A quandary exists. There are developments that should be noted, but noting them creates conflict. Is it nobler to point out the absurdity or let bigfootery continue on its’ way, some wise, but many not so much? We are conflicted over:
- posting a submitted comment about the sudden rise of event disorganizers using charitable donations as a feel good for their event. The best part of the comment was where the person speculated that for one of the events the disorganizers could save a little time (win) and simply not hold the event and donate what they lose in holding the event (charity wins with more money). Win, win, makes some sense.
- noting that in the last episode of a certain show getting headliner billing at an event the camera dude and editor both missed a shot that showed a nest/hut that had at least two of the trees showing evidence of being worked with either a hatchet or axe. Check the pawpaw shot.
- pointing out that the most legit “bigfoot researcher” on that bill has developed a “scheduling conflict”, perhaps indicating that some of the rumors of misgivings related to sharing the dias with Hollywood researchers might be true.
- or running the video below that certainly does not add to the credibility of the carpetbagger’s show.