Sasquatch Coffee


Moneymaker Speaks Out About Finding Bigfoot: “Swamp Ape”

Posted by: Loren Coleman on June 6th, 2011

Matt Moneymaker has passed along this as his comment to the posting about the new episode of Finding Bigfoot.  I (Loren Coleman) am posting it below, unedited, as usual, out-of-fairness to Matt:

As usual, we didn’t hoax anything. There was some creative editing involved which we didn’t know about until last night. It was almost as frustrating for me to watch it as was to be there at the time, resisting all their attempts for us to outright fake everything. The witnesses were legit, and at least the knocks heard at the Bridges property where legit. They did get a good recording of that. They were unprepared to record the other sounds around the property though … and again they didn’t really care because they knew it would simply be easier to insert “simulations” later.

We never told the producers that sasquatches sleep in alligators dens either. They must have heard someone mention that as a possibility and they thought it sounded colorful. The whole notion of it is bogus and stupid. Again, it’s not our call. They are keeping all that kinda stuff secret from us before the show airs.

The producers do not see integrity as their mission. They see entertainment as their mission, and they figure that folks like you people are less than 1% of the audience … so they really don’t care if you feel like you’ve been manipulated and deceived. Moreover, they don’t seem to care if the cast members feel manipulated and deceived either. They figure all we be forgiven if the show gets high ratings. Well, it won’t be.

There’s all sorts of things they did that I don’t like. You folks don’t even know the half of it. If you want to read more I’ll be posting things on the BFRO’s Blue Forum. Cliff will write up his version, but he wasn’t present for some of the action, and vice versa. We were split up into separate teams.

Craig W. will pass along what Cliff posts, and he has my permission to pass along what we say on the Blue Forum.

I gotta say this here: I read some VO lines (transitional explanations) which used the words “overwhelming evidence” at some point … I was reading those out loud the first time I saw the copy, to hear how all the lines sounded to my own ears, before even reading it through quietly the first time. After hearing myself say the “overwhelming evidence” line I stopped and said we can’t use that line because it’s simply not “overwhelming evidence”. I told them to re-record the line with me saying “a collection of evidence”. They recorded it my way and I told them to use that version instead, and not the version of me saying “overwhelming evidence”. But what did they do???

All I can say is that a whole lot of things are going to change before we shoot more episodes with them.Matt Moneymaker

About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct). Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013.


43 Responses to “Moneymaker Speaks Out About Finding Bigfoot: “Swamp Ape””

  1. loyalfromlondon responds:

    The proverbial “Be careful what you wish for” in full effect.

    I don’t think anyone needs to worry about a Season Two. Not Matt, not BFRO, not Animal Planet, not Ping Pong Productions.

  2. Redrose999 responds:

    Thank you Matt,

    I appreciate you keeping us updated and can’t imagine how frustrated you and your fellow BFRO members must be feeling. I do hope something good comes out of this in the end. Good luck in dealing with the production and editing staff of Discovery.

    Perhaps you and your team can hand Discovery some better questions with answers based on your research rather than them coming up with silly ones. Or is this another thing you can’t control?

  3. slick1ru2 responds:

    Well, I’m glad that the methane factoid wasn’t coming from BFRO. Perhaps a clause that BFRO gets final approval next time?

  4. springheeledjack responds:

    Ratings are everything…

    However, it ticked me off to no end on the last segment when Bobo caught the heat blip in the distance and Matt walked up toward it. There was no footage of the “creature” running into the woods, so we as viewers have no idea of how it moved, whether it was two legged, four, etc.

    There had to have been footage–the camera was on it the entire time. So why was that omitted?

  5. dermal_ridges_are_proof responds:

    Matt’s the real deal!
    There’s no mistaking sincerity when you hear it!

  6. mandors responds:

    Kind of sad. People finally getting up and saying “Hey, what’s going on here with this bigfoot/sasquatch thing? –Let’s investigate and find out.” Instead of just sitting and accepting ignorance.

    Still, it’s TV. There’s going to be some level of sleaze. You just have to expect it.

  7. Craig Woolheater responds:

    springheeledjack,

    Cliff addressed the thermal footage here on Cryptomundo.

  8. RWRidley responds:

    No offense to MM, but it’s not a great sign when you have to set the record straight after each episode. I don’t know any of the players involved, so I haven’t drawn any conclusions about them, but I will say that Ping Pong Productions may have misread the desires of the Bigfoot community and enthusiasts. It’s not that we want to see any old show about Bigfoot. We want to see an honest depiction of sightings and evidence in order to separate the wheat from chaff. We’d all prefer substance over style, but that goes against the nature of reality TV. Maybe we’re expecting too much from the world of entertainment.

  9. j stewart responds:

    Wow. I am so glad to see this response from Matt. If we would have had this sort of response from him on the first episode I feel we would have avoided all the drama. That being said, I must say Matt is a lawyer and as such you would think he would have been on top of the contract terms and conditions which he and his team had to sign. I do feel that the show has painted Matt and his team in a bad light but he has done little to help his case by the way he responded to critiques on this site. Matt must understand the face that is presented to the public of he and his BFRO is how he and they will be judged. Even if the misleading and misrepresentation is not directly done by he or his group. How the aftermath is handled also says volumes about the man and the group as a whole. I must still pose questions.

    If you know the statement you are reading into a microphone and is being recorded is not true then why are you saying it? If the production team constantly is directing you to LIE, HOAX and FABRICATE. Wouldn’t you put a halt to your involvement until you got this cleared up? They can’t film it if you don’t do it.

    Seems the bright lights and TV cameras may have blinded the eyes and dulled the senses and allowed the wrong influence to dictate the flow and ethics of the show. I wish to avoid the flurry of insults and overly hostile diatribe we had in the past so I will close with this. The show has not only shown us the True colors of the BFRO but AP as well. Not only should we be questioning the ethics of the BFRO but those of the company that has pushed the BFRO into such questionable acts. So far from what has come to light the biggest crime that Matt and his team may be guilty of is poor judgment.

  10. Redrose999 responds:

    @ j stewart

    Well said. But it is easy to be mislead into these sorts of situation when dealing with the media. How many thoughtful Bigfoot hunters have been interviewed by the press in an intelligent thoughtful way, and when the segment aired, it hass been edited into making them sound like loons? Even the most “expert” of people can be made to look like fools with the right cuts and lines. I find it really sad that the media seems to go out of the way to make anything in Cryptozoology research look like a side show joke.

  11. dharkheart responds:

    RWRidley is correct. Why should full disclosure be a problem? A program that can truthfully chronolog a series of events as they happen, or happened, will curry far more favor from an audience than one which panders to sensational drivel.

  12. MountDesertIslander responds:

    You can’t hold Matt M. responsible for what Ping Pong and Animal Planet decide to do with their product. It must be embarrassing to sit through the episode knowing that there will be much to answer for (especially so, if it’s not your fault).

    The only thing Matt has to answer for is the attitude he brings to these and other boards. We are, after all, on the same side of the debate.

    I actually liked the presentation and the characters featured on the show. I just don’t like being played by the production company. There is no excuse for such outright deceit.

  13. Kahil responds:

    Matt’s words here in reality mean very little. He is backtracking. His reactions and defense of what was in the first episode don’t coincide with what he is saying now.

    If the production company/Animal Planet is altering events against their knowledge, then Matt and his team does have legal recourse. If they go into filming thinking and expecting one thing, and then when it airs it shows drastic changes, alterations, fake add ins, etc…then they can sue. The only way they wouldn’t have any legal recourse is if Matt and his team in fact were on board with everything. Meaning they are actively faking evidence or they signed away ALL rights and ALL creative control over their image. If they did that, then they are fools. If someone is misrepresenting you then you fight back, you don’t jump to their defense.

    Sorry, but it is too late for Matt Moneymaker and BFRO to save face. Any reputations they had as bigfoot researchers is lost. They have quickly moved into the same category as the so called “experts” who claimed to have a bigfoot carcass…which was just a frozen suit. They also in part have damaged the reputation of cryptozoologists. Since they have a national audience that now knows evidence is faked, other cryptozoologists are going to find it that much more difficult to be taken seriously within the scientific field.

  14. planettom responds:

    Well said by Matt, and thanks for sharing Loren. Puts things in to more of a clear perspective of the manipulation by the editing of the show. Love the behind the scenes information.

  15. gridbug responds:

    Two words: “Caveat Emptor”. I suspect that Matt Moneymaker was so geeked on the idea of getting his own show that he figured he’d be able to finesse it with his own winning personality and expertise. Sadly, this was not the case.

  16. fuzzy responds:

    Manipulations, falsifications and omissions like these make one look at the entire array of AP and DISCOVERY Productions with a critically jaundiced eye… and suspicion can only damage their credibility.

    The BFRO might consider assembling REAL videos of a season’s REAL Expeditions (like the ones they are hosting this summer) into a REAL Documentary, warts and all, as REAL evidence of what it takes to gather REAL data on this elusive animal.

    Everyone gets excited as a Squatcher walks slowly towards the tall vertical figure on the thermal screen, only to hear, “Oh rats -it’s only a horse!”, when it turns and moves to the woods. They might be disappointed, but they would learn about the challenge of interpreting ambiguous images on a tiny screen, and viewers would pay intense attention to the next image they examine, in the hope that it may show the REAL cryptid they are looking for!

    OR – EQUALLY POSSIBLE…

    The tall vertical figure steps slowly forward to meet with the Squatcher, revealing its huge size in comparison to the human… viewers may hear on radio and witness on nightvision & thermal screens an interchange between the two that could signify the beginning of man’s new relationship with this cautious creature!

    Let’s get REAL!

  17. NWesterner responds:

    This statement seems like a sea change in how he acted before. Its hard for me to buy this, because it is a 180 degree turn from the aggressive belligerence he displayed about the first episode when responding to the questions. Now apparently he is admitting things aren’t on the level and he is the victim. Hard to swallow, in any case its been an interesting saga to follow. I guess any publicity is good publicity in a sense for this topic, so it can’t be all bad.

  18. Mïk responds:

    The fact is: The shows are in the can, or. at least, in the hands of the production company, so what we’re seeing is what we’re gonna see. You cannot spend a weekend taping a show of this kind and expect to get good footage or evidence. It has been tried with ghosts, cryptids, and random events of all kinds and found wanting

    Maybe the subject should be approached as a case file, showing various evidence and events surrounding one issue. Like, follow the Bridges’ swamp ape in different ‘hunts’, compiling data into a show. The footage of the ‘hunts’ and details of the crews could be entertaining in itself. Think of that, Matt. It’s how your website shows its cases, why not start your own production and show what needs to be shown, the Truth.

  19. Dr Kaco responds:

    Thank you Mr. Moneymaker for the explanations.
    Thank you Loren for posting these as well.

  20. Steven Eric Titchenell via Facebook responds:

    I’m not so sure the “witnesses” were legit. A 17″ track for something almost everyone agrees is smaller than the more northern Bigfoot?

  21. bobosquatch responds:

    Everything Matt said is true. We’re getting screwed. You people have no idea how much Matt and I fought with the producers to have any legitimacy on this show. Unfortunately they were “rewarded” with huge ratings despite the glaring problems with they way they are shooting and editing it. They only care about ratings, but they are going to crash if they keep putting crap like this out. I said it was horse early in the thermal clip from Florida. It was weird how it would look like a person or a squatch from certain angles. The sound that came up on Ranae, I ended up filming, and it was an armadillo. Please write to discovery/animal planet and make the complaints there. They’ll never see them here. Sorry to all of the squatchers that are bummed out on how they’re doing it. I assure it isn’t us.

    bobo

  22. Macleod responds:

    I am in canada and not sure if we are even getting this show, but this “creative editing” nonsense is a real turn off. Don’t think i will be making any extra effort to find and PVR it.

  23. riverguy responds:

    I’ve been visiting Cryptomundo off and on for years, but I just signed up for an account, because I figured I’d stop just rolling my eyes from the hyper-critical comments about this “Finding Bigfoot” show and give my .02 cents.

    Matt wrote that Animal Planet is not making a show for 1% of the audience (“us”). And, I happen to think that Matt was being generous giving “us” 1% when in reality “us” is probably a microscopic fraction of 1 percent of Discovery’s Animal Planet audience.

    However, I do think that “us” 1% should be grateful to finally have a SERIES on our subject. Not a single show, not a single documentary, not a YouTube video of the month, but an actual SERIES. Hello.

    I also think its pretty gracious for Matt to give “behind the scenes” information. It seems he’s doing so at the risk of alienating his Employers which allow him to provide “us” this series. And, it seems to me that Matt doesn’t owe “us” any explanation. And, one of Craig W’s links pointed to the personal website of Cliff Barackman that has add’l “behind the scenes” commentary – this guy may possibly be the best Bigfoot Researcher in the field today. I can’t find a website for Bobo, so if any body knows if he has one, please post it!

    I think many (not all) of the critiques of Finding Bigfoot on this site have been unfair. If anybody thinks that any show that Loren Coleman has been on did not have creative editing, took creative license or edited audio in post production without his approval or knowledge — then you are fooling yourself. NOBODY is above reproach on TV. It’s show biz.

    There are also those that are apparent experts at Entertainment Law that keep assuming ‘how the legal contracts work’ – really??
    Plus there’s a few that had their *sses handed to them by MM a few posts ago and desperately trying to state that the show has ‘lost all integrity’ and no chance of a second season. Well, they seem to be the ultimate viewers, because they’ve commented on every episode, and posted on nearly every cryptomundo blog post so far about this show. I saw a review that “Finding Bigfoot” had the largest number of viewers for any Premier in the history of any Animal Planet show. So, get real and move on. Animal Planet knew they had a world wide hit on their hands the morning after the sneak peek. You are going to have to get your revenge against MM for hurting your feelings another way.

    There are many moving parts at work, so let’s not scare MM away from the dialogue here. There’s Animal Planet, Discovery, MM and Team, the Audience, “us”, the Producers, the Editors, etcetera, etcetera. If we really want a show for “us” then MM and Team are the ones to fight to get it right.

    I guess what I wanted to say, is that let’s just be happy that we have a Series about our Hairy Friends. Sheesh. The show is cool, the people are great, and they’re pledging to make the show better and better. Let’s give them a little break.

  24. Opalman responds:

    If Matt Moneymaker actually follows through with his threat/promise of:

    “All I can say is that a whole lot of things are going to change before we shoot more episodes with them.”

    Then I will be glad to applaud him for his effort, at least, to end the kind of shenanigans the Animal Planet producers are perpetrated on the viewing public. I find it very difficult to believe though that someone as seemingly well traveled as Moneymaker could expect anything other than the treatment he and the topic got in the “Finding Bigfoot” series.

    I had much to say on the subject of unscrupulous broadcasting and bogus research in my first post since signing up at Cryptomundo; (this is my second), but apparently the word “Idiot” is forboden on this site, as my post was significantly edited.

    (Your post was edited per the terms of use of the site regarding your use of the word idiot.)

    Understandably like many of you commenters here, I am truly outraged by the lack of broadcasting ethics displayed by the Animal Planet producers, (and other like programs). As well; self proclaimed “Bigfoot researchers” have become a dime a dozen, but I can name but a few true scientists / researchers seriously interested in the subject. Frankly I’m surprised good men like Prof. Meldrum haven’t already pulled all their hair out.

    Even more frustrating is the treatment of the Sasquatch problem by the mainstream scientific community. Its refusal to mount an unbiased, concerted, multi-discipline research program weighted by the inclusion and direction of “gifted woodsmen / guides” i.e. guides with a lifetime of bush experience in the particular geographical areas being explored is shameful. There is such a huge body of believable anecdotal evidence to not pursue this matter.
    I have and will continue to shout it out at every opportunity—if you want to find irrefutable proof of Sasquatch—leave your bloody trail cams and other high tech electronics at home”! Any electronics tech worth his salt will readily agree; all electronic devices contain circuits that create electromagnetic oscillations—many of which are well outside the range of human hearing. I maintain that these oscillations are readily discernible to many if not all woodland mammals, as are infrared light waves. Look at almost any JPEG made by a trail cam; flash or no flash the subject animal appears to know something’s up, usually it cautiously peers directly at the trailcam. Even passive thermal imagers seem to cause the subject to look in it’s direction. In the case of thermal imagers; I believe it’s noise not visuals that give it away. Due to its unique capabilities and usefulness the passive thermal imager is the one exception for which we must find a work around. The answer may lie in a sound proofed case similar to what we use in underwater photography.

    Clearly we must admit that we are up against a very human like, intelligent hominid, that has evolved to thrive comfortably in the deep wilderness without detection (unless it so chooses detection). We must clearly examine our methods and protocols in the search of this remarkable creature.

    Einstein once said; “The definition of insanity is: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

  25. j stewart responds:

    Bobo, thank you for coming here and sharing with us. I think most here won’t have had such a problem had it not been for the nasty name calling By Matt. No one who read any of the comments of last week’s drama fest can say that Matt didn’t deserve what he got after calling everyone such dirty names. While we understand that the editing is to blame for the lions share of the misleading information but the BFRO team is responsible for what comes out of their mouths. If you say something is amazing and definite proof or you tell someone without a doubt they saw or heard a sasquatch, then you have to accept the consequences for what you say being critiqued. If they tell you to say it and you don’t agree with it and you say it anyway then you are at fault.

    @riverguy
    I cant speak for everyone else. but a show that paints cryptozoologists as the fakes and kooks that a lot of people think we are is not a good thing. Publicity of the negative kind is never a good thing when you have to battle for people to believe even the most rock solid evidence and the testimony of honest people. Faked and hoaxed evidence and false testimonies hurt us all. But I respect your views and thank you for sharing.

  26. Redrose999 responds:

    @ bobosquatch

    It is nice to see you here talking about the show. I appreciate your response and it is good to know both you and Matt actually fought to give the show some integrity. I think the suggestion that folks write Animal Planet on this subject is a good idea: for the sake of the bigfoot community, and for future bigfoot documentaries. Good luck with your BF hunting.

  27. Justin31p responds:

    Yes, this was a good explanation from Matt. He can’t help what they do with it after it’s filmed and if they simulate sounds, that’s not his fault. I do like the basic premise of the show, you go to an area, talk to people who have encounters, do some research and then go out into the field and try and find bigfoot. It’s a good solid basis, just don’t get too over the top at first, slow. steady buildups should do fine.

  28. Nominay responds:

    Why would Matt want a reality show on Bigfoot, as oppose to just being out in the field on his own? How could approaching Bigfoot through the artificiality of a reality show possibly work? The premise of a show to find Bigfoot on its face would seem disagreeable. I mean, what’s the point? If anything, a show would stand a better chance to make people less likely to believe in Bigfoot. Animal Planet strikes me as an obnoxious and exploitative corporation. If Bigfoot has to be on TV, I’d prefer a series on the History Channel, that had to do with everything except for being in the woods, where parallels of a “Ghosthunters” style comes all too easily.

  29. bobosquatch responds:

    part of editing is ‘editing’. sometimes a response we had to a situation or sound wasn’t matched up to what was being shown on the show. the biggest problem was these guys had no idea what they were getting into when they took on this project. it was way more complicated than they could imagine. and it isn’t animal planet. it was a couple of editor/producers who won’t be working on the next episodes. they busted their asses and worked hard. we signed on to do a documentary style show. they signed on to do a reality show about bigfooters. we all got along great and were bros but we would get into wicked fights about stuff. they couldn’t understand why we wouldn’t want to hit a tree(off camera) and pretend it was a squatch. they said “thats what all of the other shows do”. but i can assure you it isn’t discovery/animal planet. at least not this first season. if it happens in the second season, which they have assured us it won’t, then it will be on them. but they weren’t there for the actual shooting or editing. and the only time the exec producers were there was for the pilot and the first episode.
    so for the squatchers and intelligent viewers there will be some more of this for this seasons next 4 episodes to endure. but after that we’ll have the proper equipment and crew to capture all of the sounds we actually did hear.
    you also have to keep in mind that this show wasn’t supposed to air until october but they were so psyched on it they kept pushing up the launch date until they figured they could get it out so it could follow river monsters season finale. and the producers/editors literally worked 20-22 hours a day for the 7 week shoot and then came straight back with no time off to do 18 hour days to get it ready. so they really tried, they’re good people. just not squatchers.
    but the 2nd season will be much better.
    also i didn’t mean to imply that cliff didn’t care about how things were portrayed. he is just a go with the flow mellow guy who never yells or fights with anyone about anything. matt and i would yell and fight, cliff would calmly try to talk with them about things during slow downs. but i think if we all took cliff’s approach it would have been worse. i’m glad we resisted as much as we did. so score one for the obnoxious guys!!!

  30. flame821 responds:

    I’m having a hard time picturing Bobo as ‘obnoxious’.

    And as naive as it seems, I can easily see how they could be misled by the production company and I know for a fact what editing can do. Dr. P.Z. Myers experienced it first hand and was brutally honest about the situation in his blogging. Of course in his case he was flat-out lied to with the intention of having his words twisted to fit the needs of the producer and director of what turned out to be an anti-science vanity project.

    When he did the interview he was asked a series of reasonable questions, by a likable and soft spoken fellow. Yet when the film aired the questions the interviewer (in the film) asked were not the same questions, in fact the ‘on film’ interviewer had been no where near Professor Myers during filming. It was a set up from beginning to end.

    According to the BFRO members involved, Ping Pong productions wasn’t being malicious, they just didn’t understand what BFRO and the Cryptozoology field in general wanted or expected.

    As for ‘us’ being 1% or less of the viewing audience. I think they are UNDERestimating our numbers. Think about the daily traffic to crypto sites on the web, only a very small percentage of readers will ever bother to register or comment. Yet there are healthy discussions and banter on most crypto sites.

    One of the other things we will see, particularly if Finding Bigfoot is picked up for another season or two, is the mass audience effect. If BFRO is the only name people associated with Bigfoot sightings and reports and they know from either watching or hearing the show that, should a witness decide to come forward, they will not be laughed at or portrayed as needing medications or therapy. Much like TAPS has become a clearing house for paranormal reports, BFRO will quickly see the number of reports submitted to them rising. Which means more data, more data makes everyone’s job easier.

  31. springheeledjack responds:

    Thanks Loren–missed that one. And thanks Bobo–I figured as much, but until you’re on the inside and have to deal with tv execs, you probably can’t appreciate the…well I’d use profanity, but you know. And that tells me that Animal Planet and Discovery don’t really take BF and other cryptids seriously either. They just see a niche audience that will tune in and boost their ratings.

    So again, watchers beware…can’t trust what we see on the boob-tube…

  32. NWesterner responds:

    I thought Opalman made some interesting points about bigfoot, especially about detection. I agree, these creatures are intelligent, and can only be detected if they choose to be. Another reason I’m so wary of all the videos supposedly shot of it, its just not going to happen all that often. Catching a bigfoot on camera is possibly an extremely rare event, and indeed may be a once in a lifetime type of occurrence because these things possibly know when cameras are rolling and will most of the time stay hidden in order to avoid them. There is something supernatural about them, that is my opinion.

  33. CDC responds:

    You as talent have two options…ask for creative control, or walk away from the show.

    If you continue as is, you will be always dealing with the same issues over and over again.

    One way shows integrity, the other shows selling out.

    It is your faces crying out “unbelievable” for a horse thermal hit, your faces falling to the ground with a possible Swamp ape on your camera, your faces reacting to howls that were recreated by producers.

    Last week Matt called many here bad names in anger of our critisim, this week, he joins in our same criticism. There is a right and wrong here…Matt just took a week to find it.

    An apology to his viewers and supporters both here and elsewhere from Matt would go far to see if he really is sincere about his frustration.

    Sad to say Matt, but the buck stops with you. Integrity or sell out, apology or defiance, criticism or support…it’s all up to you from here.

    No one will EVER remember who produced the show…but EVERYONE will remember you and your team when they think of “Finding Bigfoot”.

    When I think of Tom Biscardi, all I can see is him on the podium with those two losers from the Georgia Hoax. Now the first thing I think of when I hear the name Matt Moneymaker is “unbelievable” over some old mare in a field.

  34. korollocke responds:

    Matts doing what I expected him to do after screaming at us like a madman defending the “authentic” first episode, backpeddling and spin doctoring his horribly destroyed public image(as well as the BFRO”S image and credibility.) and reputation as a “bigfoot researcher” socalled.

  35. Nominay responds:

    Ouch, CDC’s the best post on the show to date I’ve seen. It sums it all up. It’s no more complicated than that. There’s no navigating through this swamp. There’s not a needle to thread here. Animal Planet is going to want what Animal Planet wants. You don’t have a couple rogue producers/editors on your hands. There’s no mistake going on here. They rep. Animal Planet or it’s their ass. I’m sure they all like you guys and have nice personalities, but that doesn’t mean they’re above using you in the slightest. It’s just show business to them – this is not an industry where the people you work have good character. As far as Bobo’s comment goes, I suspect the couple of people in question who conflicted w/ BFRO simply signed on to other projects – either out of free agency or were simply assigned to it – but not out of deference to Matt and his crew. I mean, how much do these people respect you anyway if they don’t believe in Bigfoot? What they believe in is the profile of their audience.

  36. Tarzanboyy responds:

    Look, I’m willing to give Matt and the team the benefit of the doubt. I am however really disappointed with the whole thing because of the disingenuous presentation, which is almost entirely the fault of the producers. Everything has to be called into question, including the physical evidence. Just because the team didn’t plant anything doesn’t mean the production company didn’t without the team’s knowledge. In fact, legitimate reactions on the part of the team would be better for the overall production, so if anything was faked, I would bet money that it was the production company and not the BFRO that faked any evidence. They have nothing to gain by publicly committing what amounts to PR seppuku. The problem is, it sets legitimate research back. I want to see an honest cryptozoological program where if they don’t find anything, they don’t pretend to find something. Even just hearing from eyewitnesses in the absence of physical evidence is interesting to me but it really does besmirch the integrity of the entire field when this sort of thing occurs. So I wish Matt, Bobo and the BFRO good luck. I hope they’re able to turn this situation around and make a respectable program out of this. I won’t be ‘grateful’ as some have suggested to have a show that misrepresents facts for the sake of entertainment. I’m a lover of fiction, but it should be labeled as a dramatization if they intend to tamper with evidence or presentation. There’s a fine line between fiction and lies. I’ll be grateful for the shows that treat the field with the respect it deserves.

  37. aargeee responds:

    Methane in alligator dens? If we would have to guess, it would have been one of the other two choices (Diet being unlikely to produce this pungent smell).

    Rather I think the odor is, like many described, a hairy animal which is exposed to the elements resulting is a smell like a wet dog. Which can be pungent, I can tell you.

  38. aargeee responds:

    Fellow Cryptomundians

    Please hear me out.

    It’s a real shame that there is a lot of talk about the faking of the footage.

    At first I (as many other Cryptomundians) was really excited about a series (even) regarding our favourite cryptid ‘Sasquatch’.

    The fact that some of the footage is fake is a shame for the series. Now everything that will be shown will be taking in account as very possibly faked.

    The Discovery Channel is a commercial organisation which rather thinks about viewer ratings than about the (maybe 3 percent) people who look at the series with more interest than just wanting to be entertained.

    Just think about how they handle the cadborosaurus footage.

    But then again, the Finding Bigfoot series replaced the series River Monsters which had the best ratings ever in the history of Animal Planet. So it can be presumed, the producers of Finding Bigfoot expect big ratings again.

    Big ratings brings along with it more public awareness, which in its turn will pique peoples interests.

    I think the medium of Animal Planet is a perfect platform for increasing public awareness.

    With more people interested, there is a larger market (from Discovery’s perspective), but also just more people who talk about it and want to know more about it.

    Increasing desire among public will eventually result in action. From individuals, organisations like BFRO or platforms like Animal Planet (from Discovery).

    So again, it’s a shame for the series that some things seem faked. But as long as there is a medium (especially one like Animal Planet and NOT Paranormal TV) which doesn’t totally ridicule Sasquatch, I think it will a have positive influence for the future of Bigfooting.

    Kind Regards

  39. aargeee responds:

    Correction: Reading a bit back I have to correct Animal Planet/Discovery are producers (with a commercial view).

  40. Opalman responds:

    aargeee and others,
    I disagree vehemently with the view that any interest in the subject sparked by the Animal Planet is a good thing. My son who is an Army aviator called me specifically to let me know that he felt the airing of “Finding Bigfoot” was the biggest farce he had ever watched, “just like the belief by some that the creature exists”, exclaimed he. In discussing the same show with my neighbor he sarcastically stated that any university that “funds research on such a bogus subject”, should have all it’s State and Fed funding pulled. My neighbor watched the two episodes solely on my recommendation. I’m embarrassed! Prior to watching the episodes he said he was “open minded” about the existence of Bigfoot but not now; he stated, that the show proved that the subject was all hype and not worthy of his continued interest. Personally I can understand these outcomes. The shows were farces, were they not! Thinking people (the folks that matter) have little patience for Hollywood tricks. Especially irksome to my same neighbor (who flies R/C airplanes) was the “Drone” takes. He laughingly explained that electric planes such as the Drone shown can remain aloft for mere minutes and then with a very limited range—and they are very noisy due to high prop RPM! I remember the excitement exhibited by the BFRO crew regarding the drone! Do you expect me to believe they didn’t understand the uselessness of this apparatus?
    I know a little about television production having worked in it for a few years. A program like this can not be innocently created without the featured crew being privy to the takes and retakes etc. All such production requires these. The only slack the BFRO deserves is the probable lack of post production narrative input. The rest is all theirs (BFRO’s), and for all to see. For the life of me I can’t understand what Moneymaker was trying to accomplish here. You cannot tell me that he didn’t know the scenes were staged…period.
    Therein lies the problem for all us honest, intensely interested folks who simply want to share our enthusiasm of which we are so convinced. Now my neighbor is more convinced than ever that I’m whacked just for being interested. Ditto for my son.
    The best thing MM can possibly do is run (not walk) away from the Animal Planet people…NOW! Let them go back to filming the dreaded, deadly white sturgeon and the nightmarish, man-eating, freshwater eel in New Zealand.

  41. Craig Woolheater responds:

    Comments that do not add to the discussion of the post will not be approved. Approval of comments will be at the discretion of the moderating team here at Cryptomundo.

  42. Lawmoe responds:

    The program is a farce. When any little detail is pounced upon to support the existence of bigfoot, any scientific credibility is lost. The show should be recharacterized as a comedy I am afraid.

  43. Opalman responds:

    I find it totally ludicrous how so many cryptomundians accept what this guy (Matt Moneymaker) says; often without question. I suppose that’s part and parcel of not knowing how a production like Finding Bigfoot works.

    What I see happening is a guy: (MM) whose personality is predominated by delusions of grandeur attempting to ride both sides of the fence on the same horse.

    He wants us to believe he is the victim of unscrupulous editing while continuing to make outlandish public suppositions about his experience, his knowledge and the “cutting edge” sasquatch research achievements of the BFRO. He wants us to view him as a wise and knowledgeable researcher yet he can’t even control the ridiculous statements that come out of his overactive mouth. In an effort to regain some shred of credibility regarding sasquatch field studies he blames the actual recordings of his own comments, assumptions and brags on the Animal Planet producers and directors. Its as if he wants us to believe they are physically torturing him in an effort to make him recite some non-existent script.

    If this guy is as bright as he portends than why is he so easily tricked at every possible opportunity.

    If in fact the Animal Planet is using such manipulative methods to produce a totally ridiculous, meaningless and detrimental to real research entertainment venue, why is he hanging with these people for multiple seasons?

    Contract or no contract; I would have been long gone after one such deliberate editing instance. I make this statement in all honesty and I have no professional scientific or sasquatch research reputation to protect. No amount of money can buy my personal integrity; period.

    Again; I really wouldn’t care about the Tom Biscardis or Matt Moneymakers in the world except they have a decidedly negative impact on the mission of classifying and protecting this being; (the sasquatch).

    One caveat remains, in the general criticism of the BFRO, as I’ve acknowledged before; The BFRO sighting database is world class and a tremendous asset to real research, and I’m very thankful for it..



Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|


Cryptomundo Merch On Sale Now!

mmcm

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest

Advertisers

DFW Nites


Monstro Bizarro Everything Bigfoot The Artwork of Sybilla Irwin



Advertisement




|Top | FarBar|



Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.