"Known Hoaxer"
By: Dan
Lindholm
I post a lot of
things from lots of different researchers. One thing that I can almost always
depend on, is somebody commenting that this post is from a “known hoaxer.”
Where do these accusations come from? Do they come from someone else’s Facebook
posts or comments? Do they come from a Para Breakdown or Team Tazer video? It’s
almost always because someone has heard somewhere that it’s a hoax, usually on
this most extraordinary source of indisputable facts, the internet.
There is one known
hoaxer in this community. Everyone knows that the 2008 hoax by Rick Dyer was
indeed a total and complete hoax. That one despicable act by one despicable
character was the onset of a cancer in this community. A shadow of doubt is
cast from that moment, on EVERYTHING. This time around a lot of people were
smart enough to discount Rick’s claims immediately, but some of us had enough
trust in humanity to give him a chance and think that people can change.
Unfortunately, some people will never change and Rick Dyer will always be a
hoaxer and a con man. This new episode has bolstered our mistrust in humanity.
A bit of skepticism
over individual pieces of evidence is a very good thing, but this blanket of
mistrust over all research is anti-productive and does nothing at all to
advance the cause of learning about the Sasquatch and documenting evidence. Just
about every researcher has been called a hoaxer. Timbergiant Bigfoot, Sasquatch
Ontario, Dr. Melba Ketchum, Tim Fasano, Stacy Brown Jr., Dr. Matthew Johnson, Todd
Standing, Arla Williams, Adrian Erickson, Mitchell Waite, Dan Shirley, Ronald
Murphy, Mark Parra, Justin Smeja, Eric Douglas, Bobby Woods and even very
respectable men like Derek Randles and Cliff Barackman have been called
hoaxers. Many times the people who are calling other researchers hoaxers are
the researchers themselves. Somehow they feel that they are the only legitimate
researchers out there and if they can’t find good solid evidence, then no one
else can either. Whether it be petty jealousy, or retaliation from the others
claims, or actually studying the work and seeing flaws in it, they are
sometimes very vocal and in my opinion, only doing harm to themselves by openly
calling out other researchers.
Everyone who delves
into this subject and finds themselves in the public eye are putting their own
personal reputations on the line. Without exception, these people have
struggled with the reality that they will risk their integrity and sanity being
questioned for doing Sasquatch research. Being called a hoaxer and a liar is no
doubt the very last thing they want when starting this journey. The Dyer cancer
eventually effects all of them. A very common comment would be “I heard he’s a
hoaxer,” or “why do you post from a known hoaxer?” My question to all of you
would be, “who says he/she is a known hoaxer?” Rick Dyer is a known Hoaxer.
Beyond him, I know of no other researcher that has been proven to be a hoaxer.
Sure, there are a lot of people with less than favorable opinions of some of
them, but that doesn’t make a “known hoaxer” in my eyes.
I must admit, I
myself have fallen into this trap and have determined in my own mind, from the
evidence presented, that Mark Anders is a hoaxer. I have publically stated it,
and have given my reasons for my determination, but I still have no proof that
he’s a hoaxer. His clear, close, out in the open Bigfoot pics were all taken in
locations from Texas to Oklahoma to Santa Cruz and Klamouth (Klamath) and look
like they’re all the same rented suit filmed in the same location. The misspelling
of the location I sited above was also a big red flag for me. But I have no
definitive proof of my claims, just an opinion and I could be wrong.
In the end, there’s
only one known hoaxer to date. Calling someone a hoaxer is an especially low
blow to these people who have invested their time, money and reputations
researching the Sasquatch. Many of us including myself have had personal
encounters. We know that these creatures exist. It’s not a big stretch to think
that some of these researchers are successfully documenting real evidence. From
Todd Standings still photos to Dr. Ketchum’s paper to Erickson’s Matilda
footage, there’s no evidence of fraud. There’s no evidence to support the term “known
hoaxer.” If you have examined the evidence and come to the conclusion that it
just doesn’t add up for you personally, that’s fine. In that case, go ahead and
tell people that it’s your opinion that this or that person is a hoaxer. Make
sure to add those three little words though, “in my opinion.” Throwing out terms
like “known hoaxer” only applies to one despicable character and it’s a
misrepresentation to apply that term to anyone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment