1. His assertions and scenario originated from his imagination. If this is the case, we need not look twice at his story.

2. His assertions and scenario are based on hearsay, rumor, or witness accounts. If this is the case, Mr. Davis needs to state his sources, or at least acknowledge his sources off the record. If he has sources, then further investigation is warranted.

I’m not yet ready to write off Mr. Davis and company as some gang of mischief-makers out to defame Patterson, Gimlin, and their Bigfoot.
(Which is not the same as believing their story).

Two historical notes worth a ponder: In 1958 (I think I’m right about the year), very large human-like footprints began to show up in northern California. At this point, “bigfoot” and sasquatch were not firmly linked yet. Bob Titmus and another fellow were quite sure the tracks were made by a singular “wild” Native American, of very large size (and feet). They even reported a backstory, in which this “Indian” had been chained years earlier by his family, out of fear, and the child giant broke free and became feral (and the maker of large human tracks in the wild).

Also, it should be recalled, shortly after Patterson made his film, he gave an interview in which he said that he and Gimlin believed there was a family of sasquatch at Bluff Creek, but they surmised that the family had left the area.

These historic notes don’t verify Mr. Davis’ account, of course. I only bring them up to illustrate that bigfoot phenomena is a little more complex than sometimes presented.

No, I wouldn’t waste my time going to either talk. It is really not a talk or discussion when you can not offer a differing opinion to the opinion being offered. That is called one sided or a monologue. I think I’ll pass on this “great” opportunity. I have more important things to do. Where was I? Oh yes, back to the more important things, like sleep.

Thanks for waking me up but no thanks!

Actually Loren, I do appreciate the heads up. I might as well not throw away my stick just yet. I thought the horse was definitely dead and well on it’s way to a merciful decomposition. But it appears, there are those out there still beating the dead horse and I may have to be oncall and join in with facts against such ludicrous theories. Someone give me a page if it rears it’s ugly head.

Back to bed!

And I think that it is only right to keep swatting at this pesky fly until we finally knock it down somehow.

I am not assuming anything…listen to their interviews. Needless to say they are in the agreement with the rest of us, with your actions.

I am not putting words into your mouth only repeating what you have written and again based on testimony by Johnsen & Davis. The only slant here was your pathetic attempt at getting your name and credit in MK’s work.

How is my show one sided, when I gave both Mr. Johnsen and Mr. Davis the air time? It wasn’t until the little DA caper, that we even knew of your involvement and from Mr. Johnsen, your involvement other than lending an ear to Mr. Davis, was minuscule. So frankly your input into the theory, other than writing letters to DAs, (over non-provable claims, over worrying about your complicity in the alleged killing of multiple Sasquatch, which is the most lamest, and most legally groundless excuse I’ve ever heard.) your input was not needed, as you really had nothing new or revealing to contribute except instigating this matter further.

So stop acting like MK Davis broadsided you, when you did the biggest broadside of them all.

PS…Don Monroe TRIPPED ON A ROCK and broke his arm. Not passed out over a magma vent like you had suggested. Not a slant, just his testimony.

Surely the fact that he sent the letter to the wrong County Prosecutors’ office speaks volumes.

Post proof for everyone to see publicly and make their own conclusions as to the validity or insanity of it all or be quiet. Bottom line is that everything I have read surrounding this particular ‘theory’ comes across as, to quote the Immortal Homer Simpson, bullplop. BULLPLOP! And this constant “Just wait! Proof is coming! It’ll all come out!” screams that none actually exists that can survive rational scrutiny for longer than 2 minutes.

That is all.

Not because there is anything to these pathetic charges, but because it will show that even with a “muddying of the waters” like this, it doesn’t change the fact that continuing the efforts are worthwhile.

As to Mr Marlowe’s contention that he wasn’t trying to “inflame” the situation, didn’t he call the authorities?

Since your show was not balanced (i.e. I wasn’t invited to the party so that I could express my position and perspective on the events), you DON’T know everything about the issue and the pertinent background.

Thus, you aren’t in a position to put words in my mouth or spin the events accurately to suit your “editorial slant.”