• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Elbe Trackway

LTC8K6 said:
Demonstrating that a footer can be fooled is useless, imo.
Click to expand...

It may not help the fanatic b'leevers, and it obviously won't help the already-skeptical, but each hoax, especially if it ends up fooling the so-called "experts", makes it that much more likely that the waverers and third-parties will see through the nonsense.

It's been done many, many times already, to little if any effect.
Click to expand...
As have demonstrations of spoon-bending and cold-reading and the like. Despite the efforts of Randi and others, the world is full of people who believe in psychic woo and spoonbending and cold readings. Yet each actual new demonstration allows a new set of people to see for themselves how easy it is to be tricked.

Sure that was a hoax, but this one, this one is the real deal.
Click to expand...
Some will react that way no matter what, yes, but others may actually learn! Tricking people is a proven technique for educating them about fraud and gullibility, even though it doesn't work for everyone.
 
xtifr said:
It may not help the fanatic b'leevers, and it obviously won't help the already-skeptical, but each hoax, especially if it ends up fooling the so-called "experts", makes it that much more likely that the waverers and third-parties will see through the nonsense.


As have demonstrations of spoon-bending and cold-reading and the like. Despite the efforts of Randi and others, the world is full of people who believe in psychic woo and spoonbending and cold readings. Yet each actual new demonstration allows a new set of people to see for themselves how easy it is to be tricked.


Some will react that way no matter what, yes, but others may actually learn! Tricking people is a proven technique for educating them about fraud and gullibility, even though it doesn't work for everyone.
Click to expand...

Hold on a minute, now. What sort of hoax do you mean?

I'm talking about deliberately hoaxing footers, not the public in general.

I wouldn't hoax the public in general, and I think it's useless to hoax footers.

I might hoax a group of friends of mine as a gag.

I think the intent of the Elbe trackway was to "get" footers. A setup if you will. I'm not in favor of such being done by skeptics.

I think it puts a skeptic too far in. You are becoming part of the story.

Making a track or two, or a cast or two, here and there to demonstrate is fine.

Setting up people is not, imo.

Now, if I set out to hoax my friends, or do a demo, and a footer jumps in and makes claims, well, that's too bad. :)
 
LTC8K6 said:
Hold on a minute, now. What sort of hoax do you mean?
Click to expand...
One plausible enough to show how gullible the believers really are.

These guys are getting TV shows to help spread their nonsense. I am all in favor of anything that takes them down a notch. And the more publicly, the better.

I wouldn't hoax the public in general [...]
Click to expand...
Then you're obviously not a footer. Many of them are clearly hoaxing the public in general. Whether they're doing it out of honest ignorance or deliberate malice, I couldn't say (and I suspect it varies from person to person), but whether its wilful ignorance or simple fraud, I have no sympathy for it.

I think it puts a skeptic too far in. You are becoming part of the story.
Click to expand...
What's wrong with becoming part of the story? Hasn't Randi become a part of the story many times, perhaps most notably with Uri Geller?

A skeptic is not the same thing as a journalist.
 
xtifr said:
These guys are getting TV shows to help spread their nonsense. I am all in favor of anything that takes them down a notch. And the more publicly, the better.
Click to expand...

I look at it like what happened back in the late 60s and early 70s, There was a red neck theme going on with Andy Griffith, Beverly Hillbilly's, Green Acres, Petticoat Junction, same thing here just way up to date with the times. Now we got, Swamp people, gator boy's, hill billy hand fishing, the list is big and growing.
I don't see it going away anytime soon but don't fear, it's just entertainment and i don't think the majority take it very seriously, cause it is just a bunch of stupid stuff and they make themselves look like a bunch of imbeciles in every episode.
 
I think we just see hoaxes differently.

In general, I don't think you can have a fair and objective discussion with someone about a subject if you are intentionally planting "evidence".

In the overall scheme of things, I suppose it doesn't matter, since bigfoot is nonexistent.

Shows like Finding Bigfoot are not helping their cause at all, imo. I don't think the TV shows are an advantage to them. Just like the hokey movies really weren't back in the day.

It may make the producers some money, but the bigfooters universally end up looking foolish, imo.
 
I think there should be fake Bigfoot evidence contests with prize money. Who can make the "most realistic" looking tracks, busted trees, liverless deer, etc. The judges decide which are best. But the general protocol is "If it looks as good as what Meldrum says is authentic then we push it ahead as realistic."

I think of hoaxed Bigfoot evidence as a kind of folk art or maybe what is called outsider art. Of course all of it is that. But some are better than others. I think it is like art because the object being created is abstract and imaginary by necessity. There are no Bigfoot creatures to serve as models. This is quite different compared to a fake hundred dollar bill or a fake Picasso.

In a way, there is no such thing as a fake Bigfoot track. That is because there is no such thing as a real one. You can't fake something that doesn't exist without creating art or artifact as a consequence.
 
Last edited:
xtifr said:
It may not help the fanatic b'leevers, and it obviously won't help the already-skeptical, but each hoax, especially if it ends up fooling the so-called "experts", makes it that much more likely that the waverers and third-parties will see through the nonsense.


As have demonstrations of spoon-bending and cold-reading and the like. Despite the efforts of Randi and others, the world is full of people who believe in psychic woo and spoonbending and cold readings. Yet each actual new demonstration allows a new set of people to see for themselves how easy it is to be tricked.


Some will react that way no matter what, yes, but others may actually learn! Tricking people is a proven technique for educating them about fraud and gullibility, even though it doesn't work for everyone.
Click to expand...


Many of us were "lucky" enough to learn from being tricked as children and adolescents in what amounted to snipe hunts .
 
Last edited:
LTC8K6 said:
I can't imagine any JREF regulars bothering to hoax a trackway.

Do you have any examples of JREF regulars hoaxing anything related to bigfoot, and then crowing about getting away with it?
Click to expand...

This post is a hoax.
 
William Parcher said:
I think there should be fake Bigfoot evidence contests with prize money. Who can make the "most realistic" looking tracks, busted trees, liverless deer, etc. The judges decide which are best. But the general protocol is "If it looks as good as what Meldrum says is authentic then we push it ahead as realistic."

I think of hoaxed Bigfoot evidence as a kind of folk art or maybe what is called outsider art. Of course all of it is that. But some are better than others. I think it is like art because the object being created is abstract and imaginary by necessity. There are no Bigfoot creatures to serve as models. This is quite different compared to a fake hundred dollar bill or a fake Picasso.

In a way, there is no such thing as a fake Bigfoot track. That is because there is no such thing as a real one. You can't fake something that doesn't exist without creating art or artifact as a consequence.
Click to expand...

I admit you have a good argument there. Really can't have a "fake" without a "real".
 
I split a few off topic, or otherwise "chippy" posts to AAH; to keep others from joining them please stay on topic, civil/polite, and address the argument.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Locknar
 
parnassus said:
Cotter
Can you give an example of a trackway that was shown to be a hoax?
Do you think the Blue Creek Mountain trackway at Bluff Creek in 1967 was a hoax?
What's your thinking on whether every hoax trackway was exposed as a hoax?
Click to expand...

Hi Parnassus:

I think the trackways that the skeptics have proven were hoaxed are hoaxes.
 
Hi All:

Some really good posts above by all. (Well, most I guess). Here's my take.

Tontar's been an outspoken advocate for the non-existence of the creature known as BF. Very vocal in several arenas. I think it does carry some weight to know if one of the 'big' skeptics against this creature is out there manufacturing evidence to support his claims.

And I 100% feel the same way about ANYONE no matter what side of the debate they fall on. I'm not going to comment on 'footers hoaxing, that's not what I'm discussing, I'm discussing the Elbe Trackway and the potential that a well known forum skeptic was involved.

SO....Thanks for your responses above Tontar, however, I didn't get a yay or nay.

It's really simple. If you have no involvement with the hoaxed trackway, just say it. You carry yourself as one who knows a lot about costumes and fake feet. I think it's important for both sides to understand who is out there fabricating evidence.

Thank you Tontar.
 
Cotter said:
Hi All:

Some really good posts above by all. (Well, most I guess). Here's my take.

Tontar's been an outspoken advocate for the non-existence of the creature known as BF. Very vocal in several arenas. I think it does carry some weight to know if one of the 'big' skeptics against this creature is out there manufacturing evidence to support his claims.

And I 100% feel the same way about ANYONE no matter what side of the debate they fall on. I'm not going to comment on 'footers hoaxing, that's not what I'm discussing, I'm discussing the Elbe Trackway and the potential that a well known forum skeptic was involved.

SO....Thanks for your responses above Tontar, however, I didn't get a yay or nay.

It's really simple. If you have no involvement with the hoaxed trackway, just say it. You carry yourself as one who knows a lot about costumes and fake feet. I think it's important for both sides to understand who is out there fabricating evidence.

Thank you Tontar.
Click to expand...


The footprints have always, and will always be "evidence of man", not of bigfoot. How many more times will "footers" be fooled before figuring that out? Seems to be endless.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I think we just see hoaxes differently.

In general, I don't think you can have a fair and objective discussion with someone about a subject if you are intentionally planting "evidence".

In the overall scheme of things, I suppose it doesn't matter, since bigfoot is nonexistent.

Shows like Finding Bigfoot are not helping their cause at all, imo. I don't think the TV shows are an advantage to them. Just like the hokey movies really weren't back in the day.

It may make the producers some money, but the bigfooters universally end up looking foolish, imo.
Click to expand...

Just as Randi exposed con artists like Geller and Popoff I think the cons of the BF world should also be exposed.

Rick Noll was promoting the trackway @ first. Noll promotes the Skookum elk arse as BF after it has been shown conclusively to be an elk lay. Noll is a con and deserves to be exposed.

Cliff Barackman as a member of the Finding BF show also deserves to be shown up as a money grubbing con. Unless he's the village idiot he has to know BF doesn't exist.

If a skeptic can show these con artists for what they are then they are doing a public service.
 
^When was the last time humans shared the planet with another upright walking primate?

Or are you saying that they can't be of Bigfoot because whatever creature that may be out there won't be named Bigfoot?

I'm not sure if the matter-of-factness of that statement is more word-play sematics or based on facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom