• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Moneymakin'! The BFRO Bigfoot Expeditions Thread.

Manzer said:
I have no clue about the Chiricahua Apache, you would have to ask them which seems pretty simple. They would know who their elders are or not. Email them?
Click to expand...
Well, first, the Apache aren't really one group or tribe, and neither specifically is Chiricahua Apache. Though, if you were going to mail someone, it would be here...

http://www.chiricahuaapache.org/

It is besides the point, though, because we know what Gimlin's history has been, which is not a Chiricahua elder. That's a load of worship hooey that he may or may not have started or encouraged. We also know that he has told wildly divergent stories and have good reason to consider him less than honest about himself and what he has or hasn't done.
 
Manzer said:
I can't remember where I read it, but I am pretty sure that Gimlin was a boxer in the army and that was his record while in the military. I think it was feather lightweight, but I don't know why that sticks in my mind.

I do know, since my daughter in law is part native american, that a lot of tribes consider you Indian if you are 1/16th. So 1/4th is a quite a bit.
Click to expand...


Did you tell the truth when you told me that you have (had) no involvement in Bigfootery?
 
kitakaze said:
...It is besides the point, though, because we know what Gimlin's history has been, which is not a Chiricahua elder. That's a load of worship hooey that he may or may not have started or encouraged. We also know that he has told wildly divergent stories and have good reason to consider him less than honest about himself and what he has or hasn't done.
Click to expand...
Did Gimlin ever come clean about what really happened that one night at Fort Courage with Sergeant O'Rourke and Corporal Agarn? I don't think he did. No wait, that was the Hekawis...
 
<BUMP>

It seems to me we've been giving these particular lumps too much of a pass lately. I know we have the more timely Finding Bigfoot thread, but that's not BFRO proper as the main stooges are simply also BFRO. Here's the bumped lunacy. Caution: Written from a Squatch perspective.

So where exactly does Sylvia Brown¹ end and Matt Moneymaker start?


¹ - already has a rabid opponent base actively seeking her prosecution and incarceration for fraud and general scum bagginess.
 
Matt is nothing like any of these mediums who exploit peoples grief for gain.

He isnt hurting anyone, and he isnt exploiting anyone. I personally think he believes there is a bigfoot, but he is one of those people who doesn't have a moral problem with "helping" others see the evidence. Its not exactly fraud, even if there might be someone in the woods knocking two sticks together every now and again. It isnt exactly honest either. But the people who go on his expeditions know what thy are getting and are happy to pay for it. Somebody who is all torn up and paying to hear what their dead mum has to say... Thats completely different (not that everyone who thinks or says they can speak to the dead goes about it the same way of course)
 
Strange famous said:
Matt is nothing like any of these mediums who exploit peoples grief for gain.

He isnt hurting anyone, and he isnt exploiting anyone. I personally think he believes there is a bigfoot, but he is one of those people who doesn't have a moral problem with "helping" others see the evidence. Its not exactly fraud, even if there might be someone in the woods knocking two sticks together every now and again. It isnt exactly honest either. But the people who go on his expeditions know what thy are getting and are happy to pay for it. Somebody who is all torn up and paying to hear what their dead mum has to say... Thats completely different (not that everyone who thinks or says they can speak to the dead goes about it the same way of course)
Click to expand...

What about when some credulous nitwit goes shooting up a back-40 Moneymaker declared "squatchy?" If you know anything about bigfoot buffoonery these days, you know that the fervor to produce a type specimen (of a non-existent cryptid) is higher than ever. In fact there are a number of threads over at the Best Bigfoot Friends Forever debating the ethics, safety, etc. of bagging this boogeyman. Now who knows if any of those posting actually buy into this nonsense, but even a few of these jokers going afield armed, fueled by a dumb-ass TV show is frightening.

And he is exploiting the deluded.
 
Last edited:
Strange famous said:
Matt is nothing like any of these mediums who exploit peoples grief for gain.

He isnt hurting anyone, and he isnt exploiting anyone. I personally think he believes there is a bigfoot, but he is one of those people who doesn't have a moral problem with "helping" others see the evidence. Its not exactly fraud, even if there might be someone in the woods knocking two sticks together every now and again. It isnt exactly honest either. But the people who go on his expeditions know what thy are getting and are happy to pay for it. Somebody who is all torn up and paying to hear what their dead mum has to say... Thats completely different (not that everyone who thinks or says they can speak to the dead goes about it the same way of course)
Click to expand...


The guy goes on television claiming there is bigfoot almost everywhere they go. How is it not fraudulent? The guy heads an organization that sells camping trips in which you can go bigfoot hunting. It's bigfoot. It's not deer, bear, or any real animal. What if I were to go around claiming dragons were in the woods and I yelled and screeched at them, even made a tv show about it, and sold camping trips. Would it be fraudulent? Or legit? Feel free to replace dragon with bigfoot.
 
Last edited:
dmaker said:
I fail to see what the emotional state of the victim of the fraud has to do with the criminality of the act.
Click to expand...

I am talking about morality.

Moneymaker isn't hurting anybody. The people who go on his bigfoot hunts get exactly what they paid for and what they want. No exploitation is taking place.

These are consenting adults, and if they choose believe that the experience he offers is what they want, who are you to stop them? Maybe they are guys who just like being out in the woods but dont want to shoot things... I dont think its a bad thing.

I went on lots of "ghost hunts" with a mate and a couple of girls when I was a teenager. I dont think any of us were serious about investigating the paranormal.

And Moneymaker is a lawyer, I doubt very much any of what he does goes far enough to be criminal. It isn't againt the law to mislead people.
 
River said:
The guy goes on television claiming there is bigfoot almost everywhere they go. How is it not fraudulent? The guy heads an organization that sells camping trips in which you can go bigfoot hunting. It's bigfoot. It's not deer, bear, or any real animal. What if I were to go around claiming dragons were in the woods and I yelled and screeched at them, even made a tv show about it, and sold camping trips. Would it be fraudulent? Or legit? Feel free to replace dragon with bigfoot.
Click to expand...

On this basis I expect you will also be leading the campaign to sue the city of Inverness for the amount of "Nessie" tourism they encourage?
 
Strange famous said:
On this basis I expect you will also be leading the campaign to sue the city of Inverness for the amount of "Nessie" tourism they encourage?
Click to expand...

Do they lead people around forest yelling and hooting too? Paid camping trips? (to public areas) Should we sue some of the bigfoot stores in california also? Or the cities that allow them to be there? Kind of like attempting to sue the city of Roswell New Mexico.

I take people that claim to see bigfoot much like people that claim to see ghosts. That's nice *yawn*. Got any more cool stories? Someone like Moneymaker takes it to a different level. I guess if you have no problem cashing in on huge lies, and commit yourself into deluding others, bigfoot is the least of your worries/issues.

But that's just my opinion. Police sometimes still take psychics leads. So there you go. Religions are a huge part of societies. All sorts of "beliefs" out there, and hopefully most of them will be exposed with time. Just like the mermaid, errr bigfoot thing.
 
Strange famous said:
I am talking about morality.

Moneymaker isn't hurting anybody. The people who go on his bigfoot hunts get exactly what they paid for and what they want. No exploitation is taking place.

These are consenting adults, and if they choose believe that the experience he offers is what they want, who are you to stop them? Maybe they are guys who just like being out in the woods but dont want to shoot things... I dont think its a bad thing.

I went on lots of "ghost hunts" with a mate and a couple of girls when I was a teenager. I dont think any of us were serious about investigating the paranormal.

And Moneymaker is a lawyer, I doubt very much any of what he does goes far enough to be criminal. It isn't againt the law to mislead people.
Click to expand...

For financial gain it is.
 
But he will have a contract with everyone who goes on a hunt, and it will be worded in some way that this is an "experience", not a zoological study.

Like I said, the guy was a lawyer, he isnt going to leave himself exposed.

And on what basis SHOULD anyone sue him?

You go camping, you hear some stories, you see a tree knocked over by the wind and wonder if a Bigfoot did it... I genuinely dont see that anybody is being ripped off.

_

This guy isnt doing anything CLOSE to people charging somebody to maintain an imaginary connection to a dead loved one. He is charging people to go out and have a romp round the woods.

Would you sue a funfair who operated a ghost train because the ghosts weren't real? Would you sue a haunted house attraction for the same reason?
 
Sorry, my response was directed at Strange Famous. Whether someone is happily bilked or not, they are still being conned.
 
Strange famous said:
But he will have a contract with everyone who goes on a hunt, and it will be worded in some way that this is an "experience", not a zoological study.

Like I said, the guy was a lawyer, he isnt going to leave himself exposed.

And on what basis SHOULD anyone sue him?

You go camping, you hear some stories, you see a tree knocked over by the wind and wonder if a Bigfoot did it... I genuinely dont see that anybody is being ripped off.

_

This guy isnt doing anything CLOSE to people charging somebody to maintain an imaginary connection to a dead loved one. He is charging people to go out and have a romp round the woods.

Would you sue a funfair who operated a ghost train because the ghosts weren't real? Would you sue a haunted house attraction for the same reason?
Click to expand...

But you said you think he believes in bigfoot. If he believes in bigfoot your above scenario does not apply.
 
The funfair is billed as fun - no one goes expecting to see real ghosts. With Moneymaker, there's no wink or nod. He's claiming that he's really in contact with real bigfoots. He's in the realm of grade-A dbaggery on my moral compass, regardless of whatever legal loophole through which he might be sliding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom