View Single Post
Old 3rd May 2012, 07:48 PM   #8433
AlaskaBushPilot
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,314
Originally Posted by parnassus View Post
I agree, GS, his expenditures before and after he made his bucks don't make much sense if he didn't have some belief in the animal. I refer in particular to the elaborate capture truck, and the hiring of a guy to drive around the country investigating bigfoot reports. I believe the term for the PGF would be a righteous fraud.
Then Roger has you fooled, but he's using your conscientiousness against you.

We don't actually have much data, other than some major highlights and the testimony of brother-in-law and business partner Al DeAtley. Roger never spent another penny investigating the only place to have ever produced a "documented" bigfoot: Bluff Creek, California. Even absent the PGF this was the epicenter of bigfoot "evidence". The most he ever spent on anything hands-down is the expedition to Thailand, to the likes of the Pussycat Bar. Don't get me wrong, that was a far better investment than bigfoot hunting. But no letter has ever been produced allegedly written by a serviceman that a Thai Monestary had a Bigfoot. We have only Roger's word on that, which is an obvious lie. Roger stole that idea from Nepal where the Pangboche Monestary allegedly had a Yeti hand.

Thailand did not have such a tradition or scam industry. That's why Roger couldn't name the monestary. Roger's connections to Thailand were indeed through the service since he was Army and troops frequented Thailand for the friendly local girls. So his cover story is the Monestary, an easy lie to pass off to people that don't know Thailand from Nepal. We're shocked, SHOCKED that the story did not pan out. I think the guy who went with him might have been the guy you mentioned who chased down bigfoot reports for Roger. An Ex-serviceman. I'd like to know more about this guy and his angle because its juicy enough already.

Insofar as all Roger Patterson's gadgetry and phony bigfoot hunting fronts - that is something we see him doing from the beginnning to the end. And wow, was he busy. He's writing a book extending the Yeti hoax to the USA, on the heels of Ray Wallace. Faking a LOT of tracks and casts himself to lay the groundwork for his big one. Giving talks, hoaxing Jerry Merritt in a suit. (More than one costume deployment, most likely). He constructs this "bigfoot viewing platform" that was an outright danger to life and limb, crashing down on Merritt's property, makes a "documentary" and scams numerous would-be partners before PGF...

The capture van, being the pioneer with broadcasting sounds through speakers, etc. - Roger was relentless in the same way Finding Bigfoot is in these ludicrous gimmicks "proving" their sincerity. Phony clubs too, research organizations, Roger did it all. So sure he sent someone to check out bigfoot reports. That's Roger's trade: bigfoot "investigations", ie promotions.

Roger's whole life was the entertainment business. The charitable view of his bigfooting is just that: entertainment. He has all these elaborate props, sure. And puts on an act. He must go to his deathbead making it appear he believes in and hunts for bigfoot. His wife and kids can continue to sustain themselves after his death because of it: people's belief in Roger's sincerity.

Being a righeous fraud is better than no explanation. But the systematic way he goes about faking the appearance of Bigfoot hunting from beginning to end makes the con-man model superior because it explains everything consistently across Roger Patterson actions.

Reasonable people are going to disagree on this probably. But righteous fraud clashes with the rest of his unrepentant and incessant bad faith dealings. It would be the exception to Roger Patterson's known character. And it explains neither Thailand nor his disinterest in Bluff Creek afterwards.

The Righteous Fraud view can offer an insight on the person who believes in that theory of Roger Patterson. That's a person with a conscience. Becasue we tend to substitute our character for that of others. For someone with a conscience, it is difficult to accept being a person without one.

Just discussion.
AlaskaBushPilot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top