My name for the record is Evan jensen. I live in the Pacific Northwest, so when I see and article pertaining to the great outdoors,well I may just take notice to it.
If the paranormal or Crptid field ever changes, it may take huge leaps toward achieving the same said goals.When people fake evidence and pictures, it can set the field back in progressive movement.We hope the allegations are not true and will be following any additional comments and or replies to this particular blog as well.
The feud continues Money Maker V.S. Crook?
IN this article, we will explore allegations made by the BFRO. They the BFRO have basically stated they had evidence and proof of alleged Bigfoot hoaxer(Cliff Crook) that he was making more stuffed toys and shooting them as the real deal?
The article was written by By Daniel Dover,in the Bigfoot Junction. the article goes on to say the following”Matt Moneymaker accused Cliff Crook of being a hoaxer soon after forming the BFRO (Bigfoot Field Research Organization) and a bitter feud has ensued between the two ever since. Pictured below are Crook, a photo of an alleged sasquatch published by Mr. Crook, and Matthew Moneymaker who claims the Sasquatch is a miniature sculpture created by Mr. Crook.
Cliff Crook had his first sighting as a child in 1956 in the state of Washington and he’s been a researcher since the 1970′s and has sold postcards, maps of Bigfoot sightings, and Bigfoot memorabilia including replicas of bigfoot tracks. During his decades of research people sent him photos, many of which he published. He was a consultant on the movie “Harry and the Hendersons.”
In a Jan. 30, 2010 BFRO article titled, “Hoaxer Cliff Crook Promoting Phony Photo, Again,”Matthew Moneymaker makes this statement:
“Long-time hoaxer Cliff Crook of Bothell, Washington, has a unique niche in the bigfoot evidence fabrication business. He’s a sculptor. What does a Bigfoot-hoaxer-sculptor do? He mostly sculpts fake tracks, at his home. At one time he had a whole track duplication factory in his garage and backyard. Crook has sculpted more than just phony Bigfoot tracks though. He has sculpted entire Bigfoot statues of various shapes and sizes. He didn’t sell those statues, rather he took photos of them and tried to pass them off as authentic photos.”
Is Cliff a Crook guilty of these things? Sadly, even if he is right, Matthew Moneymaker states this as fact but doesn’t offer any evidence that Mr. Crook did this. Cliff Crook made duplicates of Bigfoot tracks at his home that he sold as replicas, yet Moneymaker claims he sculpted fake tracks, and then Moneymaker spring boards that accusation to conclude that Crook also sculpted fake statues of Bigfoot and photographed them as well.
A problem with the accusation is if someone has done research as long as Mr. Crook has then he has likely made sasquatch footprint casts and would not need to sculpt a fake print in order to make a mold for replicas. Besides there being no evidence that Mr. Crook sculpted fakes of any kind, if he publishes a photo from a third party that turns out to be fake it doesn’t make him a hoaxer, unless he promotes something as real that he realizes is likely fake, which might be where Mr. Crook is guilty of fraud.
Now, many believe the photo of the alleged Sasquatch above looks like a miniature action figure. Cliff Crook claims to have gotten that photo from a park ranger that didn’t want his name released. According to Crook the ranger said he was investigating a problem bear when he heard splashing in the water under a bridge he was standing on. He was able to take photos of the alleged sasquatch while looking down on it from above.
David Rodriguez wrote an excellent article explaining why that photo is not a miniature, providing evidence it is a full sized being. Residing in the same general region of the country he recognized the common water plant with white flowers seen in the photo with the alleged Sasquatch.
Rodriguez writes, “so its time to blow the ‘small action figure’ allegation out of the water. You see those tiny white spots in the water? That appears to be one of a few well known aquatic plant species, such as White Water Crowfoot, Water Buttercup or Fanwort. They each grow in slow moving streams or in ponds throughout the US and Canada. I see it in the rivers and ponds where I live here in Oregon, which is how I first recognized it in the photos. I also have some background in waterway ecosystems having once pursued the construction of a fresh water interpretive center. Depending on species, the size of the flowers (1/2″ – 3/4″) then provides some scale to the photos.”
Now, this might not be a miniature, and if we stopped here we might consider this Bigfoot could be real, but I have to thank Matthew Knapp for finding another of these series of pictures that does indeed prove this Bigfoot is a hoax. As Matt K. commented, “. . . how do you explain this photo, same position, facing same direction, nothing has changed in its pose. Camera person standing right next to it?” Answer: you can’t explain it in a way that doesn’t make this a fake. The ranger could not have taken the photo up top and then gone down the hill to ground level with it and taken this other photo (below). So, perhaps Moneymaker is vindicated, having some legitimacy to his hoaxer claims, at the least this is problematic for Cliff Crook.
Now, Crook later admitted he was possibly duped with these series of pictures. But it’s hard to believe that if Crook saw this same ground level photo with the others he could not have known it must be a fake. And its a further mind bender why someone would release the ground level photo in the first place if they were committing a hoax. That’s as mysterious as Bigfoot itself; something doesn’t quite add up. If your intention is to hoax why release this damning photo?
looks like a damned tree to me people?
The following information came from this website and article.
Crook owns that image, but he *licenses* it to publishers for up to $9,000 a pop. He has promoted it consistently for years, and licensed it several times to publishers.
It can be found in newer children’s books about the subject, and more than one pictorial encyclopedia about famous legends and mysteries. It also appears in several foreign publications, which likely licensed it from Crook as well.
Crook got a lot of mileage out of the puffy black statue. In reality, it may have only been knee-high in size. Doug Hajicek thinks it was less than a foot tall.
Any publisher who licenses the Wild Creek photo will have a cause of action against Mr. Crook for fraud if he did the deal under the pretense that it’s an authentic photo … or the pretense that he doesn’t know either way. Both stories are bald-faced lies. He faked that photo himself in the 1990’s.
Disclaimer: The following information has been provided to us and the article is based on the said information, we obtained. All allegations made are alleged, and the Paranormal Herald can not be held accountable for other parties information.
Paranormal Herald : Evan jensen