2016 Ohio Bigfoot Conference

Ohio Bigfoot Conference. by Melissa Hovey-Larsen.

As many of you know I don't attend conferences to listen to speakers. I go to see friends, I haven't seen in a while, sometimes years. Why don't I listen to speakers? Well, personally I hate being trapped in a room for god knows how long. and I hate being the person who stands up to leave while a person is speaking, because I have to find a ladies room. I know the large majority of those invited to speak, so I have either heard their spiel or can guess what they'll talk about.

Conferences (in my humble opinion) aren't really for the "field researcher," their more for those in the general public who see faces on T.V. or the internet and want to meet those people (or faces) up close. They're also for the person who's had a sighting and wants to talk to an investigator face to face.

 For those of you without a sense of humor, buy, or grow one, before reading any further - or simply stop reading.

I absolutely loved seeing my sister, and partner in crime, Monica Frank Rawlins. Hopefully it won't be another 5 years before we see each other again.

Meeting Shelly Covington-Montana was a trip. An absolute pleasure.

Gabrielle Cole is just as nice in person as she is online - see your dentist before spending any time around her.

Sean Forker hasn't changed in all the years I've known him. Someday you must share your secret. Seriously what is it? Creams, vitamins, HGH? Really I wanna know. But seeing him with his pal James Baker (thanks for that hug) was a true pleasure.

Jeffery R. Thomas didn't disappoint and as usual he brought his unique sense of humor along with his wife Tonia who is always as nice as she is funny.

Tom Yamarone: Yams!!!!! What else is there to say? Always, always great to see you!!

Diana Esordi - it's always great to see you and I couldn't be happier for you and Mike.

Sharon Lee. You wore Bella out. She hasn't moved in 2 days. I tried to play with her yesterday and she lifted her head and said - well I can't post that - but she gave me directions. It was great seeing you!

Henry B. May IV. Henry.. Henry.. The only person I know who can walk around with a smile on his face, and a camera in his hand, at these events like it's the first one he's ever been to. One of the kindest and nicest men in this community. I'm so glad I found you on Sunday to say hi. The only reason you got that picture is cause I like you so much! Thanks for posting it so fast.

Fred Saluga - a person I truly enjoy. Why? Because you can vehemently disagree with him, and still call him friend. It was great seeing you again my friend!

Eric H. Altman. What can I say about Eric. Eric your warmth and ability to spread joy to everyone is a pleasure to behold. Yes, I am yanking your chain. But it was great seeing you!

Cliff Barackman. It's been years, but it was really great to see you again!! Thanks for the tape measure - I will use it with pride. I just wish you had handed them out to everyone with instructions.

Lyle Blackburn. It was great to finally meet you in person! Love the hat.

Mike Hall - who let you out of Texas? Whoever did, it was nice seeing you again after all these years.

Abe Del Rio - who else didn't recognize him? I sure didn't. I don't think he will mind my saying, he walked up to me to give me a hug, and I pulled back and said, "Who are you?" then checked his name tag. It was great seeing you Abe - you look great and I wish you nothing but the best!!

Guy Edwards. After finishing this article I will be going into traction after taking a picture with him. How tall are you? 8 feet? Dude! It was great to meet you after all these years.

Dax Rushlow. It was great meeting both you and your wife!! I never would have guessed you would have such a great sense of humor and such a big smile (yah I seen the picture). Seriously though, it was great to finally meet you both.

Now, for my rant. Take it as you will. Again for those of you without a sense of humor, buy or grow one before reading any further - or simply stop reading.

1. There were so many people, I could hardly make it to the bar. It's a good thing I don't drink, but a glass of water would have been nice.

2. Marc DeWerth - could you cram more venders into a 3 foot space? I bet you can. Please make note of that for next year. The doors in front of the bathrooms were free space. No worries, anyone will climb a vendor table to get to the bathroom.

3. People I didn't get to see - Trinetta Brown Jackson and William Dranginis. Seriously? How did that happen? I am sure it was partly my fault for not spending much time at the Lodge - but Bill you were making deliveries to various cabins, and donuts are my favorite food. You are elusive like bigfoot.

4. I finally had the chance to see and speak to Bob Gimlin on Sunday. Was he being hid in a closet somewhere? Geesh let the poor guy out from time to time. I have met and spoken with him before and I know he enjoys sunlight and air.

5. Question: When is the ONLY time a bigfooter doesn't get accused of using photoshop?

Answer: After taking a picture of someone at a conference or in the field. Seriously people. I know most of you use photoshop - could you cut some of us some slack? I know some of you take 500 pictures but that is no excuse for not taking the time to make us all look our stunning best.

End rant.

At the end of the day, or the conference, all that really matters is - did you have fun? Did you meet those you wanted to? If it was your goal to learn something - did you? That's all that matters. We spend such precious little time appreciating those around us - you know, the people we talk to online, as if Facebook is our real world. Anyone who says conferences aren't important doesn't know what their talking about.

Take from conferences what you can, discard what doesn't apply and go away with happy memories. We spend so much time disagreeing and reading about the latest fight or drama - it's a miracle we can even come together in one place at all.

If my rant made you laugh - great - because we don't do enough of that either.

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Visit me on Facebook

Something to think about today.

As many of you know, I like to take pieces from my own life and experience and use them as examples. I am not the moral majority on every situation out there - but sometimes when you listen to someone else's experience and how they deal with things it gives you something to measure your own situation by.

Some years ago, I worked for a Public Defenders office as an Intern Investigator. I was in my last 2 years of college and wondered which side of the legal world I really wanted to be on and I also needed an internship for College Credit. Every day I reported to the office and was given a list of inmates arrested overnight - and I would promptly gather my things and head to the county jail (sometimes even state facilities. Hey just cause they're found guilty doesn't mean the defense always ends) to meet with the, "client," get his/her story - and fill out his/her paperwork to determine eligibility for a public defender attorney.

Sounds like loads of fun doesn't it? It was. I loved that job.

Best part of the job. Checking out the stories. You know - the alibi. I would sit in a little room made of big concrete blocks, a metal table, a thick metal door - and listen to a person tell a story that sometimes, I know, my eyes rolled, as the level of incredibility rose to greater heights. But as an investigator, listening to these stories and checking them out, was the job. It wasn't something I could just ignore. When I say, "checking out the alibi," I mean exactly that. I would go into some of the worst parts of a city (day or night) to meet with witnesses and talk to or look into whatever the client had told me. Heck yeah, there were times when I was scared out of my melon, but I had to push all that aside to do the job I was being asked to do. This person sitting in jail couldn't do this for him/herself.

The real kick in the pants is when you have no doubt in your mind the person is lying through their teeth - then you check out the story - and find out their not. Yeah, that's an awesome feeling. I mean that truly sarcastically. Personally, It did not make me feel good knowing, I had allowed my initial preconceived ideas to come into the defense of a person who it turned out, was telling the truth. I had to work really hard to change that about myself.

That wasn't the fault of the person sitting in jail - that was on me. Something I had to change. I had to learn how to listen and go where the information took me. Period.

It's not easy.

There are a lot of "titles," in the field of Bigfoot Research/Investigation - or whatever you want to call it. I take the title Investigator seriously. I'm sure you can figure out why.

Recently, I read as a fellow Bigfoot Researcher/Investigator, was pummeled by a fellow enthusiast for even the consideration of going to a site and investigating a footprint found on a property - after a sighting. A picture was sent by the witness, of the alleged footprint, and the request for help was made.

Granted, the photo (any photo) is less than ideal. So, is that where we stop? Picture is poor quality and may be a hoax? Well if that is the criteria then we should stop investigating everything - or stop calling ourselves "investigators." You don't even have to try hard to call every report or photo a hoax - so you can stay in the comfort of your home and call yourself a Bigfoot Researcher/Investigator.

No, I'm serious. If you want the cool title - then get your butt out there and do the job. Or don't ask for witnesses to bring their stories to you. It's that simple. Refer the witness to someone who is willing to do the leg work. Most of us put ourselves out there, looking for witnesses, to help us find proof of this animal. It's up to us to figure out the truth from the stories.

There has been this big push in the last few years to treat witnesses poorly. I don't understand it. Why would we want to insult the people coming to us - before we have any proof - they are not being completely honest? You can't tell and don't know if they are telling the truth, or not, until you are on the property and doing the actual physical work. I don't care what anyone else says - investigation requires actual on the scene work. Period.

Yep, you're right. You could be wasting gas and time. But, you asked for witnesses to come to you. You took the report. You agreed to listen and try to help this person. The expense is something we all deal with.

Sure their is a certain amount of, "gut instinct." But, that should be tempered against the information you are being given. Never forget - this is someone else's story not yours. The stories will almost always take a turn you will see coming, but sometimes not. Then what? What if you have already let your awesome, "gut instinct," take over? Yep - you will probably take your head out of the game and miss something important.

Sometimes the devil is in the smallest detail. The smallest detail is sometimes what we are looking for - whether we realize it or not.

Personally, I don't care how great the photo is or is not. I don't care how great the story is. I treat every witness the same and I investigate their story and, "evidence," the same. I don't go into a witness interview with a preconceived idea or notion. I don't assume out of the gate they are lying to me. I treat them with respect and do the job they have come to me to do. If that makes me a bad person - you know I won't be losing sleep over that.

If I walk into a witness interview and the person starts telling me things I just can't buy into - I still take all the information and then I find a researcher who can look into this kind of report. I am not rude or obnoxious. I simply do my job.

Fellow researchers/investigators - be good to each other. What we do is tough enough. It's stressful and all of us have been let down at one time or another. There isn't much that's sexy about being in the woods, for days at a time, with no shower. More than one private property investigation has left me covered in mud. We are always going to have the, "internet professionals," telling us how we should do things, how we did it wrong, and most importantly how right they were to begin with.

Just remember one thing - at the end of the day it's on you. It's your witness - it's your investigation to take as far as you want. What? Do you think the, "internet professionals," won't say something if you didn't take the investigation as far as they would have? Don't fool yourself. They will be more than happy to tell you that too.

It is possible to encourage other researchers/investigators - and yet politely disagree with their findings? I do it all the time. The photo in question here (footprint) is not the best, "evidence," I've ever seen - but would I blow off the witness and assume they are lying? Heck no. Would I berate the investigator involved and tell them they are stupid for even going to the site? Heck no. That's not even advice - that's being a jerk who thinks they have all the answers.

I would go to the property and do a full investigation. There is more information to be gained - whether it's a property with potential, or the ending of a possible hoax, before it even gets off the ground.

We are the first line of defense against the next great hoax. Whether we think so or not. We can sit behind a keyboard, very easily, and call everything a hoax - but it doesn't make it true. The facts are in the field and with your witness.

Pay attention. Listen and get your boots on the ground.

Finally - be good to each other. Encourage other researchers. Don't always look for the negative. Be CONSTRUCTIVE with your criticism - but acknowledge the hard work that went into what you have the chance to read about. Put yourself in the shoes of the person who just took time from their lives (and gas tank) to help someone else. Recognize we don't have all the answers and be the person you would want to talk to should you need help or advice.

In the end - know regardless of what you find, or don't, you can hold your head high and know you at least did what you could. That's all anyone can really ask.

Wedding, Field Researchers, Scientists and ~ Oh my. :)

Life has a strange way of making, "plans," for us.

Both my blog, and I, have been pretty quiet since June of this year.

I know many of you wondered why, Melissa, has been keeping her unique brand of humor and honesty to herself ?? 

I know, it's been painful for you all but; 

Wayne and I finally decided to get married!!! 

6 years is a long time to live with someone - but when you enjoy spending time with that person and you share many of the same interests - it goes by much quicker than you would think.

Much has been made about the fact that Wayne and I were still not married after 4 years so I can only imagine what those same people were saying after we reached 5 and then approached 6 years. 

But, let's face it. I am, Melissa Hovey, do you think I care what others say about me or how they think our life should be going? Nope, not a bit. But I have enjoyed hearing what the Facebook psychiatrists have had to say. Wayne and I appreciate a good dose of humor now and again. 

The dirty, despicable, gut wrenching truth that will turn this community upside down is: 

Wayne, and I, were having too much fun getting into the woods and doing what we enjoy most. Looking for the elusive animal known as Bigfoot. We've also been working a private piece of land which has yielded some cool game cam pics and audio.  

We both knew a, wedding, would take us out of the field for quite some time. Why? Because weddings (like field research) cost lots of money and take a lot of time to plan.    

But as of October 18th Wayne and I are now married and we couldn't be happier. Thank you to all who offered congratulations and well wishes. It was a wonderful day and night filled with family, friends, food and fireworks. 

Now that I have started paying more attention to the larger community, 

I see nothing has changed.

So I didn't miss much. This year I have had to back away from the community a number of times so I could take care of things more important in life and every time I have said, "maybe something interesting will happen?" 

Never has. 

I have been just as disappointed as the newbies who want to read something cool or new - or just something interesting. Backing away from the community and looking from the outside gives one a unique perspective into what is really going on and how the online Bigfoot Community looks to the average person.... I gotta tell ya - it's not a good thing. 

You all should try it, if you never have. 

The blowhards still blow, the pseudo-scientists still think they know more than the scientists and everyone, the paranormal crowd still pushes their wares and the newbies are still sitting back and wondering, "what the hell?" 

Why do I say that? Because for all the, "talk," there should be something of value. Why is there nothing of value? Because those, field researchers, who have information refuse to talk (for good reason) publicly. 

More and more of the field researchers with years of experience are backing away from this online Bigfoot community. 

Let me fill you in on something about, "Science." 

Science is about discovery. Science doesn't care how that discovery happens, they only care when it does. You could be standing on a boulder, on one foot, rubbing your belly and singing, "it's a small world," when you snatched the hair off a Bigfoot's head or you lost your balance and scratched the Bigfoot with your finger nails and obtained biological evidence. I am willing to bet if you came out of the field with this evidence of blood, hair or tissue - something rock solid - a "Scientist," wouldn't care about that boulder you were standing on initially, or whether your singing was in tune, or your work experience, educational background or how many internet radio shows you've dissed people on, blogs, or whatever, but they would care about what that hair, blood, or tissue really is. 

Imagine that. 

Sure, they will listen to your story but a good scientist wants that discovery of an unknown primate as much as you do. Science is all about discovery that is what scientists do. Listen to what they are asking of us, not what the pseudo-Facebook-scientists are telling you to do. Scientific discoveries don't happen over night either they take years and years and years and - you get it. 

It's not HOW it happens - it's whether it HAS happened. 

So, listen to what the scientific community is telling us, 

And lets just do what their asking. They don't want us to stop looking - just to refine our methods of evidence collection. Technology is catching up - and we should be prepared so that what we are gathering as, "evidence," can be tested and run through the rigors of the scientific process. I'm not a scientist - but I am tired of hearing the skeptics hide behind science. That's an easy win for any skeptic when it comes to putting down someone who actively researches this mystery. Why? Because nothing we've done has been proven and stamped as a, "scientific discovery." 

But, I digress. 

The other night I had a very interesting conversation with someone who has spent years and years around this community and has been a friend to most. I wasn't surprised by what this person said but it did set me back in my chair a bit when he/she said, 

"I just don't care about Bigfoot anymore." 

Honestly, I am hearing that more and more. I asked this person, "Why do you feel that way," and the response was deja vu, "I'm just tired of all the hostility." 

Yeah there is enough of that to go around in this community. 

What's sad though is;

The majority of the hostility, comes from the people who spend little to no time at all in the field, or they do get into the field, but don't discuss their field work. They would rather spend their days tearing down other field researchers and telling everyone how much more they know than everyone else. When in reality, they know nothing more than the people they rip apart over personal issues. It's really unbelievable. 

Especially when you factor in, just a couple years ago, these same people were telling everyone how there are no, "experts," in this field of research. It's really quite funny to listen to them go on and on about how much the field researchers don't know but, by god, you better listen to them.

Do as I say, not as I do, has become very popular.  

These angry individuals would have nothing to talk about if it weren't for the work being done by others and; no one would even know their names, if it weren't for the hard work of others. The irony is astounding when you really think about it. 

And people call me a Narcissist. I know, but at least they spelled it right.

Don't worry peeps, Wayne, had me tested and the results were negative. :)

All I know is this;

To those of you who get into the field - keep getting out there. Keep researching and keep working to try and solve this. Don't let the hostility get to you. Don't let the negative attitude of someone else ruin something you enjoy doing. If you want to discuss science - talk to a scientist. You will find one or two in this community with scientific credentials - online - and I promise you they don't have a group Facebook or fan page. 

Talk to others who are field researchers, who can offer you positive feed back and CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. If you want to be trashed and put down - I am sure you can get that in your daily life - why are you getting online to be called horrible names and put down? Talking to other field researchers should be fun and if not educational - at least we should get something from the time we spend online talking and maybe something we might be able to use in the field or at least try. 

Facebook has not been good for this community - at all. Other than giving us access to one another - what has the positive side been? There is more hostility today than when the old BFF was running full speed. 

Okay, calm down - you knew eventually - someone would say it out loud. 

My concern is simply this: good field researchers will leave this field all together because of the childish nature of others who really couldn't give two shakes about the animal or the actual work being done. It's already happening, but if it were to become a tidal wave, then we are throwing witnesses to the wolves. How fair is that to them? And, yes, we do need witnesses. Anyone who says different doesn't understand the research at all. 

Something has to change. 

Maybe field researchers need to go back to closed website forums just so we can discuss ideas without being throttled - because someone else is having a bad day or life. I don't know what the answer is but something needs to change.

I know this will anger the truly self-entitled but I'm just gonna say it because it's true, 

If we are not physically in an area actively researching the area, or we weren't involved in the activity being discussed, we can't possibly know all there is to know about what's really going on. 

We can guess. But unless we are the researcher working that property - all we can truly go on is speculation based on what we're being told. No field researcher, worth their salt, is ever going to get online and tell the world everything about the activity their researching. Why? Because it's called "research." Field researchers get online to discuss and try to come up with ideas. We're not telling the world everything - because we are still researching - we don't have all the answers. We say it all the time, but it's more fun for the skeptics to ignore the fact that researchers happily admit we don't have all the answers.    

Now, am I saying it's bad to disagree with someone? 

No. 

Even the most experienced field researchers will tell you they disagree with most of what they read, hear or see. But - it's the way it's being done. 

We have to bring back, "constructive criticism," to this community. If you don't know what that is, I would encourage a browse of a dictionary. Look it up. You will see just how little we have of that within this community. 

Anyone with a keyboard and hours to waste can get online and call anyone filthy names. It doesn't take talent or even knowledge of the topic. It just takes inner hostility that needs to be released. Why we as a community would encourage these people is beyond me.

We should be encouraging those who want to add something to this field work. Not those with a bad attitude and are in dire need of therapy - the true narcissists. 

A new year is fast approaching. We can either make this a year where we move forward, or we can stay in the rut we're all in now. And unless someone can provide something of substance - then we (as a community) are in a rut. Argue that all you want. That is the cold hard truth and the sooner we deal with it and come up with a way to move forward the better off we will all be - or we can continue with the status quo which has gotten us nowhere and that rut will only get bigger. 

I know what I plan to do and it has nothing to do with encouraging bad behavior. 

Let's face it, haters are gonna hate, and as a wise person once told me, "it doesn't matter how many times you explain something, you will get the same question over and over and asked a different way every time because they think they will trip you up. It doesn't matter what you say, people will always believe, what they want." 

It's true. Oh my - is it true. :) 

You bad bigfooters!!

Cryptozoology Gets Respect While Bigfooters Behave Badly

(Sharon Hill)

As much as I hate to admit it, Ms. Hill is right, on this point.

"Bigfooters" do behave badly.

But when was the last time a "Bigfooter" received constructive criticism that amounted to something? It's a two way street.

Ms. Hill is also ignoring the fact that skeptical researchers like me are bashed heavily by the skeptics she calls "scientific". Where is the science in saying that because I look for this animal then that makes me a "believer?" That's the comment all of us have seen on skeptical websites like the JREF. I am not a "believer" I investigate stories told to me by others. I would say roughly 95% of what I investigate; I can make the determination that the witness had a mis-identification. I am honest about that along with many, many other "Bigfoot Researchers" I know.

Do the skeptical Bigfooters get any credit for being skeptical?

Who decides what is "skeptical enough?" Is there a board somewhere we "skeptical bigfooters" should apply? The lines for "Skeptical" are very blurred. Near as I can tell on the JREF - call a "bigfooter" a few filthy names, accuse them of hoaxing and then never admit you go into the field looking - and you're just fine. But, the second you admit you went out into the woods - your skeptical card gets revoked.

How did I do?

Ms. Hill (in her article) discusses the "Paranormal Bigfooters" more than anyone. Yet, she did not make that distinction. There are different "factions" within this community, and I find it unfortunate she didn't point this out considering she claims so much knowledge of the community. She should know.

I do not do field work with any of the people who hold these attitudes or beliefs she discussed. Yet we are all lumped into the same category. That's about as fair as the nastiness she is complaining about toward the authors of this new book out now. But, her comments about the sexism - yeah spot on. But, women within this community have been talking about this for a long time.

Welcome to the party.

You say scoftic, I say, Bigfooter,

Let's quickly discuss the term she used, "Bigfooters". This word was first used a few years back by the JREF skeptical fans, as an insult, to anyone who gets involved in the Bigfoot research or community. So let’s just be honest about this. If it was not meant as an insult on her part then I stand corrected. But, one must ask, why did she even use it? Ms. Hill has been a part of the JREF community for a long time. I use the word, "Bigfooters." But not because I am trying to show disrespect to my fellow researchers, but by using the word, the sting of it, isn't as nasty.

She discusses Bigfoot Blogs. Then the one she points out is ran by someone who doesn't even do field work. Never fact checks anything, and the worst of the comments on this blog are from people connected to the blog itself or in the die-hard skeptical community. I wish she had made note of that. Maybe she doesn't know? Who knows, but, I give her points for having the guts to call them out.

It sure won't make you popular.

Ms. Hill - it's not about the truth - it's about hits...... You have a blog. You should know that. Sensational sells. That's why that blog, no one goes to for any real information, gets the kind of attention it gets.

Albeit negative.

The owner simply does not care.

I have no real big problems over all with what she has to say but the problems being discussed in this article are on both sides. Skeptics are just as filthy and insulting, in their comments, as bigfooters can be. So, let's be careful throwing stones, the window you hit, could be your own.

There is very little constructive criticism coming from the skeptical community. Sorry but, "your stupid," or "you're a Bigfooter so your opinion doesn't count," doesn't cut it, as scientific evaluation and criticism.

When it comes to women the gloves come off and anything is fair game. But that's in both the Skeptical Community and the Bigfoot Community. What's even worse is women back these men or they say these things themselves. I guess they don't realize that one day those same insults will come back at them?

So, there is equal opportunity, in that for both communities at least. If you can't find it - it's even okay to make it up. But, Ms. Hill is guilty of this herself. I have seen comments she has made about me - yet she has never even spoken to me or contacted me for any information. So exactly what information has she used to come to her conclusions about me? It sure wasn't both sides.

I have never been shy.

She brings up a book - co-authored by Michael Shermer.. Yeah, pretty sure I know what he has to say. But, just as "Bigfooters" have the right to handle their research however they want (there are no rules) then I guess so does Mr. Shermer.

It's just one more opinion.

It is not my intention to pick on Ms. Hill. Like I said, I have few problems with what she posted. But, let's be honest here.

The skeptical community is not full of saints and neither is the Bigfoot community. Either we all learn how to talk to each other, or maybe, we should just stay away from each other. There is little productive conversation coming from either side and a whole lotta finger pointing with neither side having all the answers.

Sorry, but not even the skeptics are perfect. I have seen some pretty lame arguments on the JREF too coming from skeptics who say one thing in the open, and private message me, something completely different.