Go here: http://www.kalkorff.com to order the documentary in which Greg Long and company claim to expose the P/G film whenever they get the URL up. You can also go here: http://www.northwestmysteries.com for Greg Long's exposes' of Bigfoot researchers (actually, they're not available right now, but are coming soon).

I went to Long's site www.northwestmysteries.com and clicked on the tab "Endorsements and Reviews" and then clicked on the link about halfway down that says "his "critics" have been and are exposed". Boy, was I surprised to find my name on a tab next to ones for Green, Perez, Coleman and Meldrum..... I'm SKEPTICAL of the Patterson film. Good lord.

As the Official clown of BFF, I hereby give my Grade A stamp of approval to the Northwest mysteries website. It is now officially clown endorsed and can operate at full clown function while its moderators dress in proper clown attire. Seriously, if these guys would ever present anything of merit, I would give them all the credit in the world. Their only tactic seems to be an attempt to throw out half hearted claims with little or no proof to back them up and hope the general public takes them at face value without any individual research to validate or contridict them. They remind me of religious zealots who come to your door and claim that their truth is the only truth and everyone else is misguided. Now they take aim at other researchers which makes about zero sense and further makes everyone look like quacks including them. To quote a modified line from one of my favorite movies...." What do you call it when the debunkers accuse the debunkers?"

Congratulations, Scott... you seem to be in good company!

They apparently can't sell Long's book, so

Yetifan: According to the web site you're being exposed by none other than Phillip Morris.

How does that work? Did he help you with your zipper? I mean... you know?

That sudden draft means a costumer is exposing you.

Too bad there's no zipper smiley.

- Dfoot

Oh wait, there's more goodies at www.kalkorff.com

I just went there and found this in the lower right hand corner...

"Bigfoot "believer" Scott Herriott CAUGHT posing as a CNN reporter.
Philip Morris also EXPOSES Herriott's deception"

(btw...I'm Scott Herriott)

First off, I've done freelance stories as a reporter for CNN's "Newsnight with Aaron Brown". Earlier this year, I called Greg Long, following the release of his book, and told him that I was interested in pitching a story to Newsnight about him and his theory that the film had been hoaxed. He basically said he wasn't interested because he and Morris and Korff were working on a project about it. Apparently, when he discovered that I actually believe that Bigfeet exist he must have thought some type of plot was brewing. Who knows. Anywho...

...concerning Philip Morris, it's my recollection that he had told me on the phone (I called him shortly after the book came out) the figure of $700 pertaining to what he charged Patterson for the suit. But, I admit, I could be wrong about this since I have no corroborating notes for this.

I just got the book today. I wonder if the confusion stems from the ad from December 2, 1967 used in AMUSEMENT BUSINESS magazine that Long shows?

The ad says the gorilla suit is normally $750 but can now be had for the new price of $435.

So... if a "Roger Patterson" called Morris in the months prior to Oct. '67 when the suit was still $750 then that means it couldn't have cost the $435 that the book says it does....

.... but the book also says that Morris was selling the suit for $435 when Patterson called him. (*This is when the computer on Star Trek gets confused by Kirk's logic and begins to smoke).

Morris says Patterson probably read the ad in August in the magazine that was a trade publication for owners of amusement parks. Did the suit cost $750 or $435 back in August? Why not show us that ad then instead of the later one? Just wondering...

Opal Heironimus was scared by that black furry thing in the trunk... huh? What black thing? You mean brown don't you Mama? Unless of course that was a different suit. Nah... that would mean the Heironimus boys might be in on a gag that had nothing to do with Bluff Creek and had some crappy monkey suit in his trunk. There's no money in that. Or is there? Would the Heironimus boys do something like that?

Seems that this book exposing the film never once looks at the film at all. So far it seems to be a collection of quotes from people who got lured into talking on tape about Patterson's personal habits. So what about the film? Shouldn't we look at it?

A strange read since it's choosing not to look at the subject itself and uses the gossip of unsavery characters as its foundation.

And now Scott is "exposed." If this does turn out to be because of a mistaken quote over the price of the suit and they make that sound as if they are exposing a drug lord - then that really does tell alot about the method behind the writing.

- Dfoot

What a load of crap. Korff and Long need to go in to the fertilizer business.

Contradiction after contradiction and he still has the guts to claim he has exposed the PG film as a hoax???

There needs to be a comprehensive list of comparisons between what he claims and what the facts are. It needs to reside on this website permanently. We have people here that know that information back to front and every way out.

Does the documentary come with a complimentary barf bag?

Man talk about hooey "woot"

Am I also noticing the addition of Greg's wife to the bogus posse' ?
Hmm afraid they can't handle all the tour dates so two are better than one?

$10.00 extra for a signature ?
They've got it all worked out don't they.

You know, it's not bad enough that they drag poor Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin's names through the mud, now they gotta go after guys like John Green and Jeff Meldrum and Daniel Perez, all because they don't believe the P/G film is a hoax. They're even going after our own Yetifan, for Pete's sake-and he's SKEPTICAL of the film! What a couple of true jagoffs they are. That aside, the only reason I am ordering the documentary is to see in motion whether or not Bob Heironimus can actually duplicate the P/G film (I don't believe he can, but I've decided to see for myself).

Another awe-inspiring demonstration of world class investigative journalism and critical thinking by Long and Korff.

As if this will become a best seller. Think about it. Who is going to want to buy this video of Bob walking in a suit on a river in Eastern Washington, 38 years later. Certainly they didn't get the rights (paid for or donated) from Mrs. Patterson to show the P/G film in comparison along-side theirs on the DVD:

1. Mrs. Patterson probably wants nothing to do with these guys,

2. They could not afford the cost of using the P/G film,

3. Using it would make their little re-enactment look even more childish and silly,

4. She was burned before by their likes.

The question I have is if the BBC's purchased rights could be transfered to these guys? I hope not.

Well, I know it's been said on other threads, and maybe we all just "know it", but doesn't Long and K.K. get it? EVEN if they proved the P/G film were faked, this phenomenom goes so far back, that their attacks are literally laughable?

Does anyone know John Kirk to be able to contact him and get more information regarding this claim he made as quoted below from the website and review article written by Daniel Loxton as sited?

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic04-12-04.html

Bigfoot, Big Con
By Daniel Loxton
A review of
The Making of Bigfoot:
The Inside Story
by Greg Long.
Prometheus Books. 2004. 475pp. $25 ISBN: 1591021391

I met with author John Kirk, President of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, and asked for his impressions. According to Kirk, "the trouble is that Bob Heironimus isn't telling the truth in any way, shape, or form here." Like many cryptozoologists, he believes that Heironimus is himself perpetrating a hoax. Kirk claims that his organization discovered the identity of Heironimus (then an anonymous source claiming to have worn a suit in the film) back in 1999. He also alleges that their investigation into his background uncovered "a woman who was present when Heironimus and two other individuals concocted this scheme [to falsely claim Heironimus wore the suit] in her living room so we were aware five years ago that this was a hoax, and we do not know how it was allowed to grow to this level."

This should be fun. We should try to get our hands on only pirated copies so as not to put money into this clowns pockets.

My thoughts exactly!

boy

Is it possible that there could be two Bob Hieronimus on this planet? One a doctor and the other an idiot? For a good laugh go to this link, http://www.kalkorff.com/, and click on reviews and go the second review from the end.

Another fraud from Long?

Probably just another case of Boob Erroneous trying to get attention.

Actually, there ARE 2 Bob Heironimuses. The one we know about who claims to have been the creature in the P/G film, his last name is spelled H-E-I-ronimus. The doctor in question is a paranormal researcher, and his last name is spelled H-I-E-ronimus. By the way, he thinks Bob H-E-I-ronimus' claims are BS.

Thanks for the clarification...but I still think its like splitting hairs....

The new documentary by this bunch is now available at http://www.kalkorff.com in case you're interested.