Todd also said that on his main website sylvanic.com he would be revealing some mew evidence that he was supposed to of announced on the C2C show (but we all know what was supposed to of happened on the show) except for some news paper articles and a few pics of some muddy footprints that I could have done with my shoes off, nothing has been posted.
During our time in Calgary we talked with a wide variety of people, supporters and skeptics alike. Some of the people we kind enough to share their pieces of “evidence” with us, photographs of Native mountain paintings, the illustrious “Bigfoot Wanted Poster” (
super kitschy I know, but still very cool never the less because no matter how loony it seems its 100% legit, which just boggles the mind) and the aforementioned “muddy footprints”. These were things that were given to us by people who honestly BELIEVE, none wanting their names promoted, just given freely in the realm and belief of sharing. As such we felt, and I stand by this decision, that we should share these images with everybody. Was it in lieu of anything, any video? Not really. It was part of our trip to Calgary and we felt people would be interested, but it certainly was NO EVIDENCE, just some images from our trip connected to Bigfoot.
In truth, my position on footprints is this, and it is MY opinion: I have yet to see one footprint, foot cast, impression that convinces me that it was made by a Bigfoot. People who tout footprints as proof are kidding themselves, especially when they offer every reason why they would be real. Footprints are footprints, nothing more. It’s like saying vocalizations are proof. Or video evidence is proof. The ONLY proof is a Bigfoot BODY, nothing less. Proof is one of those strange things, to offer something that is undeniable, without contradiction. Until a body is examined there is be no such proof. Until then everything is “evidence” with footprints and vocalization being on the sub-artic low end of the scale. Again this is my opinion, and based on two years plus of listening to hundreds of vocalizations and going cross-eyed examining countless footprint images. If people want my justification for this opinion ask me, otherwise I will assume my previous posts will suffice.
We are working on a series of 5 videos that will start with covering off some of the information that served as foundation for Todd’s research and then working into a closer examination of the myriad of information he has culled to date. We know it is not all in one video, but this is due to the time we feel it will take to properly present the information and now the additional care and high standards I wish to employ on the videos. The majority of you on the forum, critical or otherwise, I feel have offered and spotted a very insightful flaw with the presentation of our information which we will be correcting for future videos.
Now with everything I have read on this forum and on his website, I am starting to come to the conclusion that the way Todd is handling things does not add up, for many reasons that I won't get into, but they have all been stated in one form or another in this forum.
The reality of the situation is that we are working with a small group of committed people and a very controlled budget. This sometimes forces Todd to work double or triple duty, especially when a majority of our team is out in the field and correlating data. Even the most inhuman person (
which I feel Todd is sometimes with the cyborg-like ability to work 30 hours a day) sometimes gets scattered when they have 20 things on their plate at once. Does this in any way elevate Todd, or for that matter any one of us here at Sylvanic, from the burden or responsibility of presenting our information with the utmost attention to detail and in the most concise way? Not at all; the burden is always on us to properly present the information properly, which is the reason for the series of videos and not attempting to pile everything all in one.
Over the months information has been flying at us fast and furious from all directions, exciting information which Todd wants to share. Sometimes though because of our excitement, and I’m guilty of this in my own life as well, we speak before we have everything culled together in a concise and logical fashion. Todd has always conducted himself in the most professional way, the odd misstep has been minor in my opinion, and done from a furor and passion to share the same information that inspires him to continue in the face of everything and everyone telling him otherwise. One would say that understanding in these minor missteps are something even the most stringent skeptic could do.
To reiterate, this does not elevate our burden concerning the presentation of information via this site, period. From this point on I will be ensuring that everything we produce for this site is made with the observations of each of you on this site are kept well in mind. All of your insights and criticisms have informed our future media actions. Thank you.
...National Geographic would pay big bucks for research if Todd was to present his so [called] evidence to the people who sign the checks at Nat Geo, and they have a lot of influence within governments for the protection of species that are considered to be endangered...
...With the help of some of the "Experts" on Todd’s team, did they as an organization approach Nat Geo, not just Todd as an individual. Nat Geo likes trained scientists like biologists, anthropologists etc, not just proclaimed scientists/documentary [filmmakers]. If Todd is as sincere as he says he is, Todd’s organization should have scientists on his team like those I have mentioned to approach organizations like Nat Geo. Keeping that in mind I would guess that they would be a [whole] lot more responsive with the undeniable truth Todd and his “TEAM” say they have. My guess would be that an open checkbook would be the case in the most significant discovery the world has ever known.
Just as it is with everything, the burden of “proof” is on us. You don’t walk into National Geographic with Bigfoot videos and say cut us a check. Well maybe you would if you were in it for the money like Manitoba Bigfoot which single handedly killed media interest in Bigfoot. It is due to Manitoba Bigfoot and the sale of that blatant hoax video that put the kybosh on Bigfoot video purchases from media outlets, and that includes National Geographic. They’re a business just like any other publication/television network, and they are a subsidiary of a larger corporation that is publicly traded and has a board of directors. When you have resistance to your Bigfoot video from Forestry Officers and Politicians because they are afraid of loosing their public service job at 60K per year, how do you think a member of a Board Of Directors would react with the prospect of loosing their $150-$250K per year job? They would air on the side of caution and reply to inquires like:
“National Geographic is in the business of presenting and researching recognized species the world over and is not, nor shall be, in the business of propagating myth or exploiting fantastical elements without basis in reality.”This is a common ass coverage reply from media corporations that are politely saying “take a piss”. We could trot in every scientific expert we could muster and they would be discredited, and the fear of being discredited precludes legit participation from respected experts. People who call themselves Cryptozoologists are scoffed at in the scientific community, or people who study the field no matter what their background or how earnest their endeavors may be are considered cooks and mocked and dismissed immediately. When the oversaturated field offers little in the way of financial support for REAL scientific study (
due mostly to the myriad of profit based hoaxers and novelty salesmen masked as Bigfoot researchers, as well as those who want their answers packaged all nice and neat and NOW not later) the prospect of Gigantopithecus study attracts only the most stringent believers. It cannot compete with scientific grants for what is considered “legit study”, and it is this study that National Geographic pours the majority of their money.
I also found it interesting to discover that National Geographic, should they ever wish to produce a special on Bigfoot, has access to every piece of quality Bigfoot footage already. It wouldn’t be a study of a discovery not yet made, but a sociological study of Bigfoot mythology and wide public belief.
Now before everybody jumps all over my statement above, let me specify. Todd captured two pieces of quality video footage in the Sylvanic region in 2005, but this is not a discovery. (
If the region was still available and had remained untouched, and Bigfoot could be photographed and studied at this specific location, that would be a discovery.) This, along with the other information gleaned from the site and subsequent investigation, has allowed him a deeper insight and understanding in their potential behavior and herd mentality. Yet this is not a discovery, as Todd has stated on numerous occasions (
he has always attempted a critical acknowledgement of what he has and what he still needs). The discovery is something that we are working towards, and the only discovery of worth is that of a body to examine. We can photograph them to gather more information, but until there is a body there is no proof and thus no discovery. Todd has produced some startling evidence to date, and is working towards the discovery, but until we have something irrefutable, (
such as 1080i High Definition video footage of Bigfoot interacting with his environment or others, which I still don’t think will be enough but hey, for the point, let’s be optimistic) we’re all swimming upstream against the tide. And until we can come into the National Geographic office with something that they can’t ignore, (
high definition footage of Bigfoot in the daylight may do that) then we are fighting a loosing battle, plain and simple. So rather than beating our heads up against a brick wall, we’ll just pour our energy and time into getting that 1080i footage if you all don’t object.
...Keeping that in mind I would guess that they would be a [whole] lot more responsive with the undeniable truth Todd and his “TEAM” say they have. My guess would be that an open checkbook would be the case in the most significant discovery the world has ever known.
I know this is a repeat from above, but I thought I needed to address this point exclusive to the other though it is still a part of the same whole.
Todd has NEVER said he is the holder of any “undeniable truth”. He has stated he has conclusive footage, (
based on a kinetic analysis of the footage) but never undeniable truth. I, nor any of the other people working with Todd have made such claims. We just work diligently towards that proof in strict belief of our success.
As for the open checkbook, if you have ever had dealings with a corporation then you would know there is NEVER and open checkbook. There is thousands of dollars of lawyers fees, months of negotiations, red tape, reservoirs of BS and finally nothing close to what you had hoped for. As we are working with a tight budget, we would much rather put that time and money into just making the discovery Todd always said he will make.
I thank you for your questions and insight and hope that I have addressed each point with the proper measure of respect and clarity.