Hi all, just wanted to know peoples opinons on this subject?
Heres a link from Bigfoot forums
http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php? ... m+biscardi
Do you think something like this is bad for the real and honest researchers out there?
And if so how?
Tom Biscardi
-
nature-man77
- Approved Member
- Posts: 13
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 1:14 am
- Location: Bendigo Victoria
Tom Biscardi
There are things known and things unknown and in between are the doors
Jim Morrison
Jim Morrison
-
Romeo
- Silver Status
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:38 am
- Location: Ormeau
- Contact:
Nature-Man,
Thanks for the link. I didn't even know this had occurred.
The poor bloke really does seem to do himself over in the interview. But if somebody wants to claim something like this, it goes without saying that there has to be some hard evidence.
I don't think this will have a negaative result on the work of honest researchers. Like 'Kimble' said in the forum:
"...If anything, it has galvanised those who are considered real hunters and researchers."
The hardworking and honest people who invest a lot of time and effort into researching the topic know that just because some gimp says he has caught a Bigfoot and is proven to be a liar, doesn't neccisarily mean that Bigfoot does not exist.
As for the bloke who says it was him in the Patterson footage, who else can say it was?
I think that everone has an opinion on this film, and not all of them are going to be the same. Who's right? Maybe it was him. Maybe it wasn't. But let the fact be known that any goose can say they dressed up like a monkey.
Thanks for the link. I didn't even know this had occurred.
The poor bloke really does seem to do himself over in the interview. But if somebody wants to claim something like this, it goes without saying that there has to be some hard evidence.
I don't think this will have a negaative result on the work of honest researchers. Like 'Kimble' said in the forum:
"...If anything, it has galvanised those who are considered real hunters and researchers."
The hardworking and honest people who invest a lot of time and effort into researching the topic know that just because some gimp says he has caught a Bigfoot and is proven to be a liar, doesn't neccisarily mean that Bigfoot does not exist.
As for the bloke who says it was him in the Patterson footage, who else can say it was?
I think that everone has an opinion on this film, and not all of them are going to be the same. Who's right? Maybe it was him. Maybe it wasn't. But let the fact be known that any goose can say they dressed up like a monkey.
Sometimes, 'The Majority' only means that all the fools are on the same side.