|
Post by bigfoothunter on Aug 7, 2009 17:31:38 GMT -5
I see you back stabbing cowards are still at it, You better talk to my face from now on instead of on here, enough of your lies and bullnuts, Everyone knows your trying to make me look like a hoaxer, so you can move into my areas, Bill miller fat boy you better shut up fast, you dont even know me or know anything about me. Those pics have been studied by Nasa, and Scientist from russia, so keep on talking behind my back on your stupid site. Phone me Sebastion, I tried many times. You guys no nothing about Sasquatch. Mr. Brisson ... you are correct in saying that I do not know you, but I know enough to say that you should have kepts your hands out of your pockets on that day and not thrown any rocks. You were specifically being watched and when you thought no one was looking - you threw a rock and was seen several times doing so. I suspect that the reason you weren't confronted on the spot was so they could see just how far you were going to go with that nonsense. The people you were with that day were indeed smart enough not to expose to you what they were witnessing so to allow you to then say that you were just doing a one time harmless prank. By allowing you to carry on, they allowed you to hang yourself. As far as the pictures go ... I would love to see you post the so-called reports that NASA would have written to you because there must be a report if what you have said is true. I personally don't believe NASA would waste a second on such silliness. It's a solid rule of Physics that if the distance from the camera to fixed stationary locations increase, then all stationary objects withing the picture must also increase in size equally. This did not happen in your photos concerning the alleged Sasquatch head. It took less than five minutes for me to test this and create the example I posted to this forum. It should've taken NASA even less time to see it. The pictures were a fraud. The fact that you claimed to have taken both pictures, then the buck must stop with you and you alone. It's said that a picture is worth a thousand words - you say one thing and yet your photographs say something else. Like with the multiple rock throwing attempts ... you just didn't know when to stop. By offering a second photo from another location is all that was needed to run a simple test that would either make you or break you. I was merely the messenger. As far as my ever going into you area ... don't be silly. I was invited to join Steenburg and you on the day in question, but didn't bother wasting my time. There were no less than three to four people on-site that day, which was obviously more than enough to catch you in the act. Bill Miller Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
vilnoori
Really into this!
Bone Collector
Posts: 547
|
Post by vilnoori on Aug 7, 2009 20:37:35 GMT -5
I know I'm taking risks in getting into a fight between other people here, and I really don't know what went on, but I just want to point out that it is a common response from people that have rocks thrown AT them from the trees to pick up a rock and throw one back. I wonder if that is what hiker11 did and was filmed doing that, and then people jumped to conclusions? Unfortunately hiker11 isn't able to defend himself now. Just trying to give the guy the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
sebastian
Really into this!
Detective Gadget & Moderator
Posts: 512
|
Post by sebastian on Aug 7, 2009 22:46:37 GMT -5
First of all, there is no need to launch a personal attack on BFhunter, Hiker 11. It is extremely unacceptable in this forum. Given all information presented, Hiker 11, you have fabricated false evidence. Not only in this forum, you have also logged in as multiple persons on Youtube as well. In such case, you are simply trying to get people's attention and stay in the spotlight, that's all. Based on your behaviour, we simply cannot trust you.
Cameranut, there is no need to lie. We all know who's who in this field. I appreciate your research particularly on the Harrison area. But I don't agree with some of your interpretations of Sasquatch associating with paranormal activities, emitting eye glows, and telepathy etc. One simply cannot link one mystery to another. That's not how we try to solve problems. We all work with reductionist methods, not multiplying variables to another.
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Aug 8, 2009 9:21:21 GMT -5
I just want to point out that it is a common response from people that have rocks thrown AT them from the trees to pick up a rock and throw one back. I wonder if that is what hiker11 did and was filmed doing that, and then people jumped to conclusions? There have been several links posted to Brisson's trip in the bush as Bruce McDonald filmed the alleged action going on. I believe that they counted more than two dozen rocks that were thrown at them ... watch the video and tell us how many rocks did Brisson throw back into the forest ... I counted 'ZERO'! On the day in question it was the witnesses who saw Brisson throwing the initial stones ... not picking them up and throwing them back. Bill Miller Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Aug 8, 2009 10:52:06 GMT -5
Unfortunately hiker11 isn't able to defend himself now. Just trying to give the guy the benefit of the doubt. I understand your point vilnoori but it was facts that got Hiker 11 into trouble here.. Fact: Hiker 11 uses foul language and threats to get his points across! Fact: He has been banned from at least one other forum in the past year or so, for misrepresenting himself Fact: I find his behavior to be childish and non productive Fact: His ass is banned!
|
|
sebastian
Really into this!
Detective Gadget & Moderator
Posts: 512
|
Post by sebastian on Aug 9, 2009 18:19:00 GMT -5
Well, not done yet! From the Youtube's rock throwing video, here is the videographer's comment posted one hour ago:
"I will also step in and defend the credibiity of the Host Researcher in this video. He has been misjudged by a couple of online Bigfoot forums whom have jumped to conclusions about him being a hoaxer. I have heard both side of his story and am aware of circumstances surrounding recent evidence the host researcher has put forward. It's sad to see the self proclaimed "Bigfoot Authorities" shoot down great evidence, and good researchers, based on what I now know to be some very faulty analysis."
Please! There is no "Bigfoot Authorities" nor misjudgment. We simply reported what we observed. Thomas Steenburg and the others saw "the host" threw rock. Furthermore, based on the gif of the alleged "head behind stump" provided by Bigfoothunter, one can see the head didn't change size according to distance and camera angle.
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Aug 9, 2009 20:51:13 GMT -5
Well, not done yet! From the Youtube's rock throwing video, here is the videographer's comment posted one hour ago: "I will also step in and defend the credibiity of the Host Researcher in this video. He has been misjudged by a couple of online Bigfoot forums whom have jumped to conclusions about him being a hoaxer. He was not banned from here for being a hoaxer! He was banned for being an ass! What I think of that crew personally has nothing to do with anything! They are all welcome to equal time..providing that they are civil. Hiker 11 is not! Therefore he is gone! It is quite simple!
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Aug 10, 2009 2:54:37 GMT -5
How can some of these people research the Sasquatch when they can't keep facts straight that should be as easy to do as tracking a bloody elephant through a freshly fallen snow. That Youtube poster must be another one of Brisson's aliases or some cult-minded individual to think they have the real scoop on anything. As Steenburg said to me ... 'Brisson got caught and was seen throwing rocks.' So what part of 'seen throwing rocks' does this individual not understand?
It seems Brisson's latest story is that he was aware they all were there to set him up and I say ... If so, then why did he bother going out with these people? Why did he not say any of this in the week or so BEFORE I mentioned that they were watching Brisson very closely?? And when are some of those jokers going to man-up and admit that Brisson needs to take responsibility for his own actions???
And my final question is how thick must one be to continue emailing Steenburg as if looking for his support when Tom claims Brisson was caught in the act .... how ridiculous!
Bill Miller Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
|
Post by thomassteenburg on Aug 11, 2009 5:40:09 GMT -5
I agree Randy is a hell of a nice guy in person and I to like him a lot but there is one cardinal rule in this business which all, (non lunatic fringe) researchers take to heart. Never under any circumstances at any time do you hoax evidence. he broke that rule and was caught doing it. Therefore we can never trust him or anything he reports. Now I am sure He will carry on doing his own thing and he might even get a following of the gullible as Beckjord or Ivan Marks or Paul Freeman did. Freeman was a hell of a nice guy to and I liked him a lot but he was a hoaxer and he was never taken seriously again. It is even possible that some of Freeman's footprint evidence may have actually been Sasquatch in origin. Meldrum has had me scratching my head on some of his footprint evidence but the fact he hoaxed evidence as well and was caught doing it, and latter admitted to doing it, leads to the boy who cry ed wolf syndrome, and so resulted in all his evidence clouded in the black cloud of suspicion. Randy is a victim of his own actions and he has no one else but himself to blame. I also wonder about you since you posted reply#7 Aug 6th, 2009. at 9:44 p.m. in which you pretend to be someone else and have no knowledge of your own video. It didn't take to much detective work to see through that, and realize Trailrider and cameranut were one and the same person. That aside you don't need to worry about whether or not if we take Randy or anyone else, seriously, especially if you are seeing rocks out of nowhere moving on their own accord, perhaps you should be looking for poltergeists rather than a unclassified higher primate. But all the luck to you. As for being banded from this forum I don't think you need to worry, Randy also did that to himself by uttering threats and name calling, you have not done that. Gerry has no problem as long as you remain civil. I am sure Randy will be fine and he will soon have others whom will hang on his every word, After all Beckjord, Freeman and Marks have all passed away and their congregations are always on the lookout for a new wonder researcher whom cannot go anywhere with out Sasquatch throwing stones at him. Unseen of course.
Thomas Steenburg
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Aug 11, 2009 7:33:14 GMT -5
I've seen Brissons original images of the Sasquatch peeking over the stump. He fired off two quick shots without looking thru the viewfinder. The second shot shows only half the head as it's ducking back behind the stump. It was not included in MKs video. Both shots were taken from the same position in rapid fire, before Brisson bolted the scene I must point out that Tom Steenburg asked Brisson about the photos that Randy had emailed him and Randy said 'I took only three pictures ... the last one of the stump after the creature ducked behind it.' Now in your story there is more than the three photos involved here .... maybe you should get with Brisson and get your stories straight before going any further for it looks just as bad for someone to use a hoax to cover-up another hoax. You are aware that the second photo in MK's clip was taken from a different location than the first - right? With that being painfully obvious ... it doesn't support this diatribe you just posted to this site. So let me get this straight ... you were not there and the people who were there and saw Brisson throwing stones when he thought no one was looking was merely Randy swatting mosquitos ... is that the story you wish to tell? You and he have had two weeks to do damage control and this is the best that you can come up with?? And the rocks that were seen being thrown was what ... Brisson trying to hit the mosquitos with the rocks??? (I'm now wondering which is worse ... the rock throwing hoax and hoaxer or some one making up obvious ludicrous off the cuff stories to help try to salvage them both!) So you guys can hear stationary rocks move ... did any of them say anything to you as well ... (sigh~) It couldn't be from the fact that with your eye in the view-finder and with a limited field of view that you just didn't see some boob tossing a rock virtually straight up so to land near where you were. And believe me ... I'm being kind and giving you the benefit of the doubt because after your using alaises on Youtube ... I'm thinking you have become the Tom Biscardi of this whole affair. This observation is quite interesting for I am getting that same pungent smell in my nostrils as I am reading this nonsense. The only way a rock on that walk could hit any branches is if a tree was between you and Brisson. Randy would do better to get Baghdad Bob to do damage control on his behalf ... you've only hurt him more by offering a different version to his story than the one he gave and ruined yourself in the process. Amen! Bill Miller Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Aug 11, 2009 14:07:46 GMT -5
You either cannot or refuse to see the forest for the trees. I don't care if MK says there was 20 photos taken of the head .... Brisson told Steenburg there were only three taken - 1 of the stump - two with the head. Brisson went on to tell Tom the story of why he only took three photos.
So the point is that if we are to believe MK or you ... that makes Brisson out to be as liar ... is that what you call damage control! The entire fiasco was a sno-job and shame on anyone who tries to make excuses for it.
Bill Miller Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
|
Post by thomassteenburg on Aug 11, 2009 16:04:16 GMT -5
Your starting to loose it cameranut. Turn it down a degree or two. Your excuse for M.K. Davis still does not explain how every item in a second photo can increase in size in proportion to a change of position while only and I repeat only the head stays the same? The fact you have been suckered by a hoax is just something you are going to have to deal with. If Randy were to go into Golden ears park today and come across the body of a dead Sasquatch, Hurray! that still won't mean he was not caught hoaxing on July 21st 2009. Yes I was carrying a camera that day and no I did not film or photo a Sasquatch throwing stones, Nothing bigger than a golf ball so rock is a generous term. In fact nobody it appears on any of these trips ever see a Sasquatch throwing stones? I can only speak for July 21st 2009 when I saw Randy throw a stone. Just what sort of trap am I caught in?? Hurting my credibility?? I will put mine up against yours or anyones anytime you like. I wasn't the only person there with Randy on July 21st. Your own credibility, please. I have never assumed a false identity on any forum and pretended not to know anything of my own work. Of course I don't see rocks moving on there own accord ether. As for Bills credibility as a researcher anyone whom puts reality and common sense over hoaxing evidence, lunatic fringe garbage, and skipping down the yellow brick road, well lets just say that is the kind of researcher this mystery needs. The real sad fact is this whole fiasco, would have melted out of everyones interest by now if persons such as yourself would give up on the pathetic attempts at damage control. The ship has sunk, the iceberg is still there so your bailing bucket is moot.
Thomas Steenburg
|
|
|
Post by thomassteenburg on Aug 11, 2009 16:27:20 GMT -5
Don't need a paddle, got an outboard motor Thomas Steenburg
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Aug 11, 2009 17:53:54 GMT -5
I suggest that one of you contact MK Davis to verify how many unique images containing a complete Sasquatch head you are analyzing from his Brisson Encounter video. You will find that he posted one unique image in that category containing several versions of brightness and probably contrast. Video??? Maybe you should contact MK and find out where he got a video because Brisson's story to Steenburg was that he only took three photos ... NO MENTION OF ANY VIDEO!!! Again, Brisson claimed he took three (3) photos ... not a film. You are now the first to mention anything about his photos being stills from a video. This proclaimation would also make Brisson out to be a liar, so would you like to check your facts before going any further and please in mind that I am only sharing the story Brisson told, so blame him if you disagree and believe he shot a film instead. As Steenburg pointed out, as well as most everyone who has seen the two images, the background rotated behind the stump which can only mean that Brisson changed photo locations. Simple scaling an image differently CANNOT ... I repeat CANNOT rotate the background. It's now a mute point you are bothering to publicly analyze Randy's images using the MK Davis Youttube version when Steenburg has copies of the original.As I posted before ... I saw the images Brisson had emailed Steenburg and used those images when doing my comparison. The Youtube images were a joke as they were not clear as they changed from one to the other. I used Brisson's emailed images to Steenburg to create the slowed version. In those images the stump changed distances from the camera, but not because of a scaling difference in just one image, but because it was a second photo taken from a differewnt location and that is the sole reason the background shifts so dramatically. Furthermore as Tom mentioned ... the head stayed the same size in both images, thus defies any notion that a mere scaling change was done between two images of the same photo. I think Tom was talking about your pretending to be someone else by asking questions about a third parties video when in fact it was you behind the camera. So asking members of this forum where the Brisson video was taken was to solicit what information again. Your response makes no sense to me, Steenburg, or anyone else who has followed this ridiculous fiasco. [quoteRandy is not a computer rock star, so the accusation he is mastering photoshopped hoax images is way off base. [/quote] Brisson knows the difference between still photos and taking a video - right??? You have only made Brisson's story look even more fabricated. Bill Miller Bigfoot Field Research
|
|
|
Post by lorelei on Aug 11, 2009 17:56:48 GMT -5
Wow, not much else to say here, it is entertaining though, Thomas and Bill in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
|
|