Ely Footage Removed
Posted by: Loren Coleman on March 23rd, 2006
The Ely Sasquatch Videoes (two original segments and the “forgotten” footage just discovered) have been removed by Richard Sade from the internet.
While the BFRO was involved in assisting with placing a copyright on the video and enlarging the first segment, they were not responsible for withdrawing it, they exclusively tell Cryptomundo this evening.
According to a source deep in that organization, the BFRO related to your Cryptomundo correspondent tonight: “No, we didn’t have the video removed. [The BFRO has] been back and forth with Mr. Sade on email, and his story has become increasingly shaky and frustrating. It’s a pity, because the original footage was quite intriguing. The second segment kind of gave the game away. But your site did a great job providing an arena for the debate, and probably allowed for the truth to [come] out more expeditiously than it otherwise would have.”
Indeed, the story gained worldwide attention, stimulated mostly by over 100 comments from the readers here, here, here, and here.
But in the end, Sade appeared to have been too anxious to overplease the audience, with yet more footage.
About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. 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. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015.
Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.
If he just would have left well enough alone we would have been debating this for the foreseeable future.
But alas greed killed the story. In this case greed for extension of that 15 minutes.
We have to admit we all wanted it to be real and many of us even fell full in with it. It is one of the best hoaxes i have ever seen.
Tom biscardi and David Shealy should be enrolling in his hoaxes 101.
You know the scary thing? Someone will one day come along – read all these comments and say “aha! here is a list of things I have to avoid if I want to fool the community with my hoax….” and they’ll come up with a good one.
Chris.
I proceed with the assumption that it is commonly accepted that the videos were a hoax.
What I find scary is how, if the second video had not been posted, many of us would have spent a lot of time arguing for a bunk video. I don’t mean to personally knock on anyone that thought the video was possibly legit, as I recognize it is important to consider both sides of any debate and avoid jumping to conclusions, but I was amazed by how some people could interpret from such a grainy and sketchy short clip a whole range of revelations and ideas from scurrying Bigfoot babies (which was clearly an idea planted by the original video description with little overt evidence in the video itself) to the possibly wounded status of the creature. While it is great to speculate, I can’t help but think when the source material is so specious it is not unfair to begin any discussion without a heavy heaping of skepticism. I know that many of us WANT Bigfoot to be real, or believe a creature does exist, but we do all of us a disservice by not starting an analysis solely from what the video offers (or does not offer). Many people in the blog comments did this kind of serious, level-headed work, and my hat goes off to you! In this case, but also in many others I have been a part of, when other photos or videos arise, I am struck by how it seems already readily accepted that Bigfoot exists; therefore, all photos and video become retroactive evidence to this preconceived notion instead of laboring under the idea that the very existence of Bigfoot, indeed even the very nature of the creature needs to be strongly argued for. Personally, I think it is possible such a creature exists, but I always approach any “evidence” with the quite equal notion that it might, and probably does not, exist.
Too much time spent on so many blobsquatches.
he got scared cause everyone caught on about it being a hoax, and as for BFRO they think everything is real, thats why all the good researchers left them and for poor leadship.
But i think alot of people off the bat knew this was a hoax, but i guess that was his try to fame with that video.
I didnt get to see the 2nd part of it, Guess i never will, but at least the truth has came out
Well I won’t lie, I thought it was real at first. I hadn’t seen the second segment yet but I guess there is no reason to now. Why do people just seem to need to hoax stuff? Some people are just attention starved I guess. Eventually a legitimate video will come out. When it happens I hope it is by an actual believer, not somebody who got lucky and caught sasquatch on tape. It needs to be a dedicated believer. But until then we will just have to hold on to what evidence we do have.
I’ve been thinking about this. I think someone said that studying the video was academic either way – it would never count as scientific evidence. That being said – will ever any video or photo serve as proof of an animal’s existence?
I think we all know the answer to that one.
So what if we have something tangible, in our hands? Say it’s hair from a bigfoot – how will anyone be able to say “yes, this is bigfoot hair”? And say it’s some presumed extinct animal – how will anyone ever be convinced it was acquired from a recently living specimen and not a pre-extinction one?
This is the BFRO Investigator again. I wish to clarify that we were, from the beginning, disinclined to take this piece of footage at face value. We were simply proceeding, as we always do, in a deliberate manner to learn more about the circumstances of the filming and the man who submitted his “evidence” to our organization. Anyone who submits evidence to us receives the same respect, at least initially. The BFRO puts all claims through a thorough screening process, arriving at a presumption of legitimacy only after this process has been brought to a well-researched conclusion.
P.S. I said that the first segment of footage was “intriguing” because it undeniably was, even aside from the question of authenticity; otherwise, it would never have elicited so much energetic and intricate speculation. It is interesting–just from an epistemological perspective–how speculation built upon speculation, how further viewings seemed to keep shifting the visual terms slightly, and how much more effective the first segment was, in this sense, because it hovered just on the verge of one’s ability to quite interpret its content. It was like an inkblot. What the figure “picked up,” or even whether it picked anything up at all, stubbornly remained at the vanishing point. The “forgotten” segment contains none of that element of productive or seductive ambiguity. That is why the hoaxer would, I agree, have been much better served to leave well enough alone. All in all, I find that this whole episode has been a fascinating case study in perception and especially in the role of desire in perception.
Now the question to ask him, wich i doubt he will answer is, WHY????
but nonetheless it got proven to be a hoax before it carried his fame any further
Lots of erudite comments here…
This is what has been missing in Crypto and other paranorm arenas, a calm, multi-viewpointed and sophisticated way to discuss the mystery, without all the attendant agendae that usually invades open venues.
Thanx, Crypto, for providing!
Removal of the videos does not prove it was a hoax. I’m not arguing that the videos were authentic – yet there is no proof that they were faked.
The world is not ready for what I wanted to show them.
No video footage should ever serve as proof of anything in this day and age, no matter how detailed it is (alien autopsy, anyone?). The best we can hope for is “evidence”.
When I first saw the recent video footage of the supposed Big Foot at Ely, Minnesota…I was sure that was just my mother in-law.
Shawshank, do you think “Richard Sade” actually resides in the Ely, MN area, and if he does, did he ever give any more specific details on where he filmed this?
Richard, I’m ready for it, your neighbour of about 185 miles. E mail me from one of the other boards, same name.
Thanks
Maybe he should have held out for an offer from a top notch, probing, investigative television show 😉
There could have been another expedition and everything!
Mule,
I’d like to be able to answer your question, but of course without Mr. Sade’s permission, I cannot in good conscience quote from, or even paraphrase, his private emails to me.
I understand the confidentiality aspect Shawshank…I’m assuming by your wording that he did divulge some things but asked them not to be made public.
How does BFRO handle a situation like this where a video turns out to be hoaxed? Will you be publishing some details of the incident on the website and filing it under “hoax”, or just tossing it away altogether?
I’m assuming that if this had gone thru the loop and been stamped “authentic”, he’d have allowed what info he provided to be published.
First off, I must agree that the discussions here have been much more calm and erudite than on many other websites I’ve encountered, part of the reason I decided to join in on them, I suppose. As to what sort of video footage would count as sound scientific evidence, I would think that clear, unobstructed, close-range footage of a cryptid behaving naturally for a significant length of time with no odd or disjointed jumps would go a long way. The chances of this happening would be slim, I admit, but it always amazes me how many dedicated, reliable observers always seem to be lacking their recording equipment at the crucial moment. Crypto field researchers, carry your cameras at all times! And while a “believer”, as someone put it, would probably be best qualified to know what to do when encountering such an experience, no doubt it would also be used against them by skeptics. I dare say an experienced skeptic would be the absolute best witness, someone who doesn’t beleive, but recognizes the importance of what he’s experiencing.
Now, all this talk of fakery brings up an interesting, and probably controversial point. It seems to me that if some researchers spent some time seeing for themselves how easy or difficult it might be to fake videos, they might be more inclined to be a tad more skeptical the next time one of these videos appears. Of course, the down side to that would be that debunkers could use it to claim that the researchers themselves are just fakers…it’s a double-edged sword. Personally, I’d love to try to produce a really high-quality, hard-to-dismiss fake video and see how many people would actually go for it, then reveal it for what it was…BUT…the problem with that, of course, would be the poor light it would cast upon myself, ethically, and whatever researchers were taken in, professionally. Not to mention the fact that once it’s out there, there will always be someone who believes it, even if you provide them with proof that it was indeed faked. Belief can be a powerful thing, as I think many in this discussion have come to learn. Personally, I don’t happen to know of any confirmed hoaxers who’ve actually admitted to doing it, but if some could be found, perhaps someone could publically investigate just how they went about doing it. I’d gladly watch that on TLC or whatever. That way, nobody’s feet would be trampled on (big or otherwise).
Good evening Crypto’s….a few words of gratitude to those who invest the time, effort and treasure to make this blog possible…I moderate a message board or two and am well aware of the time investmet required….Thank you…
I salute the efforts of those at BFRO…and TBRC….their task is daunting, fraught with fraud…and mischief…for those who wish to criticize….show us your website…research, or videos….
Those who have seen…know….for those who believe…your faith is not misplaced….
Still curious what you folks thought of the Mercedes Benz Tahoe video posted here in October….
seeing is believing
ole bub
For those that didn’t see it, don’t remember it or haven’t been able to find it, here it is in all of its glory…
Bigfoot and Benz … Mercedes that is.
So just to clarify things…. where was this “forgotten” video? Did he stick up new footage at youtube.com or did someone else locate the forgotten footage?
By the way – Richard has restuck up the zoomed-in video again.
I find it interesting how Richard’s story has changed from what he initially told me.
Larry
I watched the Benz film click by click and noticed the figure turns & looks at the Benz. Did not see a human face covered with a hood. Just my opinion… but it takes very long strides, which if the width of road was known, could be counted. What about the driver of Benz, was he interviewed, what did he see? Anybody?? Also noticed, figure was in black except for tips of fingers, looked lighter like maybe snow covered. This, I think has more possibilities than Ely video.
It appears that this guy has gone to more great lengths posting, reposting, and enhancing than he did hoaxing the original footage. “the world is not ready”???? Yeah right. And my awesome powers are far, far beyond the understanding of mortal men… How many times do you let a kid “take his ball and go home, nyah, nyah”?
Shawshank (8) – spot on! This has been a thoroughly fascinating opportunity to watch belief and speculation in progress. I’ve seen the same thing in a missing persons context.
Mnynames (20) – I love your theorising about establishing valid evidence. It’s bordering on religious debate! And ultimately, all such discussions resolve to faith in a particular viewpoint based upon (interpretation of) evidence…
See also my comment (6) above about evidence for extinct animals – I had the thylacine in the back of my mind – you raise the exact points about belief in the evidence to which I was alluding.
Chris.
For all things Fortean, I tend to follow the philosophy of a Bigfoot hunter that I once saw on a documentary (Sad to say I can’t recall what the program was or who he was, might even be one of our esteemed hosts here). If I might paraphrase what he said, the gist of it went something like this- On Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays I believe, on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays I doubt, and on Sundays I take the day off. The only difference for me would be that on Sundays I don’t take off, I just plum don’t know. Seems to me a good philosophy to have, especially if you’re an investigator into strange or otherwise unaccepted phenomena.
If I might wander into fiction for a moment, Fox Mulder’s mantra of “I want to believe” is relevant to me as well (And probably a lot of people), but my addition to that statement would be that it is precisely because I want to believe that I must question it. Sadly, there are some with our interests who never stop to think about it like that, but really, it’s all in our best interests. Nobody wants to be played for the fool. If you take the time to doublecheck your own motivations, in addition to those of others, you are far less likely to be placed in such a situation, and I might add that sometimes people can end up playing themselves for fools through no fault of anybody else, which is all the more reason for such vigilance. As I seem to have strayed even further into philosophical debate, perhaps I should end it here before I become too rambling and off-track. Of course, it’s usually off the beaten track that the most interesting things lie, Cryptids certainly not being the least of them.
“Mnynames” – FYI – That quotation is from the late Richard Greenwell of the defunct International Society of Cryptozoology, who somewhat flippantly responded with that comment in at least a couple documentaries (mid-1990s) in which I have seen him appear.
It was a statement he had formatted thoughtfully, to such an extent, that the media quoted him in July 2000 when they asked his reaction to the Hoh Reservation Bigfoot tracks.
“On Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, I absolutely believe in Bigfoot, after I evaluate all the data and read all the information,” Greenwell said. “On Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays, I think it’s all nonsense. On Sundays, I rest.”
Thank you. His words made an impression, obviously. Felt bad not being able to give proper credit…