The "Lost Patterson Film" being revealed Sunday by Rugg

Here is one of the things I have always been hard on the Bigfoot Community about. Self promotion and fundraising.

Mike Rugg (who always seemed like a nice guy) has apparently some 16 mm footage of Patterson making a footprint cast and talking at his desk about Bigfoot. This footage was apparently never viewed before. So what is he dong with it? Is he improving the knowledge base of the community by releasing it digitally? Has he invited some of the countries top researchers to come view it before releasing it to the public? (like the scientific community would do with some important lost footage?)

No, he's holding a viewing at his Bigfoot Museum and forcing everyone to join his Musuem group to view it. So you have to pay to see it, and (and this is the real funny part) bring a potluck food item.....

This why your community is a laughing stock. It's all about raising funds, self promotion and self aggrandizement. There's very little science at work here. it's a farce

http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/08/breaking-roger-patterson-lost-reel.html

your so full of B.S. Stank.
They need to raise money just like f****** research labs and other as you call them "REAL"scientists do.
The camera's the time out in the field takes peoples time and it costs MONEY.
so get a fraking.
All animal research needs FUNDING even your local ass ZOO.

Ohh look

Leakey arranged funding and in 1962 sent Goodall, who had no degree, to Cambridge University where she obtained a Ph.D degree in Ethology.[5][9] She became only the eighth person to be allowed to study for a Ph.D there without first obtaining a BA or B.Sc.[1] Her thesis was completed in 1965 under the tutorship of Robert Hinde, former master of St. John's College, Cambridge, titled "Behavior of the Free-Ranging Chimpanzee," detailing her first five years of study at the Gombe Reserve.[1][9]

where did Leakey get funding from???

Seriously fund raising is part of any research

StankApe wrote:
This why your community is a laughing stock. It's all about raising funds, self promotion and self aggrandizement. There's very little science at work here. it's a farce

I am sure many people would be very interested in your solution for performing "creditable" research without raising funds and self promotion. Please provide "us" with a solid business model, avenue for purchase of equipment and needed supplies and method for doing such without calling attention to the topic of study.

He's not forcing anybody to do anything. You can vote with your dollar. If you think it's a farce and useless video, then you don't have to pay for it. It's no secret, the Bigfoot Museum is on the verge of closing, and if he can find a way to help keep it open, then good for him. So he has a product that he is selling, BFD. So I guess everyone should just give everything they have away to "improve the knowledge base" of the community. Weak.

I don't believe for one second that Rugg isn't well aware of what's on every inch of that film. Say it was Patterson talking up plans for a Patty hoax ~ it would be worth a whole lot more than a few new museum memberships and a dish of cole slaw.

I'd get to the bottom of this, but my Polygraph-Academy-In-A-Box doesn't arrive until Tuesday.

Kel wrote:I don't believe for one second that Rugg isn't well aware of what's on every inch of that film. Say it was Patterson talking up plans for a Patty hoax ~ it would be worth a whole lot more than a few new museum memberships and a dish of cole slaw.

I'd get to the bottom of this, but my Polygraph-Academy-In-A-Box doesn't arrive until Tuesday.

if a footer had film showing it was a hoax they would hide that from the public, its the basics 101 of footin

If a skeptic found footage showing Patty to be 100% real, they would keep it hidden from the public at all costs. That's JREF 101.

BurdenOfProof wrote:

Kel wrote:I don't believe for one second that Rugg isn't well aware of what's on every inch of that film. Say it was Patterson talking up plans for a Patty hoax ~ it would be worth a whole lot more than a few new museum memberships and a dish of cole slaw.

I'd get to the bottom of this, but my Polygraph-Academy-In-A-Box doesn't arrive until Tuesday.

if a footer had film showing it was a hoax they would hide that from the public, its the basics 101 of footin

You're right. I used a lousy example. I'm just betting Rugg already knows the contents ~ in fact, he'd be crazy to not have already reviewed the film.

Arizonabigfoot wrote:He's not forcing anybody to do anything. You can vote with your dollar. If you think it's a farce and useless video, then you don't have to pay for it. It's no secret, the Bigfoot Museum is on the verge of closing, and if he can find a way to help keep it open, then good for him. So he has a product that he is selling, BFD. So I guess everyone should just give everything they have away to "improve the knowledge base" of the community. Weak.

Is it his? can he prove he owns the rights to charge admission to view the film? I doubt it.

Number dos, yes, I think it's unethical to charge to view something that is supposedly important the Bigfoot research community.

If I discovered a film showing some as yet unknown Diane Fosse interview and field work. It would be my responsibility to the scientific community to turn it over to a primatologist so they could try and glean all the information out of it. Not sit back and try and grease the wheels of my pockets with some silly "pot luck film festival"

believe me, nobody is a bigger capitalist than I am, but I think something like this is at a different level. It would be like charging Nature to use my paper or something....

The Patterson Film/Mike Rugg blog post on Bigfoot Evidence has been updated to say that now the film will NOT be shown Sunday.


Turns out that he wasn't charging people to see it, but limiting viewing it to "member's only" forcing one to join his museum if they wanted to see it. So, it's just more of the same "insider info" stuff that happens with most conspiracy theories and cryptid stuff.

BurdenOfProof wrote:

Kel wrote:I don't believe for one second that Rugg isn't well aware of what's on every inch of that film. Say it was Patterson talking up plans for a Patty hoax ~ it would be worth a whole lot more than a few new museum memberships and a dish of cole slaw.

I'd get to the bottom of this, but my Polygraph-Academy-In-A-Box doesn't arrive until Tuesday.

if a footer had film showing it was a hoax they would hide that from the public, its the basics 101 of footin

It's funny you mention this Burden. We have many unique antique shops around here and I've been looking for an old 16mm camera. I kept thinking "what if", meaning missing film from this saga.
I would 100% share it regardless of what the film showed. I know that is very unlikely to happen, but I often ponder "what if's".

Whatever is on the film should be looked forward to, regardless which side of the fence you're on.

If the reel turns out to be real.

Let's wait to view it before we rip each other to shreds.

That can come after we've all seen it.