What in the world does that have to do with what I posted, and why do you give a flying blank if I think you lied about this forum in that one post?
Let me ask you straight up.
Do you want to know what I really think when I post, or do you want me to sugar-coat what I write?
Let me know, because I can lay it on thick...
The issue is whether I lied when I said that the default position here about Bigfoot sightings (and related Bigfoot issues) is to claim it is all about knowing dishonesty.
Here is the kind of thing I fault --- Parcher on the guy who was taken in and financially damaged by the Dyer hoax:
"Rule #1: Never believe a Bigfoot believer without supporting evidence.
Anybody who partners with Rick Dyer must be a believer. Don't believe them."
I think the dishonesty here is with the Fraternity that has called me a liar because I have made statements to the effect that the "it's all a lie, all of it" explanation is inadequate as a central explanation for Bigfoot phenomena.
Here is the retort I am hearing: You, jerrywayne, are a liar because we don't say it's ALL based on lies. We admit that there is a TINY sliver of sightings that are misidentifications (or hallucinations), that there are a few, VERY FEW people who may be MORONIC enough to believe Bigfoot stuff; we are just saying that OVERWHELMINGLY, IT IS COMPOSED OF KNOWING LIES! So I'm a liar based on a loophole.
Sometimes I say "virtually all" and sometimes I say "all." I'll try to remember to say "virtually" exclusively just so the Fraternity will have to adjust its criticism and be less erroneous and unable to manufacture outrage at my comments.
I was born the same year the fake yeti track "discovered" by Shipton was announced to the world. When I was a young kid Bigfoot was born in northern California. I go way back. They problem between me and the Fraternity, I think, lies with the fact that I used to be a believer and the Fraternity, as far as I know, does not sport a former believer. Also, the Fraternity is reacting to Internet Bigfoot, such as BFF and numerous other sites as well as the occasional news report. I can almost agree that Bigfoot phenomena found on the net is mostly fabrication.
P.S. Alaska is trying to portray me as angry (I may be a little angry at being called a liar, but not as much as the Bush Pilot thinks.) I would say that certain elements of the Fraternity seem to me to be some angry folks. Your post seems angry, for instance.
P.S.S. I'm using the term "Fraternity" to mean the handful or so posters here that use the "IT"S KNOWING DISHONESTY" critique as the overriding explanation for the Bigfoot saga.
