Moderated Bigfoot- Anybody Seen one?

[mikeyx]

Thank you for the clarification, Mike. I don't think I'm jumping on my facts. Remember I said:



I used your quote because...

1) It talks about giving proper credit.

The issue I was referring was in a different thread however and regardless of this argument the MABRc site has done this chronicly as opposed to a single or two in question. Regarding the old site, I had involvement in it's design.

2) You are connected with the president of the group I was talking about.

it's a better question for the management as I am only a member.

I expected you abstained from me being removed against protocol from the SFB. I may have missed a PM from you saying so when my inbox was full.

That's exactly what happened, I tried pming you twice, you need to clean out your pms

I haven't forgotten the NESRA thing from the time we were discussing Kerry Anderholm/Luminous. Please don't think I'm throwing you under a bus for Melissa and friends behaviour. Her website, her sandbox; she can do what she likes whether it follows her rules or not. {/quote]

The Nesra/Kerry was resolved and is unrelated, we (NESRA) offered him the choice of shaping up or shipping out after he became a huge liability, and he chose the later. he is now a member of the MABRC, for which I wish them luck with that...

[quote[ I suspect with your sensibilities, it puts you in a weird spot when the owner of the site you are staff of does things like completely write off Bullet Maker for admitting to Bigfoot hoaxing and then does a complete 180 and forbids discussion of whether or not admitted hoaxer Paul Freeman hoaxed any of the prints in his collection in a thread solely devoted to them.

Not really, on that Mel is a big girl and fights her own battles, it's simply not my fight or problem, so I'm not involving myself with it. The reason I was vocal regarding the MABRC theft of info is that last I knew they had an old link to an old version of the NESRA website in their so called encyclopedia that was created by Anderholm and is presented in a inaccurate (and I'm being kind and not saying fraudulent) manner. In doing this DW Lee has chosen to attempt to rewrite for group he was never involved in but nevertheless stuck his nose in, and that is why it's a peeve. After more than one attempt to point this out the entry remains there last I knew and is at best irresponsible.

I also remember you didn't attend the SFSP gong show where Melissa Hovey and crew thought they might have encountered Bigfoot so I wanted to point that out. I want you and John to know that anything I have to say about SFB/ABS/Melissa Hovey isn't meant to be personal towards you.

Their exped was a bit afar in the field for me, so no I didn't make it. Until they do one closer, I'm the guy in the field for my neighborhood. But thats as much involvement in this thread as I really care to have, I'll trust you to understand that.

 

[kitakaze]

That is not true Kit. Melissa does not defend Paul Freeman. She was asking you to NOT disrupt that thread about the cast scans with hoaxing. She told you to start that conversation in another thread. That thread was about the scans.

1) Please don't take this as anything other than a friendly offer but would you like a hand with figuring out the multi-quoting? Some people have trouble with it and it makes things a lot smoother and easier to understand for readers when it's done properly.

2) I was hoping you'd respond to the question in the first part of my post you were answering there. Particularly because that is actually the topic of this thread and I don't want to feel like I'm being OT all the time.

3) Are you telling me that Melissa doesn't advocate the veracity of casts that are also advocated by Jeff Meldrum and come from Paul Freeman? You know what is at the source of her false accusations to Matt Crowley, right?

4) I don't have a clue what you mean about scans. From the very beginning of the thread people were commenting with allusion to Freeman's hoaxing. Shall I quote some of those posts? The thread is about the images of the casts but not the casts themselves? Yeah, that makes sense.

Tell me, what exactly does one discuss about the scans of the massive cast collection of an admitted hoaxer if not the veracity of the casts?

Oooo... this scan is nice. Oh, I like that one. What kind of scanner do you think was used?

 

[WGBH]

3) Are you telling me that Melissa doesn't advocate the veracity of casts that are also advocated by Jeff Meldrum and come from Paul Freeman? You know what is at the source of her false accusations to Matt Crowley, right?

I am not telling you anything except what happened on the particular thread.I could care less about Crowley's and Melissa's casting tiff.

4) I don't have a clue what you mean about scans. From the very beginning of the thread people were commenting with allusion to Freeman's hoaxing. Shall I quote some of those posts? The thread is about the images of the casts but not the casts themselves? Yeah, that makes sense.

The people who were commenting about hoaxing from the beginning were you and other sceptics and you were asked to stop and take it to another thread.Yes the thread was about the cast images.


Tell me, what exactly does one discuss about the scans of the massive cast collection of an admitted hoaxer if not the veracity of the casts?

Oooo... this scan is nice. Oh, I like that one. What kind of scanner do you think was used?

Yes

 

[makaya325]

Lt at bff-Anyway, it walked around an old target deuce &1/2 and thats when it got interesting- the size in relation to the hood- then it moved ( about 50 meters) and walked behind an old target M113 APC.

Thats what got everyones attention- it stood chest,shoulders and head above the M113[ tracks were off, it was sitting on roadwheels] ( now its about 100 meters from us- still not a clear view from Gen I equipment)- it then just 'ambled' on its slow way to the other side of the range periodically stopping.stooping and going until it went into the woods.

When this thing cleared the M113, were any of your men amazed at the size of the thing?

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

When this thing cleared the M113, were any of your men amazed at the size of the thing?

What part of

>>>Thats what got everyones attention

escaped you?

 

[makaya325]

What part of

>>>Thats what got everyones attention

escaped you?

I know that, but what i was asking is if any of your men wondered "What is that"? Did any of your men assume confidently it was a such and such?

 

[kitakaze]

John, in your following quoted post you responded to only items 3 and 4. Why not 1 and 2? Especially 2 because you were making an issue of things other than sightings being discussed and 2 is directly referencing an important question about you alleged sighting.

I am not telling you anything except what happened on the particular thread.I could care less about Crowley's and Melissa's casting tiff.

It's weird that you would say that because then it is like you neither comprehend the issue or care about the validity of the statement that nobody in the ABS tolerates hoaxers. Dude, the president of the ABS tolerates hoaxers. Some she does, some she doesn't. She tolerates and actually argues in support of an admitted hoaxer because that person has the support of her idols Saint Medrum and Cardinal Chilcutt.

You say you could care less about her conflict with Matt but you're having a kind of cognitive dissonance in facing what is at issue. Matt showed that casting artifacts were responsible for the details that Chilcutt and Meldrum were calling dermatoglyphics on a Freeman cast. Chilcutt has declined attending Bigfoot conventions and asked for Matt to go in his place. Matt's work has been replicated by other people. Melissa falsely accused Matt of illegally obtaining volcanic ash. Melissa hounded me pathetically and very OT to try and engage her on the stupid subject at SFB. I told her I wasn't interested and she kept pushing it.

Paul Freeman admitted to being a hoaxer. The president of the ABS tolerates a hoaxer. Done and Doner.

The people who were commenting about hoaxing from the beginning were you and other sceptics and you were asked to stop and take it to another thread.Yes the thread was about the cast images.

Wrong. Here come the posts...

Melissa deleted this one. I guess it was really insulting, nasty, and OT:

This is not the "Did Paul Freeman hoax" thread.
Do not hijack this thread.

Hijack the thread? Seriously? This thread is about Paul Freeman's cast collection. If we can not discuss what we think of the casts, including whether we think they are real or not (which is an absolutely fair question considering the man was an admitted hoaxer), then what exactly is it we are supposed to discuss.
Melissa, could you or someone else explain this to me so I can understand? I don't want to post off-topic and would like to know what this is about so that I might decide to participate in the thread or not. Is there something different about these casts because meldrum thinks some of them are real?

And this one...

This is not the "Did Paul Freeman hoax" thread.
Do not hijack this thread.

Just wanted to add that the following posts I think gave the impression that discussing which casts we though were not real was not highjacking the thread:

I know a lot of people had misperceptions about Freeman being a hoaxer, but it can't be denied that he found some very interesting and hard to fake evidence.

I've heard and read so much about these casts. I look forward to looking at these and making some determinations for myself.

What does the Doc think about these casts ? He may have found some intresting things but he has admited to makeing fake casts so what leads anyone to beleave these are real ?

If I misunderstood, I apologize.

Oh my dear sweet baby Jesus, look at how horrificly rude I am in those posts. So John, when you say "the people who were commenting about hoaxing from the beginning were you and other sceptics"...

No, no. Non. Nein. Niet. Chigau. I'm so sorry, that's incorrect, mistaken, and/or made up. As you can see the people commenting from the beginning were not me and other sceptics. There is the proof that it was in fact Bigfoot enthusiasts who were first commenting on hoaxing. Is that correct? Yes or no, please. Note that those comment are not of a oh-my-those-scans-are-lovely nature. See, that is why i had the forsight to save my posts and the posts of others at the SFB. I knew that because of Melissa's intolerant groupie mentality that I would have posts deleted and later people would be making up falsehoods about what I was doing there. I promise you, John, that neither Melissa or any other SFB member will have to worry about such a thing at the JREF. We can handle whatever it is you guys want to assert.

Tell me, what exactly does one discuss about the scans of the massive cast collection of an admitted hoaxer if not the veracity of the casts?

Oooo... this scan is nice. Oh, I like that one. What kind of scanner do you think was used?

Yes

Unfortunately that just isn't true and the way the enthusiasts were discussing from the beginning.

 

[kitakaze]

The issue I was referring was in a different thread however and regardless of this argument the MABRc site has done this chronicly as opposed to a single or two in question. Regarding the old site, I had involvement in it's design.

It doesn't sound like you're saying you were the one that lifeted Bateman's art. BTW, this is not the first time there's been an issue about Melissa's site using art without permission, is it? That's rhetorical, you don't have to answer.

2) You are connected with the president of the group I was talking about.

it's a better question for the management as I am only a member.

You're right, I don't think I can expect much answers from you guys on this. Since I can be quite sure that Melissa would not tell me who in her group ripped off Robert Bateman's art and also because I know Melissa is reading this thread, I'll say it directly to her.

Hey, Melissa. Again a website associated with you and your Bigfoot club is using someone's art without permission. The first website that comes up when you google the ABS steals Robert Bateman's art. It's no different than physically walking away with one of his paintings. It's stealing. You may not have been the one to do it and think you can hide behind that excuse but it's for the club which you're the leader of. The website doesn't show some other president, it's you. If you don't want your Bigfooter club to look like hack thieves who don't care about stealing from artists, you should do something about that.

BTW, a tip for your internet radio shows when you are talking about UFO's and Bigfoot...

Please figure out the difference between "seen" and "saw". As in, "I saw some eyeshine over there", not "I seen some eyeshine over there".

You're not a stupid lady and that makes you sound like a hillbilly.

That's exactly what happened, I tried pming you twice, you need to clean out your pms

Please send that PM again, if you can.

Not really, on that Mel is a big girl and fights her own battles, it's simply not my fight or problem, so I'm not involving myself with it. The reason I was vocal regarding the MABRC theft of info is that last I knew they had an old link to an old version of the NESRA website in their so called encyclopedia that was created by Anderholm and is presented in a inaccurate (and I'm being kind and not saying fraudulent) manner. In doing this DW Lee has chosen to attempt to rewrite for group he was never involved in but nevertheless stuck his nose in, and that is why it's a peeve. After more than one attempt to point this out the entry remains there last I knew and is at best irresponsible.

Looks to me like she gets other people to do her dirty work for her. Like, Washingtonian for example. I won't go even more OT with MABRC or NESRA stuff but I really like the head of your group, Chris Bartow. I've had friendly and helpful discussions with him in the past.

Their exped was a bit afar in the field for me, so no I didn't make it. Until they do one closer, I'm the guy in the field for my neighborhood. But thats as much involvement in this thread as I really care to have, I'll trust you to understand that.

You bet, I understand.

 

[WGBH]

Complete nonsense Kit.

You picked and chose what posts you put in your response and then twisted it for your use. I will not cross post from the SFB here to prove you wrong. You forgot the post where a Admin from ANOTHER large forum noticed what you were doing and said " I am glad to see that our forum is not alone in thread hijacking." That is a pretty independent witness to your behavior Kit. He had no horse in that race. Can we forget the MANY times you apologized (or lied) to Melissa and then went right back and attempted to hijack the thread again. Anyone with a SFB account can go there and see the truth. They can also see how many times you were warned.

You also keep bringing up that Crowley vs Melissa casting debate nonsense that has nothing whatsoever to do with that thread or your ban. It is simply a way for you to attack Melissa. "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain folks". People in this field on BOTH sides of that tired argument are not interested. Newsflash, no Bigfoot casts (with or without supposed dermal ridges) are evidence of Bigfoot.

Knock yourself out with your whine fest about Melissa and what a travesty it was for her to ban you. Are you going to give her a cool super villain name next? You think that if you scream loud enough and long enough people will listen. Some of us learn to ignore children who throw tantrums when they get punished. Consider yourself ignored.

How stupid am I for hijacking a thread for arguing about Kit hijacking a thread on SFB? Pretty stupid. I'm done. Sorry to the Mods here.

If anyone want's to discuss or even argue about Bigfoot. I will be around.

 

[makaya325]

Kitz, are you banned from the bff? Because i see alot of members here are banned. Oh well, must be the mean ol' scientists who ruin's everybodys favorite imaginary biped.

 

[kitakaze]

Complete nonsense Kit.

You picked and chose what posts you put in your response and then twisted it for your use.

Why, yes. Yes, John, I did pick and choose what posts I put in my response. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that all of those posts by other members who weren't skeptics and were making reference to Paul Freeman's hoaxing preceeded any post that I and then HarryH made. Hello, McFly? Is this thing on?

Your claim:

"The people who were commenting about hoaxing from the beginning were you and other sceptics..."

Oops for you. That wasn't true, was it, John? Shall I post the post numbers and exact times and dates that those Bigfoot enthusiasts like Henry May, Creekfreak, and Reverend Stone made those posts so you can see exactly how long before my and Harry's comments they were? I would just tell any person who isn't banned to just go over and see for themselves but uh oh, Melissa turtled her board and put all new accounts on preview. Oh noes... mehbeh more skaptiks r cuming.

I will not cross post from the SFB here to prove you wrong. You forgot the post where a Admin from ANOTHER large forum noticed what you were doing and said " I am glad to see that our forum is not alone in thread hijacking." That is a pretty independent witness to your behavior Kit. He had no horse in that race.

You mean another Bigfoot enthusiast who posts in another Bigfoot board felt uncomfortable with me pointing out exactly what such a massive collection of casts by Freeman implied? For example, that he would have casted at least 26 individual Bigfoots in his small area alone?



*ding dong* *ding dong*

It's reality again, don't answer the door.

Can we forget the MANY times you apologized (or lied) to Melissa and then went right back and attempted to hijack the thread again. Anyone with a SFB account can go there and see the truth. They can also see how many times you were warned.

Being warned by a Bigfoot enthusiast groupie for pointing out the obvious in a civil manner in discussion where the comments are perfectly relevant worries me not.

You also keep bringing up that Crowley vs Melissa casting debate nonsense that has nothing whatsoever to do with that thread or your ban. It is simply a way for you to attack Melissa. "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain folks". People in this field on BOTH sides of that tired argument are not interested. Newsflash, no Bigfoot casts (with or without supposed dermal ridges) are evidence of Bigfoot.

Actually no. John. I'm simply pointing out that your claim that no ABS member tolerates hoaxers is simply a fantasy. It's not about whether or not casts are evidence of Bigfoot. That's solely your opinion, not in line with that of Meldrum, Melissa, and a throng of other Bigfooters, and a diversion tactic to try and steer away the conversation from your claim.

Knock yourself out with your whine fest about Melissa and what a travesty it was for her to ban you. Are you going to give her a cool super villain name next? You think that if you scream loud enough and long enough people will listen. Some of us learn to ignore children who throw tantrums when they get punished. Consider yourself ignored.

I don't think it was a travesty that Melissa kicked me out. I think it was the inevitable outcome of a board owned by a person for whom Woods & Wildmen is a way of life and its stars are her idols. But your right, I can't resist the suggestion for a cool supervillain name. It's got to be something appropriate for pro wrestling just like The Burg.

How about Melissa Hovey aka The Hovercraft?

Though rather noisy and conspicuous The Hovercraft glides effortlessly from Bigfootery to Ufology. The Hovercraft is used for support for bigger and more powerful members of "The Research".

Signature move: The Sandbox Slingshot. Used with little provocation whereby the Hovercraft tags a teammate to throw you out of the ring.

How stupid am I for hijacking a thread for arguing about Kit hijacking a thread on SFB? Pretty stupid. I'm done. Sorry to the Mods here.

If anyone want's to discuss or even argue about Bigfoot. I will be around.

Says the guy who repeatedly ignores requests to address the simplest questions regarding his sighting while engaging in the topic he complained about as OT.

I've lost count how many times John ignores this:

That's a bizarre thing to say. No one is inferring that you must believe the alternatives we suggest, only that you fairly consider them. I don't think you've fairly considered some of the alternatives.

Once again I ask, given that repetition and replication of the unique circumstances involved is not necessary to rule out the possibility of sleep-related occurence or distorted memory for your claim that 27 years ago in a deerstand up a tree along the Pasquotank River, NC in the early morning after being disoriented and feeling very groggy that you saw a 9 x 6 ft monster wood ape, why is it impossible that you did not see what you thought you saw?

Vivid sleep-related hallucinations occur as do vivid but distorted memories. This is known, tested, and proven by science. What is not known, tested, and proven by science is that the largest land mammal in North America is a bipedal gargantuan ape that exists in places such as small swathes of woods like where the Pasquotank is completely surrounded by farmland and cities.

Go ahead and ignore me, John. That's what you're already doing regarding your sighting. I guess as it turns out you can't give it as good as you get.

 

[WGBH]

Why, yes. Yes, John, I did pick and choose what posts I put in my response. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that all of those posts by other members who weren't skeptics and were making reference to Paul Freeman's hoaxing preceeded any post that I and then HarryH made. Hello, McFly? Is this thing on?

Your claim:

"The people who were commenting about hoaxing from the beginning were you and other sceptics..."

Oops for you. That wasn't true, was it, John? Shall I post the post numbers and exact times and dates that those Bigfoot enthusiasts like Henry May, Creekfreak, and Reverend Stone made those posts so you can see exactly how long before my and Harry's comments they were? I would just tell any person who isn't banned to just go over and see for themselves but uh oh, Melissa turtled her board and put all new accounts on preview. Oh noes... mehbeh more skaptiks r cuming.

They were not disrupting the thread like you were. I should have said disrupting and not commenting. Strone only said he will make up his own mind and did not mention hoaxing. And I find it hilarious that you would quote and use Creek Freak to defend yourself, especially since you attack him constantly for being a hoaxer. So I guess that we can say that YOU support a hoaxer too right Kit? Hypocrite. So that leaves Henry and he only mentioned it, he did not disrupt the thread.

You mean another Bigfoot enthusiast who posts in another Bigfoot board felt uncomfortable with me pointing out exactly what such a massive collection of casts by Freeman implied? For example, that he would have casted at least 26 individual Bigfoots in his small area alone?

No I mean an administrator from the largest Bigfoot forum noticed you acting like a troll as you normally do.



Being warned by a Bigfoot enthusiast groupie for pointing out the obvious in a civil manner in discussion where the comments are perfectly relevant worries me not.

And acting like a troll, scoftic will get you banned, and it did.


Actually no. John. I'm simply pointing out that your claim that no ABS member tolerates hoaxers is simply a fantasy. It's not about whether or not casts are evidence of Bigfoot. That's solely your opinion, not in line with that of Meldrum, Melissa, and a throng of other Bigfooters, and a diversion tactic to try and steer away the conversation from your claim.

It is all about opinion and yours is no more relevent then anyones. including mine, silly boy.

I don't think it was a travesty that Melissa kicked me out.

Neither do most of the members there.





Says the guy who repeatedly ignores requests to address the simplest questions regarding his sighting while engaging in the topic he complained about as OT.

I've lost count how many times John ignores this:

You are confusing ignore for disregard.



Go ahead and ignore me, John.

OK

 

[Drewbot]

John- You abstained from voting for the banning of Kitakaze. And you act like it was a gesture to show that you didn't really want him banned.

I'm just curious what your voting record is on past bannings. Have you voted to ban people before?, Have you abstained before?, Have you voted not to ban people before?

Abstaining from voting in this case, might be a big deal if you always vote yes or no, on banning, but it wouldn't be a big deal if you ALWAYS abstain from voting for banning.

NOWHATIMEAN?

 

[mikeyx]

It doesn't sound like you're saying you were the one that lifeted Bateman's art. BTW, this is not the first time there's been an issue about Melissa's site using art without permission, is it? That's rhetorical, you don't have to answer.

What I know is that it ended up being a major league catfight for many people myself included and I wasted mucho energy trying to stay out of it last year so thats about my input on it.

I won't go even more OT with MABRC or NESRA stuff but I really like the head of your group, Chris Bartow. I've had friendly and helpful discussions with him in the past.

Actually Chris is one of four board members for the Group, as am I just to clarify but i appreciate you not dragging Nesra into this subject, it really has nothing to do with them. Matters with Anderholm are considered ancient history also, fwiw.

 

[WGBH]

John- You abstained from voting for the banning of Kitakaze. And you act like it was a gesture to show that you didn't really want him banned.

I'm just curious what your voting record is on past bannings. Have you voted to ban people before?, Have you abstained before?, Have you voted not to ban people before?

Abstaining from voting in this case, might be a big deal if you always vote yes or no, on banning, but it wouldn't be a big deal if you ALWAYS abstain from voting for banning.

NOWHATIMEAN?

It was not in support of his troll behavior. I just do not support banning anyone and would not do it unless someone threatens another member. I was content to just edit his posts. Some people do not have the patience for that and he was banned.

I have not been involved with any other ban of a member there,we have not had any since I was a Mod or Admin. The majority of the members can behave like adults.

 

[mikeyx]

Kitz, are you banned from the bff? Because i see alot of members here are banned. Oh well, must be the mean ol' scientists who ruin's everybodys favorite imaginary biped.

Just my opinion, but the BFF is whole seperate political hornets nest.

 

[mikeyx]

John- You abstained from voting for the banning of Kitakaze. And you act like it was a gesture to show that you didn't really want him banned.

I'm just curious what your voting record is on past bannings. Have you voted to ban people before?, Have you abstained before?, Have you voted not to ban people before?

Abstaining from voting in this case, might be a big deal if you always vote yes or no, on banning, but it wouldn't be a big deal if you ALWAYS abstain from voting for banning.

NOWHATIMEAN?

For the record, I abstained as well and having nothing to hide about it, the main reason being, it seems the whole situation is over the Munn's report upon which I have no major opinion. Thus I abstained.

 

[LONGTABBER PE]

Just my opinion, but the BFF is whole seperate political hornets nest.

aint that the truth

 

[Drewbot]

What part of

>>>Thats what got everyones attention

escaped you?

Does THIS look familiar LT? I mean, you are talking about an extremely large object. probably bigger than a grizzly bear, probably the 4th or 5th largest land mammal on the planet.

Was the width proportional with the height? or could the M113 been parked next to a berm that it was walking on? The M113 Hull tops out at six feet, so if it was 'Chest Shoulders and Head' above it, it must have been 9-10 feet tall. and just huge. Did it look like this

 

[Correa Neto]

Uhm...

Ltes try to get back on track, shall we?

Remember my question to LT? Remember his answer?

Bottomline - no one has the right to be angered when, during an investigation, the veracity of a report is questioned. Want to do propper research? Then always raise the possibility that the alleged eyewitness is lying. Yes, it may be unconfortable for the alleged eyewitenss, but that's how things are. If the alleged eyewitness can't understand it, well, then this person is not used to investigations...

What about a third party geting upset by this? Well, if the individual has a minimum ammount of information on how investigations must be carried, actually there's no reason for it. Now if the person knows something about bigfootery, then this person is a drama queen and/or has an agenda/vendetta. Nothing more, nothing less.