Moneymakin'! The BFRO Bigfoot Expeditions Thread.

[LTC8K6]

You can't tranquilize what you can't find, and you certainly can't tranquilize bigfoot when your first act upon apparently getting close to a live one is to abandon the area rapidly so you can write up your report.

 

[Foolmewunz]

You can't tranquilize what you can't find, and you certainly can't tranquilize bigfoot when your first act upon apparently getting close to a live one is to abandon the area rapidly so you can write up your report.

...abandon the area rapidly so you can write up your report, unless, of course, it's dark, in which case you turn on your video cameras and microphones and record pictures of darkness with the occasional light shining through, with everyone saying, "Hear that? Over there! Yeah, that's one."

 

[Sagacious]

BFRO - Guided Bigfoot expeditions.

Does anyone else find the website bfro.net extremely shady? This organization/business has been selling guided camping trips where they attempt to coax bigfoot.

I'm sure given the number of expeditions, and number of participants they have sold access to some of these expeditions must've have produced some substantial evidence right? Wrong.


Taken from their website:

What are the undisputed facts about the bigfoot / sasquatch mystery?
It's a fact that for more than 400 years people have reported seeing large, hair-covered, man-like animals in the wilderness areas of North America.

It is a fact that sightings of these animals continue today. Real or not, these reports are often made by people of unimpeachable character.
It is a fact that, for over seventy years, people have been finding, photographing, and casting sets of very large human-shaped tracks. Most are discovered by chance in remote areas. These tracks continue to be found to this day.

It is a fact that the cultural histories of many Native American and First Nation peoples include stories and beliefs about non-human "peoples" of the wild. Many of these descriptions bear a striking resemblance to the hairy man-like creatures reported today.

These are some of the facts. There is, however, much disagreement as to what these facts mean.

To many, these facts, taken together, suggest the presence of an animal, probably a primate, that exists today in very low population densities. If true, this species, having likely evolved alongside humans, became astonishingly adept at avoiding human contact through a process of natural selection.

To others, these same facts point to a cultural phenomenon kept alive today through a combination of the misidentification of known animals, wishful thinking, and the deliberate fabrication of evidence.

The BFRO, and its members, take the former view.

This is of course posted by the same organization attempting to present the "Jacobs photos" representing a juvenile sasquatch. My bolding above points to some very carefully worded statements posted on their website. The website with a CEO that claims to have a sasquatch sighting of his own as well. (as stated in a national geographic article) Seems from that wording, "real or not" would suggest they are not sure. Contradictive?



Even today a moderator on their forum posts this gem:

AndrewP - (moderator on the forum over there) Posted: December 12th, 2009 11:37 PM

We do find scat, all the time. We've found piles of likely squatch scat on every expedition, public and private, I've been on.

Pretty bold statement, considering there have never been any confirmed sasquatch scat. Where is all this evidence laid claim to? Interesting...


So the question is, how does this organization/company get away with charging folks for going on bigfoot expeditions? Do they obtain the proper permits to do so on public lands? How many people total have been on said expeditions? (at 300 bucks a pop, 100 for repeat attendees) Are they paying taxes on all of this income from the claimed amount?


Curious for some opinions about this operation, and its legal status considering some of these claims. How far is too far with bold claims? Just how far can you go before it becomes fraud? Any lawyers here want to comment on the specifics? Thanks.

Being that Mr Moneymaker has made claims of being a law school graduate (is he a legitimate lawyer?) and has also made claims to seeing a bigfoot, I am curious what the particulars could imply regarding these expeditions, and or the claims on their website regarding the expeditions and otherwise misrepresented photos, or scat etc. When do you cross that fine line of legitimate sales technique, or misrepresenting evidence etc. in order to continue selling these expeditions to potential costumers.



Fraud?
Legal, but shady?
Completely legitimate?

Lets hear some informed opinions please.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

My opinion is that Mr. Moneymaker was aptly named.

 

[philkensebben]

They have nothing. Nada. zilch. Not a thing. For them to suggest otherwise makes them liars.

 

[Vortigern99]

If the BFRO and its representatives are in possession of an abundance of "sasquatch scat", I request that in the name of human understanding of the natural world, they submit multiple samples taken from different areas to a wildlife research team and/or zoological laboratory, and let science do its work.

Knowing the diet of this undiscovered animal would be a good first step toward actually finding one. Once we understand what it eats, we can lay bait and/or position game-cams at likely sites.

Or perhaps the BFRO members and participants in these guided expos are simply undereducated in the identification of fecal remains of known animals such as big cats, bears and even, dare I suggest such a thing, human beings.

 

[RayG]

How dare you disparage the BFRO! Founded in 1995, they're "[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the only scientific research organization exploring the bigfoot/sasquatch mystery"[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][1], and "[/FONT]has amassed one of the most intriguing written cultural histories in the United States of America"[2].[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[/FONT]The BFRO still stands firmly behind the Skookum Cast [3], and the Jacob's Photo [4], and have now created the ultimate pay-as-you-go bigfoot circus, that pitched its tent in 28 hotspots of activity last year.

You pay your fee to get in, there's lots of fanfare, but things only get truly interesting when it's dark, and you forgot your flashlight. If you're lucky you're treated to a close up encounter with an elephant. You can't touch the elephant, nor even see it, but it's quite exhilarating to hear one just a few feet away, crashing around in the bush.

Some of the circus crowd have attended multiple times, never disappointed that the center ring remains empty.

Obviously, it's a nice money-maker for the big cheese who runs the BFRO.

Not allowing guns means there's no danger someone might accidentally shoot a <cough> bigfoot <cough> that's stalking the perimeter of the camp.

RayG

[1] http://www.bfro.net/
[2] http://trueslant.com/scottbowen/2009/11/03/on-the-trail-of-the-new-york-bigfoot-part-1/
[3] http://www.bfro.net/NEWS/BODYCAST/
[4] http://www.bfro.net/avevid/jacobs/jacobs_photos.asp

 

[mikeyx]

Does anyone else find the website bfro.net extremely shady? This organization/business has been selling guided camping trips where they attempt to coax bigfoot.

I'm sure given the number of expeditions, and number of participants they have sold access to some of these expeditions must've have produced some substantial evidence right? Wrong.


Taken from their website:



This is of course posted by the same organization attempting to present the "Jacobs photos" representing a juvenile sasquatch. My bolding above points to some very carefully worded statements posted on their website. The website with a CEO that claims to have a sasquatch sighting of his own as well. (as stated in a national geographic article) Seems from that wording, "real or not" would suggest they are not sure. Contradictive?



Even today a moderator on their forum posts this gem:




Pretty bold statement, considering there have never been any confirmed sasquatch scat. Where is all this evidence laid claim to? Interesting...


So the question is, how does this organization/company get away with charging folks for going on bigfoot expeditions? Do they obtain the proper permits to do so on public lands? How many people total have been on said expeditions? (at 300 bucks a pop, 100 for repeat attendees) Are they paying taxes on all of this income from the claimed amount?


Curious for some opinions about this operation, and its legal status considering some of these claims. How far is too far with bold claims? Just how far can you go before it becomes fraud? Any lawyers here want to comment on the specifics? Thanks.

Being that Mr Moneymaker has made claims of being a law school graduate (is he a legitimate lawyer?) and has also made claims to seeing a bigfoot, I am curious what the particulars could imply regarding these expeditions, and or the claims on their website regarding the expeditions and otherwise misrepresented photos, or scat etc. When do you cross that fine line of legitimate sales technique, or misrepresenting evidence etc. in order to continue selling these expeditions to potential costumers.



Fraud?
Legal, but shady?
Completely legitimate?

Lets hear some informed opinions please.

I believe he has gone to law school (allegedly), but he is not a lawyer.

 

[jhunter1163]

The thing that tipped me from "honest but deluded" to "shady" was the fact that the BFRO doesn't allow tranquilizers on its little jaunts. You'd think that they would be all for putting ol' Squatch to sleep and thereby getting absolutely incontrovertible evidence of its existence. They're not, and that tells me all I need to know about them.

 

[William Parcher]

Mikeyx, there was absolutely no need for you to quote that entire post just to say that one line.


Saga, we have a number of other threads tagged with BFRO and one of them is specific about their expeditions. BTW, with all due respect, you seem to be quite familiar with the Bigfoot topic and tagged this thread like a pro instead of a newbie. You are not new to this debate at all, are you?

 

[Vortigern99]

The thing that tipped me from "honest but deluded" to "shady" was the fact that the BFRO doesn't allow tranquilizers on its little jaunts. You'd think that they would be all for putting ol' Squatch to sleep and thereby getting absolutely incontrovertible evidence of its existence. They're not, and that tells me all I need to know about them.

If I may play devil's advocate for a moment, the refusal to allow the use of tranquilizers is not an indication of "shadiness" or a willful obfuscation of reality on the BFRO's part. Tranquilizers do not work the way we've been conditioned to understand them from movies and television: namely, load a dart, aim and fire, repeat as necessary, and the target animal goes down. The reality is far more complicated -- and potentially dangerous for both target and shooter -- than that. The use of tranquilizers is neither easy nor harmless.

First, what is the dosage required to drop the target animal quickly? How many darts need to be fired at the animal, with each dart containing how many cc of what narcotic? Overdosing might kill the animal (in which case you might as well shoot it with a bullet); under-dosing might leave the shooter and others in the area vulnerable to attack from a wounded and/or enraged animal. We don't know the average mass (or neuro-chemistry) of an undiscovered animal, so it is impossible to determine the proper dosage, or indeed the kind of drug, required to safely tranquilize it.

Second, the shooter would have to position him/herself closer than he would if s/he were armed with a standard firearm, since tranquilizer darts have a much shorter range than standard bullets (about 1/10). This again would open the shooter to potential harm from the target animal (if it exists, which I'm not saying it does).

Third, darting equipment is expensive, specific to certain fields of research, and difficult to obtain. On what authority could a group of amateur foresters acquire the necessary equipment and substances?

Fourth, we have no way of knowing how long the effects of the tranquilizing drug (whatever it may be) would last. What would happen once the animal awakens? What are the next steps in transporting it to a laboratory for examination? How could a group of amateur foresters and weekend woodsmen safely transport a massive (?) animal to the nearest wildlife research facility? What assurances can we possibly provide that the animal would not awaken at some point during its transport and go on a kill-crazy rampage? Or at the very least, somehow injure itself in an effort to escape?

The majority of the preceding has been summarized from Krantz, 1991, p. 225 - 227. Please be aware that I do not believe bigfoot exists. However, if we are going to assume for the sake of discussion that it might, and proceed with the details of hunting for and safely tranquilizing it, the above points must be addressed -- for the sake of the hunters as well as the hunted, if any of the latter exist, which is doubtful.

 

[jhunter1163]

Fair points, Vort. Personally, I think educated guesses could be made regarding most of the variables you mentioned, but the biggest fly in the ointment is the lack of targets. That, and the risk of tranquilizing some BFRO member out doing his Squatch impression.

 

[I Ratant]

How dare you disparage the BFRO! Founded in 1995, they're "[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]the only scientific research organization exploring the bigfoot/sasquatch mystery"[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][1], and "[/FONT]has amassed one of the most intriguing written cultural histories in the United States of America"[2].[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[/FONT]The BFRO still stands firmly behind the Skookum Cast [3], and the Jacob's Photo [4], and have now created the ultimate pay-as-you-go bigfoot circus, that pitched its tent in 28 hotspots of activity last year.

You pay your fee to get in, there's lots of fanfare, but things only get truly interesting when it's dark, and you forgot your flashlight. If you're lucky you're treated to a close up encounter with an elephant. You can't touch the elephant, nor even see it, but it's quite exhilarating to hear one just a few feet away, crashing around in the bush.

Some of the circus crowd have attended multiple times, never disappointed that the center ring remains empty.

Obviously, it's a nice money-maker for the big cheese who runs the BFRO.

Not allowing guns means there's no danger someone might accidentally shoot a <cough> bigfoot <cough> that's stalking the perimeter of the camp.

RayG

[1] http://www.bfro.net/
[2] http://trueslant.com/scottbowen/2009/11/03/on-the-trail-of-the-new-york-bigfoot-part-1/
[3] http://www.bfro.net/NEWS/BODYCAST/
[4] http://www.bfro.net/avevid/jacobs/jacobs_photos.asp

.
Sounds like the tour group that would show you real Graboids in one of the "Tremors" series on SyFy.
Boy, were they surprised when a real one showed up!

 

[Vortigern99]

Yes, I neglected to mention the potential for inadvertently tranquilizing -- or killing -- a doofus in a fur suit, out for a night of (mostly) harmless tree-knocking frivolity.

 

[Bitter Monk]

Yes, I neglected to mention the potential for inadvertently tranquilizing -- or killing -- a doofus in a fur suit

You're crazy man.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The cretins that brought us "Freezer Bigfoot"?

 

[Bitter Monk]

No. That was an entirely different set of cretins.

 

[kitakaze]

Does anyone else find the website bfro.net extremely shady? This organization/business has been selling guided camping trips where they attempt to coax bigfoot.

Hello, Sagacious, and welcome to the JREF. As WP already pointed out, we already have a thread on the BFRO and their expeditions...

Moneymakin'! The BFRO Bigfoot Expeditions Thread.

I personally find it best to check if there is a thread already existing on a subject I want to discuss, especially where Bigfoot threads are related. That prevents the GS&P from having 12 threads on the first page witha Bigfoot heading. I would make the suggestion that a mod merge this thread into the existing one for simplicity.

Sagacious, just so you know, Matt Moneymaker has a membership here. If you will look at Moneymaker's profile, you will see that he has one post only, yet if you try to click on that post, you get "sorry -no matches found". There is a reason for that. I've written a lot about the BFRO and their expeditions here. Enough that it got to Moneymaker who had a royal spaz. Moneymaker is a wannabe lawyer and likes to spew legal threats at people who irk him. I'm one of those people. Moneymaker is not a lawyer. He studied law but gave it up to make money on the belief in Bigfoot. I don't think Matt actually believes in Bigfoot at all.

A number of Bigfoot forums have threads on Moneymaker's threats to me. The BFF's is here...

Someone Named Matthew Moneymake Threatens JREF poster with legal action.

In the OP there you will see Monemaker's little fit...

Hey Kitakaze,

Do me a favor and post your real name and contact info so I can sue you for criminal libel, you lying piece of crap. I will own you, and teach you something about the law. If you lie about about someone, or a group, then try to hide behind the anonymity of a forum like this ... You're in for a surprise.

Stand behind your words, you dog, so I can make an example out of you. Post your name and address, so I don't have to subpoena the records of this forum to get at you. Save them that trouble, because the forum does serve an important function when commenting on things it actually knows about ... rather than libeling people anonymously. All the disclaimers in the worlds won't protect it from that.

Nearly all of the long-time proponents of bigfoot research ARE MEMBERS OF THE BFRO and attend the expeditions, and some organize the expeditions as well.

I'm going to make you wish you never even looked at the BFRO web site. I kinda doubt that you're in Japan, but I can get at you there too, because there are agreements between the two countries for situations like these. You're going to learn a lot from me, you punk.


MM

LOL. Matt Moneymaker wants me to help him sue me.



Oops, I fell down.

Moneymaker could not sue me and was simply swinging his purse at me out of anger. I share this with you so that you are aware of what posting criticisms for Moneymaker and his BFRO on a skeptics board can lead to. Whether I am in Japan or Canada, his bluster is harmless to me. I am confident he could not have sued me if he had my person information and I lived in the United States. Also, you should be aware that Moneymaker is going to be on heightened alert for criticisms to his organization with a new TV series coming and over a hundred expeditions planned for 2010, smaller in attendance size.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

No. That was an entirely different set of cretins.

I was wondering if that bunch were out of jail already.

 

[Sagacious]

Thanks for the great replies so far. Thank you also for the welcome kitkaze. I apologize for creating an already made thread. (so to speak) I first ran a search by title and it came up with nothing. In the future I'll try a tag search also.

I appreciate the responses also, I'm still doing some research but will make an informative post soon. I'm very curious how far is too far when making these grandiose claims in support of something that is completely unprecedented when your organization also sells Guide services related to these claims. There have often been claims made of "sasquatch activity" on these expeditions. At what point does it become fraud? I'm very curious what the legalities are concerning this. I know there are folks that sell all sorts of services that are, lets say questionable in nature that are perfectly legal. I think it may relate to what claims are made, and in what context. I'm not aware of what disclaimers they may invoke for this sort of expedition also. (or required NDA etc)


To me, this seems very questionable. Given that there are no bigfoot, and they are not only selling guided tours/camping trips and people within the organization are making claims of bigfoot activity during these trips, also making claims of stool, vocals, and even sightings, footprints etc. (excellent stool reference earlier regarding that! nice one) At what point does something like this become fraud and prosecutable?


By the way, I did get a great laugh out of reading Mr Moneymakers remarks. Sounds like hes used to having control over everything. Sorry to inform you of this Mr Moneymaker, but the only thing you're owning here is a great reputation as an @ss. At least I wont feel bad gving this organization a little looking into. Great e-thug posting though, at least a 4 out of 10. I think I just heard his e-peen shrink, I'm not sure though. Maybe its always been that small. I have little sympathy for people who profit from others by fooling them into believing crap like this.


Thank you to the mod/admin who merged the threads. Sorry to give you a little extra work there.