Dr. Fahrenbach and Vanity Fair
Quote, Marianne Williamson
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate.
Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure.
We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant, gorgeous, talented, fabulous?
Actually, who are you not to be?
We were born to make manifest the glory of God that is within us.
And as we let our own light shine,
we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same."
There is nothing new as for actual field of research, but per the norm, the "usual suspects" are at it again.. In the name of all that is good and righteous, they have found a new target or, should I say targets.
I did attend the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy Conference this year in Jefferson Texas, I did take some time to listen to a few seconds of a couple of the speakers and yes, one of those speakers was Dr. Henner Fahrenbach.
I also spoke with Dr. Fahrenbach the night before the conference took place. Dr. Fahrenbach is a very, very nice man. Highly intelligent and very well spoken. The items we discussed the night before the conference, I did not find strange or unusual. I found Dr. Fahrenbach to be very "normal" and very down to earth.
For those of you who do not know Dr. Fahrenbach, he is a retired Zoologist and PHD, and more importantly for our purposes he is the man everyone (and I do mean, everyone, not just the TBRC) sends alleged Bigfoot hair samples to, for comparison with other known animals. Why, because no one else analyzes hair samples or has the qualifications.
Who better than a Zoologist to send a hair sample to? But, Dr. Fahrenbach has been spending time talking to those who have stories of "habituation", which tends to make some in this very "twitchy". I personally have not found one "habituation" story I can actually buy into, but that's me. Dr. Fahrenbach does not answer to me.
I remember the day of the Conference, and walking into the auditorium area, while Dr. Fahrenbach was talking. I remember hearing him say "witnesses told me" and he then went into some comments that made me stop in my tracks. Why? Because I do not buy into the whole "habituation" thing. But, just because I have never found one habituation story to change my opinion, does not mean Dr. Fahrenbach needs to stop his work.
I looked into the audience, and there sat the reporter from Vanity Fair and I knew this would not be good.
Oh, and for those who are wondering.. No restrictions are placed on the media at a TBRC event. The media may roam and talk to anyone, or listen to anything they choose.
Should there be restrictions?
Should Daryl Colyer or Craig Woolheater of the TBRC have rushed Dr. Fahrenbach, and body slammed him to the ground thus stopped him from talking? Did Dr. Fahrenbach discuss wormholes or disappearing bigfoot? No, he was discussing behaviors that were reported to him by witnesses. Yes, that is exactly what he was speaking about, his evaluation of alleged behavior based on reports given to him verbally by alleged witnesses and information he read (in report form) on the various website data bases.
The "usual suspects" are all angry and upset that Dr. Fahrenbach made "them" look bad.
As if this is the first time?
Usually the "usual suspects" make themselves look bad, so Dr. Fahrenbach did nothing to help or hurt their chances of ever looking good. If Dr. Fahrenbachs' speech prior had been approved, wouldn't that be "censorship"? I thought the "usual suspects" were against censorship?
Dr. Fahrenbach was asked to speak, and those who attended are allowed to listen and come to their own conclusion. The ability to decide for one's self is an idea I know is alien to some, but most people are very capable of doing that, even in this field of research.
So, now the "usual suspects" are so upset and angry, they are demanding, the TBRC have transcripts of Dr. Fahrenbachs lecture be done and distributed to all interested parties.
If I were on the Board of Directors for the TBRC, I would tell these "usual suspects" to mind their own business and pay more attention to why nothing is happening within their own respective organizations. Why are they getting nothing done? Why don't they put on a conference? Hey, here is an idea, instead of believing everything you read in magazines and on the Internet, why don't you "know it alls" attend a conference and pay your admittance fees like those who do attend. Then, you can transcribe to your hearts content.
One guy on these Internet bigfoot boards got it right when he said "Who in the hell do you people think you are??" That was very much a bulls eye comment and a comment we should hear more often. To demand anything from a volunteer organization,
1. you are not a member of,
2. pay no dues or,
3. provide no support (lip service does not equal support)
The TBRC has no responsibility to anyone but their members and their mission statement and pre-determined goals as stated. Thus the term "Volunteer Organization".
I have an idea for those of you who think your entitled to everything. Wait for the video to come out, and pay for a professional to transcribe it yourself.. Shell out the money you want others to pay. Now, that would be the honest thing to do.
Let's dispel another myth very quickly, Dr. Fahrenbach is not on the Board of Directors for the TBRC. Dr. Fahrenbach is on the Board of Advisers, because of his PHD in Zoology. Which means, he has an extensive knowledge of primates, to be more exact. How dare the TBRC ask that someone with such knowledge work with them, as needed. The nerve!!!
Is this happening to the TBRC because they are a shady group?
No, it's happening because of the jealousy of the "usual suspects" who can't stand the fact that the TBRC is a respected organization, and the "usual suspects" have no say in the day to day function of the TBRC.
That's it, plain and simple.
The "usual suspects" find issues with the TBRC quite often. So having Dr. Fahrenbach speak didn't create a first time problem.
I am wondering...
When the groups they belong to will finally get fed up with the constant pot stirring these few people start so often? When will their leadership decide one person is not worth the alienation of so many? Are these people acting professionally and in the best interests of the research? Are these complainers putting a positive public face out there for their respective organizations, or the research in general?
No, because if they were to act professionally a letter (or email) would have been sent to the TBRC requesting information on this situation. That was not done. Instead they once again took their issues to the Internet, yet again demanding things they have no right demanding. I am pretty sure they all know the email address for the TBRC, it's just easier and creates more of a stir doing it publicly.
Dr. Fahrenbach is a good and honest man, who does not deserve to be treated in such a shameful manner. Those who would attack him from within this community should remember,
You once spoke highly of him.
When people in this community attack others based on limited information (prior to having any real evidence of wrong doing) it's shameful, and makes us all look like a group of hateful fools. The public face of this community is tarnished by these constant unprofessional attacks against Dr. Fahrenbach, Dr. Meldrum and others, who's only crime (it appears) is having a PHD or a willingness to look into the things they are hearing and reading about. Hey, I could be wrong, but is that not the definition of investigation? Is that not what we should all be doing?
Why is it so acceptable to degrade our own in this community?
Especially those who put their careers on the line, so you have someone to send your "evidence" to?? If you don't agree with Dr. Fahrenbach or Dr. Meldrum, or a whole host of others, then don't listen to what they are saying. It's really that easy. It does not make you or your group look "better" by publicly flogging them because you do not agree with their every word.
It makes us all look petty and unprofessional.
Why did I post that quote to start this article? The media is not our worst enemy, it's ourselves. What are we afraid of as a community? That we might be successful? There is so much anger and hate by a select few individuals in this community, I wonder when their anger will be put to a stop, so the good that should be happening, can happen. Good won't happen and won't be discussed as long as the "usual suspects" are allowed to continue this kind of nonsense, and more people will continue to leave the discussion.
Eric Spitznagel and Vanity Fair isn't the issue, it's how we handle things as a community... The worst of this community was allowed to take over yet again. Things have been blown out of proportion.
Vanity Fair wins.