Well done, HM.

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…

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.