[Melissa]

I thought Mr. Faulman wanted to remain anonymous? Isn't the anonymity of this witness the biggest argument used by the MRP, to not disclose any further information about the property? Is there really an NDA? Did the Michigan group not know about this newspaper article?? If they did, why did they sign an NDA??

Well, wait till you read this... AND YOU NEED TO. This is an article from the Marion Press Newspaper in Marion Michigan. Front Page article from June 5th 2002. The first page shows the date the paper was published. Scroll down to the second page of this file for the article itself. "Bigfoot Sighting Spooks Marion Teens".


Read this for yourself. At times I actually felt sorry for Mr. Faulman.. I do not anymore. I like how he points out the barbed wire in this article. Oh, and the fire pit. :) And, pay attention to WHEN the various MRP folks say they became involved..

Coincidence? I don't think so.

Attached File(s)

•  Doc1.pdf (645.61K)
  Number of downloads: 60

[Spazmo]

Interesting article.
I'm not sure what you're suggesting about the timing of the MRP crew's involvement...but am all ears! I get the impression that this incident may have prompted someone to bring in a researcher (or a researcher saw the article and came on their own). This in turn may have led to the involvement of the MRG. Is this what you meant?

Anyway, this article can be seen a couple of ways...one being in support of possible activity in the area. Another being in support of ongoing hoaxing activity. Either way, it's really nice to finally here some new details about the location. I'm uncomfortable about the names of the individuals being made public in connection with the MRP, but as you said, it was in the newspaper (as was the location). Hard to complain about it now, even though the connection may not have been made if the original anonymity had been maintained.

Anyway, good find. I think it would be very interesting to interview some (or all) of the witnesses to this encounter.

S.

[Kimble]

Wow. I found the MRP site... Wow. Was that easy to do. Thanks Mel.

[Melissa]

Spazmo, on 06 November 2009 - 06:40 PM, said:

Interesting article.
I'm not sure what you're suggesting about the timing of the MRP crew's involvement...but am all ears! I get the impression that this incident may have prompted someone to bring in a researcher (or a researcher saw the article and came on their own). This in turn may have led to the involvement of the MRG. Is this what you meant?

Anyway, this article can be seen a couple of ways...one being in support of possible activity in the area. Another being in support of ongoing hoaxing activity. Either way, it's really nice to finally here some new details about the location. I'm uncomfortable about the names of the individuals being made public in connection with the MRP, but as you said, it was in the newspaper (as was the location). Hard to complain about it now, even though the connection may not have been made if the original anonymity had been maintained.

Anyway, good find. I think it would be very interesting to interview some (or all) of the witnesses to this encounter.

S.

You cant divulge a witnesses name, if they have already done so themselves... Mr. Faulman outed himself in 2002. For the MRP to scream now that their witnesses identity has been outed, is pure crap.

Yes, the MRP involvement started right after this article was written. There is also a connection between this article, Mr. Faulman and activity that actually made it to a BFRO report in Isabella County Michigan. More kids...

Yet one more thing the MRP has not disclosed.

[Washingtonian]

This article is a good find. If it was the reason why anyone started to do recordings in the area then why would they not have referred to the article? It is rather unusual to not mention why someone was in the area to begin with, in fact you'd be hard pressed to find a report that does not describe why the people were in the area.

If they didn't know about this incident, yet were doing research at the same location :dont-know: says a lot about the quality of the research done.

More information kept only for the secret squirrel club? They can run their club any way they want but should they want to be taken seriously by others, this equates to a total fail no matter how many cheerleaders you have.

I agree that it is not possible to "out" someone who has had a newspaper article written about them in connection with BF and they have already been interviewed.

[Lyndon]

I was amused by the opening lines in the first paragraph of the newspaper article. It says:

""Something lurks in the woods east of Marion in Winterfield Township. Some say it is man, some say it is beast and some say it is a strange combination of both....""

Is the article refering to a certain member of the MRP???

Just wonderin'.

[Melissa]

Quote

If they didn't know about this incident, yet were doing research at the same location public/style_emoticons/default/dont-know.gif says a lot about the quality of the research done.

See, that's just it. Those associated with the MRP absolutely knew about this article. They chose (again) to not disclose this information, and instead yell NDA..

You can't even pretend to protect someone's identity, when the person you are trying to protect has already made themselves (and their name) public..

Unreal

[Melissa]

And now this was just sent to me. Read this exchange carefully.. Wow, just WOW!!


http://www.bigfootfo...71&hl=snohomish
Second Michigan Outing, 7-24 through 7-27-04

Quote

Originally Posted by StacyinMI

Fish, we mainly used some purported BF vocals that NW had downloaded and cleaned up, plus some owl, gibbon, and chimpanzee vocals that he altered to sound very squatchy. If I recall correctly, on some of those he layered a couple of different sounds (like owl with gibbon, etc.,)... he'll be able to tell you more specifically. We did also, a couple of times, use some of the Sierra Sounds recordings, despite the decidedly "non-cleanness" of them, just because we figured we might as well try it....

Nightwing's Description of the sound tape.

Quote

Originally Posted by Nightwing

Hairyman, the best of the "classic" calls was the snohomish call. While it retained either a great deal of background noise, OR distortion if totaly cleaned..it at least provided a good base sound.

As to mixed sounds, the best ones were "classic" alleged sasquatch sounds(again, snohomish), overlayed with gibbon whistles and shrieks, or greatly altered barred owl calls. I also "stacked" highly altered barred owl and gibbon calls, purely to create a curiosity call.(this works amazing with predator calling...thought something similar may elicit a curiosity response in our target).

I also made up a couple of "mixed" interaction type sounds, essentialy trying to duplicate a territorial battle of primates(used chimp and gibbon in this case).

"Yowie" calls, simply cleaned and slighly enhanced, were also used.

Finaly, a number of straight gibbon, chimp, and even owl calls were used, but again altered in pitch, tone, and tempo to mimic as close as possible the "classic" alleged sasquatch screams, or in some cases, just becasue the resulting sound was very "giant primate" sounding!.

ah..almost forgot..used a very clean version of the "mumble" sounds from sierra sounds, as well.

The concensus favorite sound was the "yowie" one.(although I still like my gibbon/owl derived "whoop" "whoop" sounds!!)

Well hell, if that is not an excellent description of the vocals on the MRP website, I am not sure what is. Again, maybe this is just yet another "coincidence"..

If you think that, I have some swamp land that would make a great homestead, I would LOVE to sell you.

[Wammy]

Well that sure is interesting. I've said from the beginning, that the main vocals on those recordings, sounded like it was making 2 different sounds. And I know others agree with me. This would explain why it sounds that way. And on another note, I recently went back and listened to a certain track on those recordings that caught my attention from the start. I posted my curiosity about it here somewhere. It was the track that sounded a lot like the Sierra Sounds, the grumbly half talking sounding part. The certain part of the track I pointed out, has been edited out of their posted recordings now. It initially started out with its patented howl sound, and abruptly went back to the Sierra sounding mumbling. It was rather strange when I heard it the first time, almost unnatural if you will. But its gone now.....wonder why?

[BillyWillard]

Great find and very interesting information! It makes a person say Hmmm....

[Melissa]

What I like in the conversation between Stacy and Nightwing is this:

Quote

ah..almost forgot..used a very clean version of the "mumble" sounds from sierra sounds, as well.

How do you "almost forget" about using the Sierra Sounds?? It's not as if they are (or even were) some obscure audio files Nightwing found on the internet somewhere...

[Washingtonian]

Wammy, on 07 November 2009 - 05:37 AM, said:

Well that sure is interesting. I've said from the beginning, that the main vocals on those recordings, sounded like it was making 2 different sounds. And I know others agree with me. This would explain why it sounds that way. And on another note, I recently went back and listened to a certain track on those recordings that caught my attention from the start. I posted my curiosity about it here somewhere. It was the track that sounded a lot like the Sierra Sounds, the grumbly half talking sounding part. The certain part of the track I pointed out, has been edited out of their posted recordings now. It initially started out with its patented howl sound, and abruptly went back to the Sierra sounding mumbling. It was rather strange when I heard it the first time, almost unnatural if you will. But its gone now.....wonder why?

So they have not only been busy erasing past posts that they have made, but they are now scrubbing the recordings themselves...???

This may turn out to be a bigger hoaxing than I thought.

Is there anybody else who is attempting to gather audio recordings who would record several "layers" of past recordings from different parts of the country and then have the gall to put them on a web site and say "we want to know if anybody else has heard anything like this?".

How about trying to have these mixed recordings analyzed? So much emphasis has been placed on "just the sounds" yet the specifics of the analysis have never been made known.

[Wammy]

Washingtonian, on 07 November 2009 - 01:28 PM, said:

So they have not only been busy erasing past posts that they have made, but they are now scrubbing the recordings themselves...???

This may turn out to be a bigger hoaxing than I thought.

Is there anybody else who is attempting to gather audio recordings who would record several "layers" of past recordings from different parts of the country and then have the gall to put them on a web site and say "we want to know if anybody else has heard anything like this?".

How about trying to have these mixed recordings analyzed? So much emphasis has been placed on "just the sounds" yet the specifics of the analysis have never been made known.

That's what I've been wondering, if these recordings can be peeled apart....I don't know if the technology exist to do that, but that is what needs to happen. I feel there is to much coincidence here to ignore. And ya, their scrubbing those recordings.......at least that 1 part anyway.

[Melissa]

Well I can say that I witnessed Wammy sitting at this computer for a couple hours, going over all those audio files (I was trying to watch TV). I got tired of hearing these files over and over and asked Wammy in a loud voice "What in the heck are you doing over there?" He told me he was trying to find a specific file, and asked me if I remembered these specific vocalizations (and I did). So, we listened to all the files together, and COULD NOT FIND IT.

I will never forget the look on Wammys face as he looked up at me and said "Did they edit their own audio?"

I'm not sure what other alternative there is.. Bet you wont read about that on the BFF

[Melissa]

Kimble, on 06 November 2009 - 08:24 PM, said:

Wow. I found the MRP site... Wow. Was that easy to do. Thanks Mel.

It took time and patience... :)

[Washingtonian]

I find it interesting to see how the thought processes are changing.

These change occur every time one of their supporting statements is proven wrong.

for example the statement that "this is a very remote area" was proven wrong once their location (which they did not want people to know for more than just the given NDA reasons) was found. What is more significant is the hiding of information than the fact that their statements supporting the idea of this being a remote location are false. Don't get me wrong, making such false statements is very significant.

It appears now that there is a major positional change in the examination of these recordings in particular which basically says "It isn't a hoax until the hoaxer confesses".

What a bunch of bunk. Scientific examination is not the same as a legal trial.

A true scientific fact has to be proven to be true and is not accepted as fact unless it can be proven, hence scientific examination does not start with the assumption that something is true until proven false. This has nothing to do with "innocent until proven guilty". These people are getting even more unbelievable.

Perhaps therein lies the problem, we are indeed dealing with a very large gray area where hoaxers can get away with things, especially the making of sounds.

I've seen enough information come out that has ruffled the feathers of the MRP group to make it clear to me that they are being less than honest, yet their cheer leaders keep on cheer leading and belittling those who have a different view.

It is much the same as with other far fetched claims. After all I guess some people still trust Biscardi.

[Melissa]

I thought it would be interesting to see a list of comments and statements made by the MRP, that have been false or misleading.

1. "No roads of consequence" - this is untrue. There are many roads of consequence near this research area.

2. "Remotely wooded forest" - Wrong.. While there is an area of forest, it is by far remote where the MRP were conducting their research. Just ask the homeowners near the actual property.

3. The MRP have been waiving an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement), in the attempt (they say) to protect the anonymity of their witness -- The witness gave a full newspaper interview in 2002. This interview gives his name (at least twice), and direct quotes from him.

4. The MRP lied in reference to the Location of the property -- The MRP have been summarily busted on this note, here, and on the BFF openly by Paul Vella.

5. They are being accused of - Knowingly concealing information about;

A) "Suits" (gorilla or otherwise)

B) "Audio Looping"

C) "Haunted House"

And the witness distributing copies of the;

D) "Sierra Sounds" CD's.

6. Editing of recording file on the MRP website, after the site was made public.



Instead of answering to these questions, they have instead threatened others for asking about these things, then picked up their toys and went home. When researchers think they do not have to answer to questions like the ones above, there is something SERIOUSLY wrong.

[Melissa]

I'm still waiting for a BFF Moderator or Administrator or OWNER to post the article I found -- ON THE BFF. Prove to me and this forum you are not protecting these people. I give you full permission to do so. The members of this forum should not have to face your wrath for being honest and proving the whole "privacy" issue is bunk.

Prove me wrong. Download it, and post it, then force the MRP to answer to this. Come on JayleeD, prove to us all you are not protecting your friends.

This article PROVES your friends (JayleeD) are lying through their teeth about yet one more issue. Do it. I dare you.

I will add Teresa to the list too. Tired of being accused of protecting your friends?? Fine. Prove it.

Paul, if you are so upset with the MRP folks, then why are you not being the "same ole' Paul" that jumped all over Tom Yamarone and the TBRC in public?? Why are you expressing your upset in personal messages? Why did you not extend that same courtesy to others?

Your comments about others and our misunderstanding your comments is plain BS. You know it and I know it. It just bugs you that people are calling you on your double standard. If you wont allow tough questions on the BFF - stop worrying about the forums who are willing to do the heavy lifting for you. We do not need your help. Before you hand out advice on "Counseling Services" maybe you should check your own need for it. You have done a complete 180 in attitude since all this started. At least I have remained true to what I have always said. That must really burn your backside.

Stop whining like a child that got their fingers slammed in the cookie jar, and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Prove to us ALL you are not protecting your friends.

POST THE ARTICLE!!!!!!!!!


P.S. I have still not heard a word from Law Enforcement.. I didn't think I would and highly doubt I ever will.

[Washingtonian]

Melissa, on 08 November 2009 - 08:34 AM, said:

I thought it would be interesting to see a list of comments and statements made by the MRP, that have been false or misleading.

1. "No roads of consequence" - this is untrue. There are many roads of consequence near this research area.

2. "Remotely wooded forest" - Wrong.. While there is an area of forest, it is by far remote where the MRP were conducting their research. Just ask the homeowners near the actual property.

3. The MRP have been waiving an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement), in the attempt (they say) to protect the anonymity of their witness -- The witness gave a full newspaper interview in 2002. This interview gives his name (at least twice), and direct quotes from him.

4. The MRP lied in reference to the Location of the property -- The MRP have been summarily busted on this note, here, and on the BFF openly by Paul Vella.

5. They are being accused of - Knowingly concealing information about;

A) "Suits" (gorilla or otherwise)

B) "Audio Looping"

C) "Haunted House"

And the witness distributing copies of the;

D) "Sierra Sounds" CD's.

6. Editing of recording file on the MRP website, after the site was made public.

Instead of answering to these questions, they have instead threatened others for asking about these things, then picked up their toys and went home. When researchers think they do not have to answer to questions like the ones above, there is something SERIOUSLY wrong.

How about the "you've got the wrong property and the wrong property owners" followed up in a short period of time by "they called us and and said that they were receiving strange phone calls, and regret that it was made public" when it was already public a long time ago... and if it was the wrong property and the wrong property owners ..........................:Crazy_282: ....... :hysterical: Ya know, people can put 2 and 2 together and come up with 4.

I understand your frustration about the BFF covering things up for their friends and not bringing forward pertinent information and not allowing pertinent questions. Just think, not long ago the BFF was burning up the search engines, digging up every little morsel they could find connected to the GA boys and then giving themselves high fives and slaps on the butt for finding the information. I even remember that they were boasting about beating anyone else with the posting of some of the information anywhere else on the net. A stark contrast to the way the MRP has been dealt with.

But you've got to admit that asking them to publish a newspaper article that will show their own failure as well as that of their friends is the same as asking a dog not to bark, or a rooster not to crow, or a cow to jump over the moon. It simply isn't in their vocabulary to do so.

[Melissa]

You know what really bothers me about all this?

There are 10 year old children that show a higher level of responsibility than what I have seen displayed in this situation -- by people who are well above the age of 10 and should know a whole lot more... Not to mention, should know better.

I have only been involved in this field of research since 2005, but I thought honesty and the credibility of not just the people involved, but the information being given out was important. I guess it depends on who you are, or who YOU KNOW.

I have seen good people be trashed and called liars on the BFF, I have seen people be outright lied to on the BFF, because they dared to stand up for what used to be the status quo (and should be the status quo). These lies have went unchallenged or just flat out stopped, when asking these questions is the right thing to do.

I seen an excellent question asked on the BFF. "How can we evaluate this audio, if we are not allowed to discuss the problems with the audio, or the witness?" Answer to this awesome question... YOU CAN'T. You are stuck in the position of having to believe everything the fine Michigan folks have told you, even though they would call you a follower or a hero worshiper. Heaven forbid you should ever pay attention to anything Dr. Meldrum, Rick Noll or others have to say - but by god, you better believe everything from the Michigan group. Why? Well, because you were told to.

If people allow this type of attitude to prevail - get ready for the next MK Davis or the next Eric Beckjord.. Why should you question anyone?

I'm not angry - I am disappointed, and sick to my stomach. I also fear for the next generation of researchers and this field of research in general if questions become taboo and simple belief in everything is allowed to take over.

It will not happen on this forum.