If You Cannot Trust The BFRO What Are Your Options?

Diane Stocking Neiss in her interview with Rictor Rioli, see  previous posting, confirmed what I had heard from several sources before.  However, Stocking Neiss was in a high enough position at the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO) to confirm what was said ~and add to revelations.

It has been claimed that BFRO leader, Matt Moneymaker asked those going out on field trips to fake evidence. This was claimed by others but Stocking Neiss is a respected researcher and was in a position to confirm this. Fake field evidence.

It was also claimed by others that the online BFRO sightings catalogue, used by many for statistical analysis and to look for trends in sightings, contained fake reports. In fact, when I tried to do this for my second book, Some More Things Strange and Sinister, I had a problem in that some things did not make sense and I was positive that I was doing something wrong. Which seemed odd enough. Stocking Neiss confirms that Matt Moneymaker openly added fake cases to the online catalogue. Fake Evidence.

Then there was the fact that locations given as having "high Bigfoots activity" did not.

But why? "To keep the BFRO on top" to be the Bigfoot Research organization for the simple reason that Moneymaker intended to make money from the subject.  And he is. No one really cares about re~staging scenes in a programme identified as being for entertainment purposes. That is TV.

Here is the thing. The BFRO and Moneymaker are the public faces of Bigfoot research. The BFRO boasts of its scientific approach.  Sorry, when Moneymaker states that a Bigfoot can create "bioluminescence" in its eyes to communicate in the dark he is joining Matthew Johnson.

If you run a scientific organization and tell your people to fake evidence on field trips (and they do!) then you are no longer a credible scientific oprganization.

If in your "scientific" organizations online (public) statistics you add fake information you are not credible.

If you fake reported activity then you are not credible.

Just one of the above could ~would~ destroy an accepted scientific organization. All three....well, I am sorry but if you have any connection with the BFRO you are tainted. Who is going to believe anything you find or report?

The BFRO will be removed from the blog list.

Lies? Well, why has Moneymaker and the BFRO sued ~if it's all lies then they could win massive legal damages?  Because it is true.

M. K. Davis and his analysis of the Patterson~Gimlin film has been used on UK TV. The assumption was always that Davis was some type of scientist or expert in photo~analysis.  Apparently he is neither.  TV companies do not do their research into people ~they just need something to pad out an episode. In the UK and beyond we can only go by what we have filter through.

I know that Rictor Rioli offends a great many people, sometimes, perhaps, he does go too far, but he makes no claims about his show being anything other than fun and entertainment.  However, if you are wondering who is trustworthy and who isn't in Bigfoot research ~it's the place to go.  Rictor After Dark is an excellent podcast and I have learnt a great deal from it ~including finding out that one investigator who appeared in Monster Quest is fdar, far more credible than the programme showed (Steve Kulls).

Why do real investigators and researchers do their work in private and not get involved in You Tube or on Face Book or even Bigfoot message boards? Rictor shows you why!

But in~fighting, bigotry and worse is not just in Bigfoot 'research',

It runs throughout Cryptozoology, 'Fortean research', 'Ufology' and more.  It is why Science will never take these fields seriously.  Faking, lying...don't get me wrong, either.  I have cooperated with several academics who always stated that in their line of work there was a "professional code of ethics" they had to abide by...they took what they wanted and then cut off all communications (and in one case I lost around £250 worth of rare books).

Look at the ways to gather scientifically accepted evidence and DNA material and how to store and not contaminate it. Prepare your report including any analysis results or photographic evidence. Run off copies and send to the necessary science publications or experts who have been involved in the subject. You send out multiple copies because that way someone who is a "name" cannot claim it as their work.

It is the only real way because there is no credible Bigfoot organization (or organization on any of the other subjects(.

Keep a level head and learn who you can trust.