I'm trying to get at what motivated Mary Green to write that book. I mean, what's the deal there?

I admit up front, this might be a pointless exercise...

I know I said this in another post, but this is my opinion on the matter.

I was going to start a thread with this question but I will put it here instead.

Why do people hoax bigfoot and not some other purple, firebreathing slime spitting, sulphur belching, 3-toed, 17 3/4 legged dragon or something like that, why the big monkey?

Maybe it is my interest in bigfoot that keeps me informed about bigfoot hoaxes and the fact that I really am not interested in UFO's, ghosts and such keeps me uninformed about those things, but it still intrigues me.

As for Mary: I voted that she is perpetrating a hoax, but she did not create it. I think she just got in over her head believing someone else and cannot get out for whatever reason. She definatley has something, a hoax I think, but like I said before if she had just presented it correctly even this "hoax" would have been valuable evidence and she could be there with the big guys.

Of course if I am wrong, (and it wouldn't be the first time.)then congratulations!!!

I wish to reserve judgement until after I read the book. Inspite of all I have read on the Forum.

I voted duped... but only because she wanted to believe so badly... there may even be a kernal of truth to it... but where it went from there is anyone's guess...

Hey Tug, are you on a list to borrow that stack of rags?

Me too

I'm still hoping someone can sell or lend me a s/h copy of the book - i don't want to buy a copy from ms green.

I've got a copy. You guys can thumb wrestle for it in Willow Creek...

Coco: "Why do people hoax Bigfoot instead of some other fire-breathing, sulphur-spitting, 17-3/4 toed dragon....?"

What makes you think they don't?

(Like the HIS, which is probably just a plain, garden variety Bigfoot.)

Ok, here's my opinion.

I voted that she "couldn't care less if the things in the book are true" and at this point that one seems to fit best as it is mostly publicity she seeks.

I think in the beginning she was just gullible and believed the story Janice fed her.
I think she later, after her separation from the GCBRO, wanted to believe it because without it, she had nothing to remain in mainstream bigfoot research with at the time.
I think after it was already too late and she was in too deep, she realized she'd been duped by Janice and is continuing with the facade intentionally.

I believe at this point, for her, it is no longer necessary for the details of the book to be true. It is only necessary to keep the public convinced they are true. I don't think she cares if it isn't, just that no one ever finds out it isn't.

So I actually think the first 3 choices all contain something pertinent to my opinion of Mary Alayne Green as they have all been covered at some point in this situation she has created for herself and her followers.

That's my opinion. It might not be yours.

Now that's why we call her the Bigfoot Research Goddess... isn't she awesome?

Talk about cutting to the quick. This ought to receive some action.
I don't know. But the suggestions offered so far make sense. Its become a strange occurrence and everybody loves to follow the mystery like a giant soap opera. And yep, Panthress is awesome

I have never been convinced that there ever was an "Edith Perry" but suspect that Mary Green fabricated the whole story from start to finish. She may have had an accomplice but I feel strongly that Mary Green wrote the story.

Neither do I believe that Jan was anything more than Mary's flunky. Mary wrote "50 Years with Bigfoot" and Jan's only Job was to help her pull off the scam. I believe this is why Jan could never get her story straight. She had nothing to do with writing the story and only played a part to help Mary market her book.

Think about it ...

Mary always seemed to have the answers and Jan's answers often just did not add up ...

Mary finally decided she needed to put a muzzle on Jan and ordered her to silence .... Why? To keep Jan from blowing the scam all apart.

50 Years with Bigfoot is pure fiction, plain and simple. Mary knows she is not a writer and has no chance of ever being published unless she can convince her audience that the story is real and create some interest in it. If she can do that and sell her first printing, she may be able to convince a REAL publisher to buy her book and publish it.

That my friends, is the real story here ... You can bet on it!

I notice no one has yet said it is the definitive work regarding bigfoot. Huh.

I also notice I left out a perfectly valid option in the poll: Don't know/care.

If you don't know or don't care, you'll have to post that. Sorry.

Isn't a new poll kinda redundant, considering the opinion of this board has been obvious for months.

Mary couldn't have been duped. Isn't the consensus here that Mary (not Janice) provided the Sasquatch hair sample to Dr. Fahrenbach? Hence, she would have to be in on the "hoax".

I don't think that's a concensus here. It was just one of my "grassy knoll" theories.

I avoid trying to characterize the opinion of the board. I know we have many people with many different viewpoints regarding many things. Mary's book is just one of them. So no, I don't think this is redundant.

For instance, you're an active member of this board. Do you feel the same way I do about the book? Hardly. Are you active in several discussions and welcome to continue your posting? Do you think I would be similarly welcomed over at Mary's board?

[Edit] And still I notice no one has called it the definitive work. Even when those who consistently defend the woman and her work have added their thoughts to the thread. I would hope that those doing the defending are doing it out of true conviction and not just to be argumentative...

Maybe this is a poll Mary should be running?

I voted this way "Couldn't care less if the things in the book are true - she's in it for the attention/money/whatever." Its the way I feel about it.

Yeah, definitive is a strong word.
I'd give it "essential" (add a clear photo of a constipated Fox sweating it out in the poop-barn and I'd bump up to "definitive")

That's how Elvis died, chronic...

Maybe that's the only way anyone'd be able to get a picture of him! He'd have to be...distracted.

I didn't vote. I would vote against the first three choices, of course. But obviously, there is NO one definitive work. We are dealing with a complete unknown here. Certain things we do know....but even that varies from one locale to another, one sighting to another, one experience to another. It's a good book and I find it believable. Not getting into that again, however. All has been said, again and again, pro and con. But nothing is the definitive work and won't be a for a long time, maybe never. And therein lies the heart of the mystery.

Get the tape recorder ready, and maybe you'll catch Fox swearing...

"If I ever get my hands on that damn Fishbone35, I slap him silly! Him and his freaking cheese sammiches!!! Clickie, clickie, huh? I'll clickie clickie him... if I could only poop!"

Fox and a rabbit were taking a dump in the poop-barn.
Fox said to the rabbit, "Do have a problem with s**t sticking to your hair?"
The rabbit replied, "Nope".
So, Fox wiped his ass with the rabbit.



er, does that belong in the bad-joke section?

Chronic: Yes.

Mmm...Yup...

Pretty much sums up my beliefs on the subject as well...

Elvis died in the poop barn RB? Now I'm confused, no wait,
maybe Elvis is masquerading as one of those hairy bastards
at the Coy farm!!!

No that can't be right. I just had a banana, PB, and
marshmallow sammich with 'em

Man I'm hungry. Been lookin' at the Zatarain's website...

Ain't my fault. Dumbass shoulda' told me he was lactose intolerant.

I voted the same as Arky and Ranshirl. Us girls are all on the same page. I have a hard time thinking that someone would just make up something from scratch and premeditatedly put it out there. I think she is caught up in a lie that she can't escape from gracefully. I also think I might be just really naive about her and she may be just what George said. I just can't imagine someone being such a liar. I know there are people like that so maybe she is, but I don't know her well enough to make that call. I have never met her. Arky has so I feel more confident about my poll answer seeing that she voted the same way.

I voted hoax.I believe she knowingly perpetrated one or abbeted one knowing full well or her quacktions (no I didnt misspell, I meant that. only a quack would write that and call it "definative"/)and the consequences.To this day she knowingly continues to do so...There are also upon further investigation several questionabl reports/sightings attributable to her before the book was even a thought.Which would be obvious to everyone if her site hadnt been redone/deleted umpteen times.There are also several of these reports in the GCBRO database.You have only to look her name is attached at the bottom of the reports. I keep hearing this,and yet no proof (once again) have any of us seen to my knowledge, that he either recieved or analyzed any such sample.Even if he did ,once again to the best of my knowledge,when did he become a geneticist ?If he did ,great, glad to see hes continuing his education and expanding.If not ,then how would he be qualified to run any sort of DNA test on the above mentioned sample ?

Ok, I voted that she couldn't care less if the stories were true. Everything I've read that Mary has written just furthers my belief that she knew from the get go that she was being fed a line of crap. She makes excuses for Janice not being on her computer and for Janice not taking phone calls. I believe that one of them had to step to the rear and let the other do the talking. Only way to keep their stories straight. And Mary is not going to be the one to take a rear seat to anybody.

I just don't understand why she acts so surprised that people are asking questions. I'd bet money that if a book of this sort had been written by anyone else, she would be first in line to shoot it down.
And, what's with the Jane Goodall approach? Does anyone understand what the heck she's talking about? Surely to god she's not comparing herself or Jan to Jane Goodall. :rolleyes:

I did read that she said she Ms. Goodall has a copy of "the book" and she is waiting to hear back from her on her opinion. I wonder if Ms. Goodall tells her it's crap if Mary will tell her "you're just jealous."

In "50 Years With Bigfoot", Mary Green...

• Can't seem to keep her facts straight

I think she crossed the 'unwitting' line a long time ago.

'nuff said.

RayG

I'm with George on this one, it's Mary who's the puppeteer here

Spork, your avatar scares me...

Whoever said "soap opera"--that's exactly what it is. Good description. :rolleyes:

Mary Green has been marketing both herself and the idea of a "Tennessee Bigfoot" in printed news and broadcast media as well as her website on the internet for years now. She has been carfully cultivating her book idea and working on name recognition in order to publish something that will make all the ground work she has been doing all these years pay off.

Is Mary Green a liar? Maybe she is but then look at others who do the same thing Mary is doing ...

Be honest now ... can you think of anyone else who uses printed and broadcast media and the internet to boost his name recognition and fuel the drive to publish books? Now consider what is in those books ... Is it all true or is some of it obvious fabrication? And the important question is does this person KNOW that its fabrication and just publishes it anyway because it sells books?

I think everyone here can think of a name that fits the above ... oh yes there is more than one.

Mary is no different ... shes just not as polished.

(and terribly mean spirited to boot)

Spork, your avatar scares me...
- Bipto

Funny I was going to say the same thing about yours. Its that constant stare.

& thank you Ella.

See thats the beef most of us have. It was first mentioned by her as the definitive guide. As you can agree that is a strong word and to make a claim like that, evidence would certainly be able to back it up. Definitive is a strong word allright, I wonder why she chose that in the face of having no evidence to back it up.

And that is the main contention with most folks. Mine really comes from her not being honest, I really didnt care if the book was legit or not. I already had my mind made up before it came out. I remember the Pal Talk sessions when Janice first came onto the scene. First it was like "I am new and would like to learn more on this subject" she said that she wanted to know EVERYTHING there is to know about BF and wanted any reference that can be offered up. Everything from all popular BF authors to some primate books. After a while she seemed to reveal more and more or her strange encounters and to some it was obvious that it was a hodge podge mix of what she just read somewhere. Next thing you know she has the nickname TNBSlady2 and is now the expert on BF. It was an evolution most did not get to see. I know Robert remembers this as she used to pop up on the Monkeychasers Pal Talk room when she first appeared.

Actually I have to give credit where credit is due. In the literary sense, it is definitive. It sure is an exhaustive compilation, unfortunately for many of us, it is an exhaustive collection of hogwash. But I will concede and say in that sense, Mary was correct. See #2 (man I didnt enjoy that, but its honest) But all bigfooters will agree that #1 is what we all expect in this field.

Main Entry: 1de·fin·i·tive
Pronunciation: di-'fi-n&-tiv
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English diffinityf, from Middle French definitif, from Latin definitivus, from definitus
Date: 14th century
1 : serving to provide a final solution or to end a situation <a definitive victory>
2 : authoritative and apparently exhaustive <a definitive edition>
3 a : serving to define or specify precisely <definitive laws> b : serving as a perfect example : QUINTESSENTIAL <a definitive bourgeois>
4 : fully differentiated or developed <a definitive organ>
5 of a postage stamp : issued as a regular stamp for the country or territory in which it is to be used
synonym see CONCLUSIVE
- de·fin·i·tive·ly adverb
- de·fin·i·tive·ness noun


Of course in this realm of research and the desire to truth and the final solution to this mystery, definitive would automatically be anticipated being the firest definition. BF research is all about EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE, and more EVIDENCE. Is it any wonder that one would expect no less?

I stand corrected. To be authoritative it has to come from a form of authority. There really isnt one for Bf research so in that sense, it is not authorative, therefore not definiteve in any way shape or form. I retract my statement saying she was right. (I just knew it didnt feel right to begin with)

So with no formal authority to validate or approve the work, it cannot fall under that category.

.


Main Entry: au·thor·i·ta·tive
Pronunciation: &-'thär-&-"tA-tiv, o-, -'thor-
Function: adjective
Date: 1605
1 a : having or proceeding from authority : OFFICIAL <authoritative church doctrine> b : showing evident authority : DEFINITIVE <a most authoritative literary critique>
2 : DICTATORIAL 2
- au·thor·i·ta·tive·ly adverb
- au·thor·i·ta·tive·ness noun

HEY GEORGE! To answer you question: A resounding YES! But I won't mention his name on a public message board. No, not EB. He goes without saying and no one pays him much attention. But I'm kinda disappointed at the famous personage whose name I won't mention. :rolleyes:

If you knew Jack like I know Jack, you'd know he's nothing to be red of!

Whew. That's good. I was so nervous I went over to 50 years, noticed Spork's avatar again (actually I may have seen what you did)
became even more nervous and wrote a comment. Of course being late and me being nervous I accidentally sent it to him as a pm. Shaking I then left. I tell ya, these avatars ...... ooooooooo

Ella,

I think I know who you are thinking of and yes he is one of the worst offenders but he is not alone by any means. Voldemort is in the same catagory but he is not even as polished as Mary Green nor as successful dispite the many more years of persistance.

So many hucksters but so few actually make some money, still others try and what can we do but watch them and wonder at how they are able to fool so many people.

This is the world of Bigfoot. Sometimes its just plain ugly.

Well, George, I believe in the saying, "The message, not the messenger". This nameless guy does write interesting books and more power to him if he makes money. I don't agree with all his theories by any means, but he is very informative. He doesn't like me apparently just because I like Ben Blake of Devil Monkeys and Mary Green and am supportive of both. I think it's mainly Ben he abhors. A bad reason to dislike a person, just because you disagree with them, but the world's full of it. :rolleyes:

As for EB, I really think he's driving with one headlight and may be psychiatric rather than just crazy. I don't think anyone takes him serious. He is unfortunate.

You keep some pretty evil company Ella ...

You already know what I think of Mary Green and Ben Blake is not all that different from EB ... Ben's every bit as flakey and just as destructive once he gets started.

Why you are attracted to such people is beyond me but its a free country and I suppose if you choose to wriggle on the ground with rattle snakes that is your right.

Well, George, you're entitled to your opinion too. That's why I'm glad to be a citizen of this free country. Even EB is entitled to his, one can short of a six-pack though it be.... :rolleyes:

Still no one clicked on the Definitive Guide.

Kind of strange as its the whole heart of the debate. Those who defend her dont even agree with her?

Skunkie, I already explained that NOTHING is definitive. Important, yes, that book is important to the field. But we are, as I said, dealing with what is still a complete unknown here, so there can be no definitive guide.....until possibly at some point in the distant future.

Maybe someone should caution Mary, or do you think she would disagree with you.

Now if I may ask. Why do you feel this book is important to the field?

Aw, Skunkie, nothing I could say would do anything but start another same ole, same ole. But if for no other reason, it's surely the most controversial, attention-getting book in the history of BF research and for that reason alone, it's important. Ellafink out. :rolleyes: