Editorials Redux...

I feel like I need to do this to get the message through to some people that I, Henry May, have taken a new stance, and that is to research BIGFOOT, NOT other researchers. I feel this is important, and I will run these editorials as I see fit.

Editorial: Should we be neutral on Tom Biscardi?

I can already predict I will take some heat for this editorial, but I am willing to take it anyway. I have a neutral stance on Tom Biscardi because I do not know the man, so I cannot say whether or not he is a hoaxer or an alleged hoaxer or a fraud or whatever. Sure, most of the Bigfoot Community has their own opinions on Mr. Biscardi, but some people go against the grain and have a neutral stance on him until they meet him. Some like myself have decided to make up our own minds about Biscardi rather than following along with the rest of the Bigfoot Community. Of course, what happens when a credible researcher associates with Biscardi or goes on his radio show is, most of the Bigfooters jump on the person that decided to associate with Biscardi or say that person is a sell-out. That is utterly ridiculous and absolutely unprofessional. People choose to associate with Biscardi or go on his radio show to get out the message of Bigfoot, not because it's the Tom Biscardi show. Why don't certain individuals in the BF Community let others make up their own minds about somebody before they condemn someone? Am I defending Biscardi? No, although it may seem like I am. He has made his share of mistakes and goofs in his time, but haven't we all? Biscardi's detractors tend to harp on the "Capture story" from two years ago and use that against him, but perhaps they need to re-examine that before they condemn the man. Now, am I trying to tell people to change their hostile stances towards Tom? No, because I cannot make people do anything they don't want to. But, at least back off on publicly bashing the man until you have the absolute facts on him. Bash in private all you want, but bashing someone in public can come back to bite you, so be careful. Now, to close, I will say this-he can come off as a bit of a slick, used-car salesman type to those who don't really know him, and that can be detrimental to Tom, but let's not forget, Roger Patterson was also a used-car salesman type, and look what he did. A lot of people ask "What has Tom Biscardi done for the Bigfoot Community?" Well, I say he has promoted awareness for the studies of these animals and has given people the opportunity to tell their stories of their sightings without fear of ridicule. No matter what one thinks of Tom, at least he gets out there. There is an old saying-"Sweep around your own front door before you sweep around someone else's."

Editorial: Is this hunt about Sasquatch or personalities?

In some recent discussions I have had in recent days with trusted friends, we have been perhaps forgetting and taking our focus off the subject of our search, the elusive Sasquatch. We have instead focused on certain personalities, questionable or otherwise, and it's fun for a while, but it gets to the point to where this becomes nothing more than rumor-mongering and gossip and not about the true research. One of the individuals who seems to generate the most discussion is Tom Biscardi, who everyone in the Sasquatch community has an opinion about good or bad. He has been the subject of discussions I have participated in on many a night recently, especially since after the recent Paris, Texas expedition in which some things have been said that were considered "questionable." OK, well, so what if a tornado was not seen "on the ground," or there was no tornado warning for the area? A tornado was seen in the sky, wasn't it? It only becomes a tornado when it hits the ground, so what if Biscardi and his team called a funnel cloud a tornado? So what if things are misunderstood and exaggerated about Biscardi? Is this field about personalities and their perceived screw-ups, or about researching an unknown, hairy biped? Why don't we quit gossiping about so-and-so or such-and-such and get on with the business of proving these things exist? Have we turned into a bunch of old ladies talking over the neighbor's fence about so-and-so down the street who committed some unpardonable sin? Even if the gossip is true, what does it benefit us? What benefit is there in us destroying someone's reputation? Does it get us any closer to solving this mystery? Does running Tom Biscardi, Loren Coleman, Matt Moneymaker or any other polarizing individual in this field of inquiry down help us get that one piece of evidence that proves to the world there is a Sasquatch? Of course not. Now, things that do help us get closer to solving it is diligent field research, radio shows interviewing the researchers who get out there and put together this puzzle, blogs which provide information to the researchers, organizations getting together and having discussions on theories and ideas of how to do better research. These are positive steps, not tearing someone down, not sitting around gossiping like a bunch of old ladies. If we spent half as much time trying to solve this mystery as we do trying to tear someone down, we'd have moved on to Loch Ness by now!!!