|
|
Post by hbsquatchmay14 on Mar 30, 2014 0:50:27 GMT -5
And it now looks like Jeff Meldrum has hitched his star to Standing, given that he claims he had a Class-A sighting in Alberta last year with Standing. Oy!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason C. on Mar 30, 2014 12:14:42 GMT -5
And it now looks like Jeff Meldrum has hitched his star to Standing, given that he claims he had a Class-A sighting in Alberta last year with Standing. Oy!!! Please provide a reference (i.e. hyperlink) |
|
|
|
Post by hbsquatchmay14 on Mar 30, 2014 15:09:06 GMT -5
Meldrum said this on his Facebook page when he was asked about his association with Standing: Don Jeffrey Meldrum "I think I have explained myself already. Todd invited me up to the field to have a look at what he is doing. I decided to give him a chance and went. I was impressed by what he had to show me. I am agnostic on some points, but have experienced some things that compell me to want to investigate further. He has the means to get at this in a significant way and his motives seem quite genuine. I am looking forward to working with him and Les (Stroud)." Plus they are doing a radio show together and a project which involves a documentary ( www.bigfootnorth.com ) Here is a report where Meldrum says he saw something when he was in Alberta last year with Standing: www.bigfootbuzz.net/did-dr-jeff-meldrum-have-a-class-a-sighting/ Hope all this helps. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason C. on Mar 30, 2014 20:32:02 GMT -5
Meldrum said this on his Facebook page when he was asked about his association with Standing: Don Jeffrey Meldrum "I think I have explained myself already. Todd invited me up to the field to have a look at what he is doing. I decided to give him a chance and went. I was impressed by what he had to show me. I am agnostic on some points, but have experienced some things that compell me to want to investigate further. He has the means to get at this in a significant way and his motives seem quite genuine. I am looking forward to working with him and Les (Stroud)."  Reference: www.facebook.com/don.j.meldrumNo comment. I haven't seen where Meldrum is taking credit for this being HIS radio show and HIS project. It looks like Standing is trying to create social proof of this being a joint project. I could be wrong, but either way if I was Meldrum I would steer clear of Standing. There is no report from Meldrum at the link you provided. The link you gave links to Robert Lindsay's blog and ends there. Lindsay is the one saying Meldrum saw something. Lindsay goes on to say that it had to be a sasquatch. It's all hearsay. As an aside, I appreciate your posts here and glad you are participating. As I am sure you have seen we are a very skeptical and facts-based group of people -- and we welcome others --- just dig a little deeper to provide the sources, links and facts for your posts. It saves us time, frustration and keeps us on the straight and narrow! Respectfully, Jason |
|
billr
Really into this!
Posts: 856
|
Post by billr on Mar 31, 2014 2:18:35 GMT -5
Well I watched part two tonight and I didn't find it that bad
I just think that Les puts too much thought into the stick structures and too much credence in the videos that Standing provided
I wonder who the four self proclaimed sasquatch experts were that he stated dismissed Standings video as a hoax were
|
|
|
|
Post by westerncanadian on Apr 3, 2014 19:36:45 GMT -5
It seems the sasquatch world is off its axis. Meldrum doing a radio show with Standing, Les Stroud out in the field with the same guy. When you hoax, and even if it is on just one occasion, you are disqualified from the realms of credibility unless you repent and work under the aegis and supervision of others in the field so that you don't do it again. With the blinking sasquatch Standing has show he is unrepentant. Forget about nice guys, we're looking for truth here. If you have lied, deceived, cheated or hoaxed, I don't care how nice you are, you are finished.
To me it is rank insanity that Meldrum especially has fallen for this niceness thing. Standing's dirty work speaks for himself and anyone who gets involved with him could be tainted in such a way as to never be washed off.
Stroud obviously doesn't know anything about Standing's past and that is sad. Now the sasquatch realm is going to think that because Standing has street cred with bonafide sasquatch investigators. The general public watching this crap will think that we are all like Standing. This is why the sasquatch realm suffers from credibility (present company on this forum excepted) by aligning themselves for whatever reason to kooks and hoaxers. Sorry Jeff, but it seems you have decided to learn the hard way what consorting with a hoaxer will do to you. I will not watch or listen to any of this bovine fecal matter.
|
|
billr
Really into this!
Posts: 856
|
Post by billr on Apr 3, 2014 20:58:44 GMT -5
I was very disappointed to learn that Meldrum has agreed to work with Standing
I always thought that I would immediately contact Bindernagle (sp?) and Meldrum if I had a body
Now I think it may just be Bindernagle
I have a high degree of respect for the researchers that call this forum home, as I think that we all feel the same way about hoaxing and hoaxers
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason C. on Apr 4, 2014 1:24:36 GMT -5
It seems the sasquatch world is off its axis. Meldrum doing a radio show with Standing, Les Stroud out in the field with the same guy. It has been off its axis since the beginning. As a matter of fact, one of my favorite quotes is attributed to you John... Bigfoot's Reflection Trailer #1That Sasquatch/UFO crap is no different then the "forest people" habitation crap that is going on currently. I don't believe in repentance or forgiving those who do hoax. In 25 years, I won't be able to move around the bush like I do. I know my time is finite, therefore I won't associate with people that waste it or can't be trusted. You are right John. We are searching for truth, and people like Standing are muddying the waters. Hoaxers are the biggest obstacle to getting REAL scientists involved in the search. I don't mean to minimize his behavior. Quite simply they are becoming an accomplice to criminal fraud. He is charging people money to see his fraudulent videos. Standing is knowingly committing a crime. Stroud knew! He admits it in the second episode that Standing is known as a hoaxer. |
|
|
|
Post by bigfoothunter on Apr 6, 2014 6:49:26 GMT -5
I am pretty pissed off about the whole thing. The second part was terrible! Much worse than the first episode. All I could do is wonder why Standing wanted to take Survivorman on a 14 miles hike up a mountain when Standing has said he crawled only two miles up a creek to get close to Sasquatch. |
|
|
|
Post by Jason C. on Apr 6, 2014 11:43:32 GMT -5
All I could do is wonder why Standing wanted to take Survivorman on a 14 miles hike up a mountain when Standing has said he crawled only two miles up a creek to get close to Sasquatch. Good point! Standing was serving up exactly what Stroud was wanting. "Need 24 hours of footage? Let's go on a two day hike." A 10 minute hike to the EXACT spot he filmed "Broadway" (also known as the Cats version) would have been less interesting. Standing (like most liars) can't keep his story straight. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2014 1:01:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Jason C. on Apr 9, 2014 19:49:18 GMT -5
Not sure why you guy's seem 100% sure that Standing is a hoaxer, He has not changed his story or admitted to anything like Dyer has. Are you kidding?!! STANDING is a hoaxer period. The "sasquatches" in his videos look completely different from one another as outlined in Bill Miller's previous post in this thread. How the hell can that be so? Not to mention they never blink in the original footage. And when he was called on that, he introduces a new video showing an animatron that blinks, and once again looks different than the previous ones. In addition all he has are "headshots". There is never a clear, visible moving body. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 9, 2014 23:29:04 GMT -5
Not sure why you guy's seem 100% sure that Standing is a hoaxer, He has not changed his story or admitted to anything like Dyer has. Are you kidding?!! STANDING is a hoaxer period. The "sasquatches" in his videos look completely different from one another as outlined in Bill Miller's previous post in this thread. How the hell can that be so? Not to mention they never blink in the original footage. And when he was called on that, he introduces a new video showing an animatron that blinks, and once again looks different than the previous ones. In addition all he has are "headshots". There is never a clear, visible moving body. You seem rather sure on this subject, so i will leave it at that. Cheers But here are cool links showing Todd is growing in his field, he seems to be impressing the PHd's (the educated ones) and hard core survivalists like Stroud. www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eMklx6ubU4www.voiceamerica.com/episode/77062/tvs-survivorman-les-stroud-and-the-search-for-bigfoot |
|
|
|
Post by Jason C. on Apr 10, 2014 21:10:41 GMT -5
But here are cool links showing Todd is growing in his field, he seems to be impressing the PHd's (the educated ones) and hard core survivalists like Stroud. Thanks Randy Todd. |
|
Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
Post by Richard on Apr 10, 2014 22:45:21 GMT -5
Randy, Although I have never met Todd myself, I find his stories quite far fetched at times, and overtly dramatic. Sadly in this field, once you are labeled as a hoaxer it can never be undone. It seems in the past Todd has hoaxed more than one "event", and thus the general distrust for him as a researcher. Also, just because he impressed someone who holds a PhD, does not in any way shape nor form prove that he is genuine, it only shows that even people with advanced degrees can be fooled just as easily as the next person. To put it bluntly, if 1/2 of what Todd claims is authentic, then was should have indisputable and reproducible proof the Bigfoot exist - since we do not have that proof, logic would dictate that he does not have the proof, thus is lying and a hoaxer. Please prove me wrong! Richard |
|
