I read some, not all, as you know, I was away on business when the pms were a-flying.

But, this thread isn't about what *I* may or may not know, frankly, I couldn't care less at this stage, but I do feel that there are questions that BFF members want to ask and rumours and accusations that they want to explore - you are entirely at libertly to contribute or not, but please don't think that because I have been sent a few pms that the case is closed, I have no involvement in this other than the fact that people seem determined to involve me in it.

This isn't about me - I wasn't there, I didn't see or hear anything, I've never met nor spoken to the landowner - heck, I haven't even listened to all the recordings yet!

So has anyone got any questions about the actual recordings themselves - surely they can be discussed apart from the associated wankery that everyone seems more intent on bringing into the debate?

Eg - as I understand it, the group decided to share some of the data they've collected on a years long research project, to allow other researchers to compare it to recordings they may have obtained in the course of their own research.

So, MRP, have you guys had a chance to analyse and compare the qualities inherent in your recordings with those of other researchers who've now shared their own recordings with you? Any trends standing out? Glaring differences?

Alternatively, those researchers who've got recordings that share qualities with the MRP audio, anything you'd like to share out of your analysis so far?

Earlier this month I recorded some wood (sounding) knocks in one of my research area. They were only a short distance away (I'd estimate within 25 meters) but the audio was really faint. Southern Yahoo was kind enough to isolate some of the knocks for me and enhance the volume and says that they share similarities with knocks he's heard in the field. I've put the audio up here.

Because THAT is the state of bigfooting these days: Entitlement. 'You know something'... therefore, I must too, and if someone makes an accusation based on nothing but speculation or "someone said...", entitlement obligates YOU to prove *nothing* is wrong.

Some would call that ... **DRUM-ROLL* ... arm-chair research at it's finest.

ForestGuy... not so much any analysis, but from several different regions of the U.S., we've had a few people state they've heard virtually the same kind of vocalizations. Amazing how "those Michigan hoaxers" get around, isn't it.

Has anyone provided or published recordings that match or come close to matching the ones you have recorded?

"In this world, I have only my word and my b*lls, I don't break them for any body"....Tony Montana

I personally don't know? Paul handles all the web related contact information as it comes in, some contacts (as I'm recalling off the top of my head) may have been people from this or other bigfoot forums who've contacted us confidentially, and a few are likely completely "off the web" or personal contacts we've had or made.

If anyone else is publishing recordings on the net, I haven't heard of it... or in at least one case where I followed a link to some 'sounds', when I listened, I never even heard what it was they were stating was on the recordings. That's been a while back. I have no clue where or what that site was.

Were the tracks mentioned on the website documented? Can we expect to see them at any point? Were they found in the areas (and shortly after) you heard the audio come from, or in the areas the sightings took place? I think they are very important to the potential legitimacy of your recordings.

Also, missing camera traps or trail cams? Did they go missing while the group was there? (or while gone?) Did you find any pieces of the cameras or were the entire units and everything (mounts etc) missing also? Any tracks around those cameras that went missing?

Thanks.

RR - you really seem to be struggling with a basic part of the debate at the moment:

"currently only the recordings are up for discussion. We cannot disclose additional information at this time, nor can we discuss or disclose information pertaining to other aspects of the project"

They've said it more than once...

Are you incapable of discussing the recordings at the moment? Surely there's enough in them to start with, and if pertinent information that impacts on the veracity of the recordings comes to light later, then the discussion can move in that direction then.

That's actually a really good question.

Those things I mentioned are quite relevent to the potential legitimacy of the recordings. Dont you think so? Or not? I think its also appropriate to quell any rumors or fabrications that have been alleged rather than stay quiet regarding them. In the end its the right step to take. Sure helps dispell the crap, and leaves us with more fact than fiction. I'm not struggling with anything... I'm asking important questions related to the recordings, and sightings. They can chose to answer or not at their own discretion.

Why can't simple questions be answered with simple answers?

To be honest you guys (the Michigan Group) are sounding a lot like the types we "meanieheads" used to rail against... Attacking instead of answering questions, taking your ball and going home, etc...

I don't understand why you don't think (or never thought) that people would have questions or that people that were on-site might disagree with you.

A few simple questions:

Did Drew lie?
If so why? If not why not?

Did Angie lie?
If so why? If not why not?

We used to talk about seeking only the truth, someone is not being truthful here, either by words or omissions.
The Genie is out of the bottle and no one can turn back the clock now.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and I haven't seen, or heard, anything extraordinary.

Of course I think there are issues relevant, including the ones you've raised. Which they've already said they're not answering.

As I said, surely we can discuss the recordings on face value, and include further information when (if) it is made available.

So my question stands - are you incapable of discussing the recordings at the moment? Or are you of the opinion that your questions need to be answered before it's worthwhile discussing the recordings?

Hi

As a Member or Moderator it don't make a difference, I would have said something about using this word any day ~ incapable ~ That kinda word is not needed when talking to another Member.

Peace
Tim

Hey BM - I was wondering if any of the recordings sound similar to the vocals you've heard in the field?


Edit - RRS, have sent you a PM.

Thanks Tim, you said it much better than I would have (and almost did).

Ok, thanks for the answer (no evidence). I wasn't trying to badger, I just wanted to know if there is anything supporting possible BF activity as it relates to the recordings. There was mention of tracks and sightings, which I consider supporting evidence. But if those events were not strong enough to be considered evidence by the group, then that is also understandable.

Going out on a limb here for just a second, and this will help explain my questions:
EVEN IF it can be "proven" that the group fell victim to a hoax, it DOES NOT prove that there IS NOT/WAS NOT Sasquatch activity at the location. And by the same reasoning, even if it can be proven that no hoax was perpetrated, it does not prove that there is or was Sasquatch activity at the site.
But if there is any supporting evidence to the possible source of the sounds (regardless of their origination) it helps all of us formulate informed opinions. And since our opinions of the recordings are apparently the reason they were posted in the first place, I felt it was ok to ask questions about any other evidence.

The next evidentiary question is about the missing trailcams. RR brought it up, BM thinks it's a good question, and I would love it if this is something you feel you can elaborate on. My trailcam has a nifty feature with a remote key fob so you can locate it (if it's relatively close) if you arrive at the site and it isn't where it was supposed to be. Have you been able to locate any of the missing cams, and if so, what type of damage did they suffer?

Thanks in advance,
S.

I've neither heard (personally or from another source) nor recorded anything that would be a match for what is presented in the MRP.

I have had one person tell me that they had heard something that would match the MRP vocalizations. The problem with that is I could say I saw a bigfoot poop a glowing orb, and at some point someone would say they saw the same thing. It's part and parcel for the course. Anecdotes will always be anecdotes, but something that can be physically evaluated and tested is the cornerstone of research.

Thanks BM - so do you think there's a benefit in comparing audio recordings to the MRP, esp if someone thinks they have similarities in their recording?

Also, further to RRS post, apols to RR for being too harsh - was just trying to see if there was a reason for not focusing on the recordings at this stage, beyond the other questions.

I think there is always a benefit in comparative analysis. A recording produced prior to the MRP being released, and from a location and source unaffiliated with the MRP, that proved to be a match to the MRP recordings would certainly be interesting.

ETA - I'm not saying that the above scenario would validate the MRP recordings as being from a sasquatch. IMHO vocalizations only have a true benefit after the source has been positively identified.

That's what I thought too. Hope someone out there had an actual recording, not just a few "yeah, mine sounded just like that..."

"was just trying to see if there was a reason for not focusing on the recordings at this stage, beyond the other questions."

Because without "the other questions" being answered, there's not much to focus on. These are a compilation of odd animal or human sounds, and without having the benefit of knowing what other evidence is present, we're left in the dark. For all I know the MRP recorded these sounds at a local zoo and they are just testing us to see how we react .....

Well that's sort of what I mean by discussing the recordings - if they were recorded at a local zoo then I expect someone would be swooping in to point that out with known samples etc. I'm not a sound guru, but I thought there are things that can be analyzed in the audio itself, like what Southern Yahoo has referred to when he said none of the vocalisations have the same signature.

Although I do see how some of the questions being asked have an impact on analysis of the sounds, I don't know how confirmation of physical evidence like prints, hair, scat, will really impact analysis of the audio recordings? Surely that just opens up the next round of questions...

Although I would argue some people have some very valid questions here regarding the recordings, I support the MRP's right to continue their investigation in peace without having to defend these recordings or justify any allegations being made......... as long as they are maintaining a "we're sharing what we've collected in good spirit & for other researcher's comparisons" position & that's currently the only objective. If and when these recordings are ever claimed as a definitive type of evidence for an "unrecognized" NA primate species those valid questions & allegations (ridiculous or not) will need to be addressed & I would suspect they know that.




I agree with all these rules in principle and absolutely always have..... but it's kinda remarkable considering all the countless childish threads that have gotten everybody in a tizzy previously where it was perfectly ethical "for the greater good" to share personal emails, PM's, dirty laundry & copied posts from other sites and forums here. Just wondering why it's OK to post outside material (even intended private material) here, but it's not OK to take something here and post it on another forum? I think that's a very valid question as well as moving forward..... is this hopefully going to apply to all members and all threads here or just be exclusive for this one?.....which would certainly perpetuate this perception that the MRP is receiving friendly treatment here.

Nope. Jim never said this.


I just witnessed the guy who I call the landowner, tell me about a suit, in front of you, and claim that he burned it.


???



Were you with Mike in the car? Do you know that sleep hallucinations happen to Drivers while driving all the time? I even did a poll here about it.

Please don't assume I am the one giving out info. The closest I came to giving out information was regarding the Gorilla Suit. I made a story up about Barney Suits and Purple Dinosaur Hunters. The leap to gorilla suit was made, and I acknowledged it.

I didn't know the owners name, I couldn't even remember his first name.
I am completely against outing the owner, even now. I don't think his fun should ruined.
What I did want, is for you to address the items that were admitted to me, at the site, at the beginning, before Bigfootry got all googly about these sounds.

All information regarding the owner or his nephew or whoever has been done independently of me. It was obtained by someone at JREF using the map posted at SFB, and the info was then shared with people at SFB. I have not even confirmed or denied the information obtained. As I said, I didn't even remember the guy, who I thought was the landowner's, first name. I never even went to or by anyones house, I was escorted on and off the property.

Like I said, I have never wanted the owner's identity to come out. I don't think it is anyone's right to ruin his fun. And to boot, I didn't even know his full Identity until I read it on Melissa's Forum.

Yes I was so offended by not being invited back. In fact It didn't even cross my mind. I have a place on a lake, less than 15 miles from the location. Why in Crom's name would I want to go back to a location that I had determined was probably not on the up and up. I would go back to look for snakes though.

The only time I ever asked anyone to come back, was when I was trying to get Nightwing via PM to bust this hoax open, after you had started your recording website. I told him I would help him do it, and would be glad to sneak out there and catch the hoaxers in the act. I really hate seeing JimF and Nightwing at the center of this, since I consider them both decent people.

And just so you know, I don't really care about getting to the bottom of this. I simply wanted you to acknowledge what I found, as legitimate reasons for me to believe it was a hoax.

I defended your group and location against all people who thought that posting the map was a proper thing to do. Even knowing now how much it seems everyone in your group resented me all along, I would still defend any intentional attempts to out the location.

Nightwing- I trust you to answer 3 yes or no questions.

Do you think that Bigfoot is on that property?

Do you think that MRG has been the victim of a hoax at any time during the last 5 years?

Do you think I am stupid?

It is being implied that I am lying about the owner admitting to owning a Gorilla suit.

Just so we can be upfront about this. How many witnesses would you require, that have seen a Gorilla suit in operation on that property? Would three be enough? twelve? Do they have to be law enforcement officers? or Military Veterans to be credible?

Also remember, I am not claiming to have seen the Gorilla Suit, I am claiming that the owner told me he had one, and that he burned it. I am claiming that he said this in front of JimF. I am not claiming that JimF told the guy to burn it.

where does that put Jimf's denial then?

It puts it in the category of Drew either doesn't recall things as well as he thinks he does or is making things up. I was NEVER involved in any discussion of the burning of any suit, as much as he would seem to care for that little non-fact to be true.

So when was the suit burned? and who burned it?

Did the owner own a gorilla suit or not Jim? That is the question.

Do you doubt he told me he owned a gorilla suit? Seriously?

Are you saying the owner or the owners family NEVER OWNED a gorilla suit? Put it out there.

Because I never said you burned it, or said that you burned it.

While were at it Drew,what do you think you heard now that prompted you to file a Bigoot report in the first place?

Do you think your in laws , who saw one supposedly in the same area are either victims of sleep paralysis also or liars?

Do you think that Bigfoot even exists ?

And lastly(for now) why did you repeatedly ask to be invited back if you thought it was a hoax?

Straw men.

Did you actually FIND evidence to prove a hoax, or are you referring to a gorilla suit that you say you never saw?
If indeed you are in possession of proof that these folks are being hoaxed, and can't post it here for whatever reason, I guess we outsiders will have to accept that. but it knocks this thread back into the "cloak and dagger"/ "secret squirrel" category.

I honestly don't know if he's lying or if he's read so much crap from others on JREF that he now takes much of the supposition presented there as fact, and there was a lot of supposition even before I basically told them to go F** themselves. I'd like to think he's not doing it on purpose but I also think that he's trying so hard to fit in somewhere that he will take the ball given him by others and run with it as hard and as fast as he can no matter whether that ball represents something truthful or not. I also think given the PM system on JREF and other places that Drew is likely as responsible of much of the allegedly accurate info ( though most of it is not) being leaked around the internet. In a word I do not trust him to be able to keep a secret.
She most assuredly did. Starting with her post regarding the LO's ability to manipulate sounds. The only sound system he had was a crappy stereo that played a canned recording from a Halloween soundtrack album. She was there for one weekend and professes knowledge of the area, the people and the situation that she does not possess. So you tell me, is that lying or not?
Yup. Guilty as charged. There's a crapload of things Bigfoot related that I'm simply never going to tell anyone regarding the people involved, here or elsewhere. Not even specifically about the site but Bigfoot research as a whole. Why? Because I said I wouldn't and to me, if not some others , that still means something. In case you haven't noticed, over the last few years that phrase has very little if any meaning. It's one of the basic reasons that people withhold whatever they consider evidence. There's to much of a sense of entitlement in the Bigfoot "community" that they have some sort of god given right to know who, what, and where everyone else is doing while doing nothing themselves. Have I done the same in the past? Yes. Have I done so very often in the last few years? Less and less, because simply put if someone wants me to know something they'll tell me and nothing I do, particularly on an internet forum is going to force their hand into doing so. Something to think about isn't it?

I never said I had proof. I said I believed they are being hoaxed.
I said that the owner told me he had a gorilla suit.
I said that the owners location should not be revealed.

There really isn't that much to it.

You'd be wrong.
If you only knew how many people have come to me and asked if the location was correct, or if the names of the people are such and such. I have kept every secret about the location, I knew nothing about the landowners, (which I truly don't, I have absolutely no recollection of names or faces of anyone other than You, Stacy, Nightwing, and a couple people from Indiana that went canoing,) and told people such.

You published a map, someone who didn't like you (not me, I like you) published a google earth map, someone took that map and did a property search, someone found out the alleged name of the owner, someone published that info on their website, now some KOOKS are callling him. I have nothing to do with any of this.

Why couldn't you just be upfront about the Gorilla suit? I think the BF community deserved that.

Wouldn't it be funny if the rec project is at Creekfreak's home ?

Perhaps for the same reason that you seem to think that the "gorilla" suit is actually that. It most assuredly is not. it is also assuredly not over 7 feet tall or black or even dark in color. But go ahead and keep fueling the rumor about things you apparently know nothing about and I'll keep sitting back and laughing.

And while were on the subject of lies Drew. Did you or did you not tell the people on JREF that you were brandishing a knife at the camp? When exactly did this take place because none of us seem to recall it. In fact were you not told prior to being invited in the first place that we only had two rules:

1. No alcohol
2. No weapons.

Aside from that you or anyone was free to go and do whatever you wish. Seemed pretty simple to me.

Did you call the police when you game-cams were stolen?

No?

Why not?

Because Bigfoot stole them?

Now who's making straw man arguments?

Same as you'd appreciate your questions being answered. i'd appreciate mine being answered as well.

Fair enough. I only asked because the word "found" to me implies something tangible, as opposed to well.... you know.

1. No Alcohol
2. No Firearms

Would you like me to post the PM, or will you admit you are lying or mistaken about what I was told?





Wrong, not calling the police when Cameras are stolen, is indicative that you thought Bigfoot stole them, or someone told you not to call the police. Otherwise, unless you had an idea of who was doing the stealing, the police should have been called.

Your questions to me have nothing to do with whether the owner told me he had a gorilla suit.

No.

Why ask questions you already know the answer to?

You profess knowledge, but have , it seems, been living in the greater Detroit metro area for too long. It would do no good to do so. ( Of course based on my recent experience it does no good to do so in the greater Detroit metro area either.) Who exactly should we have the cops question? Would we also need CSI to come out and check for latents? For which they are ill equipped to do in a woodsy setting. I know well contact Gil Grisom and his teal and have them end the entire mystery once and for all.

If that's what you want to beleive go right ahead. But not a one of us at any time has said anything like that. This is just more myth perpetuation on your part, putting words in our mouths that (I) we did not say. You seem to be very fond of rumors and doing just that these days. Attributing things to us that we never said or did, waiting for someone else to recover the fumbled ball and run with it. Sadly, I've grown to expect that of you these days.

Go right ahead. Keep in mind though that not everything said makes it to PM. Like a verbal conversation. The words don't seem to translate well there.

You file a police report, so if they pull over Willie in his Big Red Truck with a couple of GAMECAMS, they know who to give them back to, and they know he stole them.

What about RULE #2 ? Do you acknowledge that I was told "NO FIREARMS"? not "NO WEAPONS"?

Don't recall which you were told. either way you WERE NOT brandishing one about camp as you have claimed. At least not while I was there.

OK Jim, It's really quite clear in this case.



I don't recall if you were there or not, But I know I told you that my goal was to get DNA at all costs, if BF showed up.

Wow. That's bad form, considering the PM wasn't even one from me.

And if DNA is your goal could it not be assumed that a hair or fecal sample would suffice?

No, it's bad form to say I was given one set of rules, when I was given a completly different set of rules.



DNA wasn't my goal, I state that I am going to charge any Bigfoot noises with my knife to DETER HOAXING. I have said that the bestway to not see signs of BIGFOOT, is to proclaim you will charge and stab the Beast. And to say it in front of people at camp. Nothing like a guy with a knife, boasting of no fear of Bigfoot, to put a damper on hoaxing activity.