Attack Dogs? Or Merely Passionate Inquiring Minds?
Posted by: Loren Coleman on May 26th, 2008
On Sunday, May 25, 2008, Henry May hosted his hour long internet-access radio program, “HBMs-Crypto-Corner.” You can click to listen to it here.
“I got beet-red over the BS from Loren Coleman over on Cryptomundo,” says Henry May about his latest internet program.
Most of his summary of what happened is below but you can go to the link and hear it all, if you wish:
This was a rather passionate show (at least at the end) with myself and Bill Green discussing the Ohio Bigfoot Conference, my research here at Janice’s place and I really got into the debate over the M.K. Davis findings over the alleged massacre (I got beet-red over the BS from Loren Coleman over on Cryptomundo) and I seemed to be defending M.K. quite a bit against all the vultures that have come out against him merely for postulating a theory and conjecture. Henry May, Sunday, May 25, 2008.
(On Sunday, May 25, 2008, Sean Forker and his “Sasquatch Experience” radio program crew of Henry May and Melissa Hovey also discussed, more calmly, the latest M. K. Davis theory of the Patterson-Gimlin footage, and made several good points looking on all sides of the issue.)
I decided to write Henry May this “Open Letter”:
Dear Henry
I liked and laughed through parts of your show, as you certainly did show some passion. The enjoyment in your voice when you were treated like a “rock star” at the Ohio Bigfoot Conference by your fans was obvious. I was unable to hear most of the people you were talking to, thus your short answer chuckles were without context. But I clearly heard you throughout, and understood what you said “passionately,” especially after the 45 minute mark about your “old friend Loren Coleman” and Cryptomundo.
LOL. I certainly got your sarcasm the first time you used the phrase “old friend” in conjunction with my name. It is unbelievable anyone else missed it too. I think you explained to all of us, deeply, the source of your emotions.
At the beginning of my 1999 book Cryptozoology A to Z, on an otherwise blank page 11, is this single quotation I picked to open the book:
“Cryptozoological research should be actuated by two major forces: patience and passion,” - Dr. Bernard Heuvelmans, 1988.
I know you will find it hard to believe, but I respect your passion - and your passionate true friendship to your Mississippi buddy, M. K. Davis.
All I would pray is that you have patience someday with those who do not agree with your every thought and support others who have different views, as much as I support your right to say what you wish, passionately, as long as you stop short of ad hominem assaults. (My request[s] to withdraw specific statements in your past blog were tied to personalized ad hominem attack statements given as fact, without proof, that verged on actually being libel.)
Ultimately, I was not offended by your passionate anger at me while on your Sunday radio show; I’m a big boy. However, you were not exactly fair to those comment makers on Cryptomundo by calling them “attack dogs.” Folks who support M. K. Davis have posted as have those who are troubled by his theories, speculations, and assumed facts. Hey, I gave blog space to both John L. Johnsen and M. K. Davis to have their statements fully published, which you seem to overlook. Everyone has the responsibility, I feel, to question speculations, perhaps even more so, as they are being based on alleged realities.
But I defend your right to say what you feel on your program. Your painting the picture the way you see it is what America is all about, and that is, indeed, what passion and friendship are about too.
I appreciate that your real “true friend” is M. K., and your motives are grounded sometimes more in that foundation than in seeing the whole. I respect that.
Have a good Memorial Day,
Loren
May 26, 2008.
BTW, since Henry May brought it up, with regard to a quick reference made in May’s show to my “comparing M. K. Davis to Michael Richards” in 2006, here’s what I actually wrote, in context:
Is M. K. Davis a racist? Of course not.
* * *
Has M. K. Davis now thrown a “Michael Richards” incident into the middle of the whole study of Bigfoot with some new enhancements or probing of his theory? Has Davis walked into a minefield of racism in his latest remarks, showing that he has little basis for his original insights? Does his most recent revealing statements reflect a complete lack of knowledge about the historical square peg he is trying to fit Bigfoot into - a racist one?
Roger Knights, Seattle Bigfooter, shares this:
“M. K. Davis was on the X-Zone talk-show 11/30/06 in an interview with Rob McConnell. It’s archived at X-Zone Archive, where you can click on a link to replay the 4-hour interview. He indicated there that his candidate was a surviving digger Indian of the type the Spanish encountered, or heard tell of, when their ships explored the California coast long ago.”
Perhaps M. K. Davis, who lives in a part of the country far removed from California and does not have a background in anthropology, is unaware that the employment of the term “Digger Indian” is based on a rather well-documented history of it being used as a highly offensive racial epithet?
Seen below is an archival photograph from the Library of Congress that is labeled “Digger Indian Squaw.” The term “digger” points to Native Californians who have been demeaned via a word that rhymes with another one that has been used in American racism.Loren Coleman, Cryptomundo, December 3, 2006.
- Similar Phenomena:
Good morning Cryptomundos…
Loren…I’ve appeared on Henry’s show a time or two and consider him a friend…I don’t fault him for defending an acquaintance especially since he attended the Ohio presentation.
I am hopeful MK will post the “detailed stills” for folks to draw their own conclusions….remember image clarity is only as good as monitor resolution and contrast ratio.
I am stunned by the lack of humility and the arrogance of “psuedo experts” seeking fifteen minutes of fame on the subject of the “big folks”. The only experts on sasquatchery are squatches. The more I learn…the more I realize how little I know.
They were here first…it ain’t easy being a bigfoot…leave them alone…JMHO
live and let live…
ole bub and the dawgs
hey loren this definetly a very interesting new article indeed. good afternoon bill green
I take it that it could be me, as one of the Attack Dogs whom responded the other day to Loren’s blog on Mr. M.K.Davis as to pertaining to his theories on “Patty” being shot, having braids and bangs. My posting was merely indicating that I don’t see any of these things holding water, as I have seen the Patterson film hundreds of times and just simply disagree with Mr. Davis’s findings, other than I do believe it is a real squatch, female at that. In no way do I want to trash anyone including Mr. Davis.
I think it’s great that he would want to spend his own dime and time into this research of this type. From my perspective, it’s all about getting out in the field and waiting, fighting off snakes and nasty wild pigs that want to chew off your leg and the insect world wanting to devour you then discovering you got a few gators to deal with only to just get glimpse or a few sounds from the animal you’re researching. I’m willing to see if they will be violent to me if and when I encounter them again. Each trip is different. Most of the time you get nothing. Sometimes you get surprises like a friendly coyote wanting to see what you brought him or sighting a black bear. There’s nothing like going out in the field, so when I read about a researcher who doesn’t go out but just analyzing film and in my humble opinion, seemingly jumps to conclusions, when he isn’t educated in the field of anthropology or physiology fields, it does make me scratch my head a bit. His heart is definitely in the right place and he has done a lot of good but most of his speculations on “Patty”concerning braids, bangs, bullets don’t really wash with me and I doubt that I’m alone here.
This is just an opnion and should not be seen as slander to anyone. Just a different perspective.
All i can say, and i say it to everyone, is so much for peer review. Squatchers are dieing to be accepted as so called professionals or real researchers but they are unable to be adult and open with their so called research. Worse is when someone takes a point of view opposed to what they present they start screaming and throwing poop like unhappy monkeys. Add to this the arrogance ignorance name calling and secret manhattan project style research areas and findings and its no wonder “real” scientists and researchers look at us like the fringe lunatic.
Well boys and girls if you want to be accepted and considered legitimate you first have to act or at least try to act like you graduated kindergarten. You have to present your findings for testing and scrutiny and not need to smear preparation H all over your self when others disagree.
Finally, and this may be the most importiant, you need to focus on the subject and not run off at the mouth personally attacking people. When you call folks names and spend your time on character assassination you belittle yourself and make everything you present nothing more than the poo your slinging.
It takes an adult to present your findings and allow your peers to pick them apart. If they stand up after being picked apart then you did good. If they fall apart under the scrutiny then we learned something and move forward. That’s how scientific research and advancement are done.
So i ask, are there any adults left? If not we are stuck with only a bunch of gossips whiners and wannabes. Its time to look in the mirror grow up and at least try to be professional and respectable. It starts with you and untill we take the initiative and do so we will be nothing but the fringe we so despise.
Peer review and disagreement is not a personal attack. It simply means others who share your desire to answer the sasquatch question disagrees with your findings. If you cant stand others to pick apart your findings i suggest you move on to knitting or needle point because your not gonna make it as a researcher.
Hmm.
Pot, meet Kettle.
The irony in this is about as thick as the scat samples being tossed about.
I’m just wondering here: why doesn’t Henry May get Mississippi-red-dirt-red about his own prolific flinging of feces?
Henry May is about as full of roughage as anybody who calls themselves a bigfoot researcher.
I heard that on his recent trip to Ohio, he supposedly had a number of encounters, which would bring his total number of encounters up to maybe 10? (I’ve lost count).
One thing I’ve learned: this subject brings out the fruitcakes for sure. One only has to hang around for a few months to learn that a ginormous amount of feces is flung about rather liberally (and not by Cryptomundo), as if to mimic the behavior of the great apes.
Henry May has certainly flung his share.
Hmm.
Ok, Sergio. The reason I got ticked at Loren is because the attacks on M.K. seem to have gone on all week long, and it just kind of came to a head on my show. From now on, I am not going to stress myself over something that is said about M.K., because there is no need for me to nearly have a heart attack or stroke over that. As to my encounters, I had some POSSIBLE encounters, yes, but nothing I would classify as definitive. Did I see or hear any Sasquatches on this trip? Possibly. There is just as good a chance that I didn’t. But the point is, I am not definitively saying what I saw (or didn’t see) until I have absolute confirmation. I hope this clears up any misconceptions. Thank you.
I’m sniffing really hard but I can’t smell any BS on Cryptomundo. Perhaps Henry May has walked some in with him? Check your soles, Henry!
I have read all the postings and comments on the ‘massacre’ with great interest and possibly a little incredulity. I have been able to get a full picture of what everyyone thinks because Loren has posted whatever people want to say - that is the way it should be.
Suppose Loren had decided not to post, for example, Johnsen’s earlier submitted contribution. When Johnsen’s views were finally aired eslewhere, and we found out that Loren had declined to post them as part of an honest debate, how would we regulars have felt? Or say one of us regular readers had taken issue with, say, Davis on a technical matter or had offered a reasonable opinion and Loren had pulled our comment, how would that look?
The great thing about this site is that when a contentious issue arises every shade of opinion is free to be heard. Incredible claims demand incredible proofs, but if those proofs are hard to come by should the claims, or for that matter counterclaims, be silenced? Or should they be put up for discussion?
On this site we covet and crave debate and inquiry, and delight in open minds. This is Cryptomundo, not the Anthropology Dept of the Natural History Museum or the Smithsonian!
Oops! That’s me banned from South Kensington.
Hi Everyone,
As Mr Coleman was saying, Henry was only guilty of trying to defend his friend from what he interpreted as attacks. Henry may not always express himself in a pc way but I think his heart is in the right place.
Can we please follow Loren’s lead and not start to bash Henry? Henry is a friend and even though we differ in opinion on this M.K. Davis debacle, his opinion is as valid as mine, yours or anyones.
Please be kind.
I want everyone to understand that diverse opinions are wonderful and are always welcome. I do allow many different opinions on my blog from the folks who comment on stories I put on there. Loren is doing nothing any different. Perhaps my approach to all of M.K.’s detractors was wrong, and perhaps I jumped the gun and took your peer review as an “attack” on M.K. I apologize to all including Loren for attacking this blog and forum. I thought I was passionately defending a friend, but I may have made things worse, so I am going to attempt to stay a neutral party from now on and be more tolerant of diverse opinions and not take them so personally. Thank you.
Well said, mrbf2006.
Although I still must say that Davis’s evidence still seems unconvincing…
Good side to this is the attention this site has gotten because of this…
I think we all could take a page out of mrbf2006(Henry’s) book. I hate to say it but some of us cryptomundians were becoming attack dogs(and I don’t mean Loren) simply because we didn’t agree with MK’s take on things, mrbf2006(Henry) included when he rose up to MK’s defense. However, unlike some of us, mrbf2006 realized he made a mistake in roasting Loren and he apologized. I don’t agree with MK or mrbf, and maybe sometimes I won’t agree with Loren but don’t attack me because you don’t agree with me. A simple “I believe you are wrong AlbertaSasquatch” will suffice. Even if you want to point out the reasons you don’t believe me, great. But once the name calling and attacks come out, watch out. Enough of the name calling and personal attacks. We all are adults, well maybe not all of us, but we should all try acting like adults. Just my two cents. (which some of you probably don’t agree with)
AlbertaSasquatch
I can’t imagine a community without our friend Mr. Loren Coleman. The work he has put into, not only this website, but all of the books he has written or helped to create is staggering, the information he has helped to spread throughout the world is impressive and appreciated. The thing I like the most is that it is never presented as absolute or condescending. We are all learning. Well, most of us are anyway.
Anyone can get carried away but it takes a gentleman to acknoweldge it.
Well done, HM.