I have to consider that most of you whaling away at me with your comments did not even read the post. At least, not past the first few words of the title.
No where did I ever state that I thought the Patterson Film was a hoax, or bunk.
It was even suggested that I watch the film and breakdowns, etc.
News flash, people. I have. Many of them. Some of them many times over.
I have to say, I don't like Patty.
Start breathing again, People.
I don't like her. I LOVE her.
She is beautiful. She is regal. She is iconic.
But she is just one example of the many, many sasquatch/bigfoot/Forest People out there. Just one.
There are many variations.
THAT WAS THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE. And to STOP throwing out possible evidence just because someone's description or photo or video doesn't look like Patty.
That film was an historic step in the research in this field. But it was just one step. If all we do is cling desperately to that one film and throw out everything else, we not only do a disservice to ourselves and to other researchers and to the field of study, but we do a disservice to her and to all the other sasquatch/bigfoot/Forest People out there. And we severely limit ourselves to what we can or should accomplish. We will continue to box ourselves in and never take forward steps.
And have a little [at least] respect for me. If I haven't researched it, I don't write about it. I don't go taking other's work and just regurgitate it onto the page. If I did that, you'd have a post twice or three times a day. I take some pride in what I do. I don't mind creating talk, even controversy. But if you are going to comment on my work, at least read it completely through first. Then we can talk.
Thanks much.
Nancy
"I'll spark the thought; what you do with it is up to you."
