers that be at the BFRO have a problem with anyone who thinks or forms opinions for themselves. Anyone within the BFRO who has ever dared question any of their motives or ways of thinking has been immediately removed by Matt Moneymaker.

Several years ago when I first joined the “internet Bigfoot community” I contacted the BFRO about the possibility of being a part of their expeditions. The only questions asked of me were do I have any money to contribute or do I have any equipment I could let them use. Otherwise they had no need for me, even when they were having an expedition in my own home state. That pretty much told me what they were about right away.

In conclusion, someone correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t the point of this original blog to discuss the blatant attacks on Cryptomundo in the un-signed editorial of the BFRO? This isn’t about the photographs or the book. That can be found in a different blog entirely.

“Look for some remarkable fruits of these labors in the coming months”

Can you elaborate on that?

Oh spare me please. Biscardi just gained credibility.

Yes, Shawshank places a bit of someone’s reality above within those comments about your humble “pulp cryptozoology” blogger. I suppose that I can proudly say that when the BFRO was “created” by one person years ago, via a groups list, I was (after only a few weeks) kicked out of the internal circle of “curators” for asking too many hard inquiries that were never answered, about mission, decision-making, leadership, and more. My media awareness and documentary visibility were not appreciated then. My mild organizational questions were found to be too challenging, even though I never requested or wanted any kind of leadership role in the BFRO. I merely probed as I do all the time about many issues. I was unsubscribed, without explanation.

That I assume is how Matt Moneymaker has conceptualized and discussed my “removal” from the “BFRO.” Who cares? Each to their own reality, projections, and dictatorships. Of course, he may have left out that after I was publicly given the boot, he backchanneled secret discussions with me often, and even later invited me to speak at the Willow Creek symposium during the year my Bigfoot book was being published. (I was later to discover this invitation was sent with no authority, and I was to learn I was not on the published speakers’ list.) I was also asked to contribute to the BFRO website (without credit and without my name being attached to the items), for example, on matters of Ray Wallace and the media.

It has been a long and winding road.