Bigfoot Buried With What?
Posted by: Loren Coleman on June 1st, 2008
Often during the last two weeks, I have had to step back and conclude that the Bigfoot world had gone mad for even listening, once again to M. K. Davis. How could anyone seriously give time and consideration to a theory being floated among us that there had been a massive killing field of Bigfoot at Bluff Creek in 1967?
If I allowed people to hear fully about the entire theory at Cryptomundo, I thought, would not the house of cards collapse upon itself from the ridiculous nature of the supposed theory, the blatant lack of evidence, and the refusal or inability to bring any supporting documentation forward?
Perhaps we are turning a corner. Perhaps there is some enlightenment out there. I read a new blog that gave me hope.
Sometimes a line or paragraph comes along that says it all, with wit and humor, to shine a light on the absolute absurd nature of a new thought. Blogsquatcher wrote such a line earlier. Now Melissa Hovey, at The Search for Bigfoot, appears to have done that with the following paragraph from her new blog on M.K. Davis’ new Bigfoot theory:
“According to MK [Davis] who showed fellow researchers copies of frames and the [Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot] film at the Ohio Conference in an ‘after conference’ chat, he and [John L.] Johnsen are ’speculating’ there was a ‘Bigfoot Massacre.’ Yes, that’s right. An entire family of Bigfoot were shot and killed. Then their bodies were buried with the help of a backhoe - or something, insert your favorite digging equipment, because they don’t even know (I’m going with spoons, it’s just as plausible and makes me laugh).”
Melissa Hovey has penned further along at The Search for Bigfoot, in what she entitles “Here We Go Again…,” these thoughts:
Now, who do they insinuate was the “Trigger Man”??? Allegedly Bob Gimlin.
Now the story gets even better.
Not only are they insinuating Bob Gimlin was allegedly the “Trigger Man”, but they say he kept all this hidden from Roger Patterson. So let me help you picture it.
It’s a wild shoot out, loading and reloading going on as quickly as you can imagine - Bigfoot dropping like flies all over the place!!!
Blood, screams, logs breaking, baby bigfoots clutching their mother, AHHHHHH THE HORROR OF IT ALL!! Then the deafening sound of silence as this entire family of bigfoot lay dead on the ground. Then the loud mechanical sound of a backhoe (or clinking of spoons), digging into the earth spewing their exhaust into the air, while they dig the final resting place of an entire family of Bigfoot. Oh, they also say there were other researchers in the area, at the time when all this took place. But, we may as well forget about that - because no one knows who they are.
Meanwhile Roger Patterson sits at the camp unaware of any of this. He hears nothing, he knows nothing. If I were Mr. Patterson I might be insulted - they almost make him sound stupid. Geesh.
How do you miss that much racket?
Now, remember this was before the filming of “Patty”. Mr. Patterson is blissfully unaware of the events that have transpired (according to MK or Johnsen, they won’t clarify who is the owner of this theory). Mr. Patterson and Mr. Gimlin ride off, and within days or hours to Bob Gimlin’s horror, they come across a Bigfoot that survived this “Massacre”, namely “Patty”. Oh the shock that must have been sent through the body of Mr. Gimlin as the wounded “Patty” stood before them.
Now, this is where it gets really silly.
You know the alleged hernia on Patty’s thigh? Well, MK and Johnsen (not sure which one owns this theory they won’t admit to this either) said it’s a gun shot wound. In fact they state by looking at the frames owned by MK you can see that Patty has a thigh wound and a head wound.
Are either of these guys hunters? Apparently neither of them know the kind of damage a 30.06 can (and will) do. They state it’s not a hernia we see, but a flap of skin. Flap of skin? Well, most bullet wounds create a divot on the entry - and a big hole coming out on the exit (if it exits).
Now, what proof of this do they have you ask? That’s is a very good question.
Apparently - NONE. Other than a few frames from a 40 year old film and MK’s word as a researcher who has been at this for 11 years. Yet they (Johnsen and MK Davis) went on Coast to Coast AM with George Noory and MK dished this info at the Ohio Conference, but remember, this is all “speculation”.
Hovey moves on to motive:
When MK Davis and John Johnsen appeared on Coast to Coast AM and discussed this “speculation”, they took it out of the realm of “speculation” and opened it up to the consumption of the general public. Now ladies and gentlemen, all the general public needs to hear from us (or someone in this community) is something new. They don’t care if it’s true or not, they will RUN with it.
But in this case, how do you “speculate” and try to come up with facts, when you’re using a 40 year old film to “speculate” on events that may have happened days or hours prior to the film being shot? That seems to be a question both men (MK and Johnsen) are unprepared to answer. In fact, they flat out refuse.
Yet, they have no problem talking to George Noory.
I have asked both MK Davis and John Johnsen numerous times over the last 24 hours to provide some sort of evidence to back up this “speculation” which is actually being received by a national audience. They have declined.
Instead, they have gone on the attack.
I can understand why, since I was informed by Mr. Johnsen he has sold 120 of his DVD’s entitled “Keeping the Watch”, since all this broke. His words, not mine. Now, you should know none of this information about the “Bigfoot Massacre” is on this DVD. So you wont be happy if you buy it for that reason.
Intriguingly, as this latest Davis affair unfolded, an alien video in Denver surfaced that began to get a lot of media attention. What I found interesting is that one blogger called it “The new ‘Johor Hominid’ case.” I didn’t get the connection at first, but read on.
The writer on that matter commented: “Remember back in in late 2006, when Loren Coleman from Cryptomundo helped debunk the Johor hominid? How greedy ’scientists’ Sean Ang and Vincent Chow did not want to release photographic evidence that would prove that a some unknown hairy hominoids existed in the jungles of Johor. They both wanted a book deal first, and would release only sketches of the creatures only to the media. They said that the photographs were to be released in their new book. Hoping to make money of this. Not very scientific. Turned out that the pictures were fakes. Both Sean and Vincent were duped into believing that someone had actually photographed unknown hominoids. The dust settled in the Johor case, and there were two shamed scientists left to teach others a harsh lesson about greed.”
I would never go so far as to use the word “greedy,” but the historic similarities to merely asking the questions, being teased to wait for more evidence, and being rebuffed over and over again by M. K. Davis are there.
So, who are the real attacks dogs in this game? Those at Cryptomundo (the bloggers and the readers) or those who get defensive when they can’t produce what they promise? What seems insane to me is how those who are over-wrought emotionally-involved radio commentators or blog writers have constantly turned the tables around and make those who are asking the questions the enemy, as if there is something wrong for wondering why someone like M. K. Davis can be given a free ride, over and over again.
Sure, Davis has done wonderful work on the P-G footage, although there is that business about him using Rick Noll photographic work without credit for years. Sure, he’s used the P-G footage to show us all that images of Patty can be enhanced, although there is that business about Mrs. Patterson not getting any benefit of the use of the film for years.
No, instead of asking the hard questions, M. K. has been given a free pass. Any of us who have questioned why he is allowed to use (even unconsciously) racist terms like “digger Indians,” or make claims that Patty has “white skin” were attacked as if we were the source of trying to take down the Patterson-Gimlin footage with the talk of “massacres,” “shootings,” “bullet holes,” and “ponytails.” But is this right? Questions about the theories, speculations, pieces of enhanced frames, and other materials should be gladly encouraged. The Bigfoot community does it in regard to every other new theory, skeptical argument, or attempt at debunking from within and outside the field. Why should some of the most outrageous “new findings” presented since 2006, lacking full documentation, be given carte blanche approval, without being called into question?
Melissa Hovey notes similarly:
When I began to question MK and Johnsen routinely (because they were refusing to answer questions) I was told I was “mean” by the MK & Johnsen supporters. When they should have been saying, “Hey, MK, why are you not showing these people the photos you showed in Ohio and answering some simple questions?” But nope. They seem to think this is a personal attack, by me and others who are asking questions, when the questions are about the “speculation” they are putting forth, not about them personally.
If you want to hug and kiss every person who is involved in this, and not do some work to find out what their motivation is, do not come crying to me when it all blows up in your face and you’re looking like a fool for supporting someone who is out for personal gain. At this point, that seems to be the motivation in this. Which makes sense. As Mr. Johnsen told me a long time ago sales of his DVD “Keeping the Watch” were less than stellar (and he tried to blame me). LMAO. Apparently that has changed. I hope he thanked Mr. Noory and Loren Coleman.
As I mentioned in a previous blog, in an elegantly simple, but insightful concluding statement, blogsquatcher summed up many people’s feelings about the eventual outcome of M. K. Davis’ poisoning of the waters with his incredibly unsupportable “massacre” theory.
Blogsquatcher wrote: “You’ll ultimately have to decide for yourselves how you feel about [M. K. Davis' speculations]. I will leave you with this thought though — for more than 40 years, nothing has been able to diminish the impact of the P/G Film. But maybe this grand conspiracy theory will.”
- Similar Phenomena:
Using spoons makes a lot more sense to me than a backhoe, as I keep wondering: If Patterson and Gimlin trekked in to this location on horseback, how on earth were they able to tow in a backhoe? Now you’re talking chainsaws, probably a grader, and a lot more men. And if there is a road right to the creek, why go on horseback? Logic would suggest they would save time by trailering their animals in and proceeding from there.
Forgive me all for taking the bait and responding to the “massacre” allegation as if it were credible — because I agree it appears to be quite the opposite. But:
If you *had* slaughtered a family of BF, and if you *could* bury them, would the creek bed itself be the location you chose? You’re just asking to have your “hidden evidence” exposed by washouts.
Taking a step back, my overall (and unsolicited) reaction to this tale is: disappointment to see the perennial “I’ve got shocking evidence but 18 reasons why you can’t see it” disease strike someone with such a history of constructive openness.
It’s interesting to see the Denver alien invoked here. To me, the most amazing thing about that episode had nothing to do with the video’s content. It was that someone said “I’ve got video of an alien” and then he actually *showed* it instead of weaseling out.
I am not going to badmouth the man, and I appreciate the work he has done with the film in the past. However, there are things about his “conspiracy theory of slaughter” I just do not get.
A. Why the massacre in the first place? A film of a whole family would have been much more conclusive than a single individual. Even if they had caught a whole sasquatch clan out in the open and were attacked by them, who would blame them for defending themselves against such creatures?
B. There was no evidence of backhoes or any other equipment on the premises.
C. If there are bodies there, why didn’t they go back, dig the remains up, and sell them for a huge amount of money? I do not think “we may have killed actual people” holds up.
D. That would have taken quite a few people to carry out the burial, it seems someone involved (especially if he/she thought money could be made) would have squealed by now.
E. Oh yes, I see the braid in the hair now. Gee, aren’t the two dark spots in the middle of the braid a bow?
Spoon theory!
Have wooden spoons been ruled out? They could be made on site and not have to be carried in. They could be burned later to destroy the evidence. Wooden spoons would also be much quieter (ignore the irony of the previous gunshots and screaming bigfoot) thus avoiding unwanted attention.
Let me be first in creating a division within the ranks of the spoon theory supporters.
Who wants to help me create a DVD to show how wooden spoons were slyly thrown into the campfire to keep them from ever being discovered? Should we build a real campfire or create a computer generated one?
I suspect if we enlarge the picture of the campfire flames enough we will see images of Elvis and Bigfoot singing a rousing rendition of “Proud Mary” that Tina Turner would enjoy. Closer examination will reveal Elvis is holding a wooden spoon, Well until it burns up, that is.
very interesting new article about bigfoot. the photos of the spoons add excitement to it i guess. thanks bill green
The spoon theory has some validity, perhaps even as the cause of the deaths: They would make no sound (at least any that would carry back to Roger Patterson back at the camp, and growing up, the wooden spoon was my mom’s “weapon of preference” when dealing with us.
I think they could have made more money (if that is what they are after. Who knows anymore) if they had tried to publish this as a fictional short story rather than trying to pass it off as a plausible theory. Let’s be frank here it comes off as a complete conspiracy theory but with even less evidence. I say let’s move on I don’t think M.K. really deserves our time unless he’s willing to act like a professional and quit withholding evidence (if he genuinely has any) of his “theories”
I think that one of those spoons was the one Patty used to tie her topknot.
Or was that pigtail? Or pony?
I GET SOOOOOO CONFUSED…
So it always is with stuff like this. No evidence; transparent ignorance in relevant fields of study; and nothing to back anything up when it is politely asked for.
Squatchers have no one to blame but themselves when they give nonsense like this an audience. DEMAND EVIDENCE, WILL YOU? Real scientists don’t say a THING until the proof is in, chopped fine, and transcribed to PowerPoint.
Learn a lesson here! Giving overheated rants like Davis’s the light of day is the problem, not the rants themselves.
Do you thank the janitor for keeping the school clean? Or do you go, wow, CLEAN SCHOOL! Wanna be the principal?
Take what MK has to offer; and decline when what’s on offer clearly goes beyond his capacity to deliver.
Is this so hard?
I have sat patiently and waded through this whole fiasco. And believe me, that is what this thing is.
I must say that I am saddened by how this matter has turned fellow researchers against each other.
But I am not surprised.
I have seen it before.
Too many times.
It appears to me now that anyone, can at anytime, without a shred of evidence, make up anything about Roger Patterson, Bob Gimlin, and the film that was shot in 1967.
Not only can they make stuff up, they can expose it to the public via a national radio show. They can assassinate the character of Mr. Gimlin, and show no evidence to support their story.
But it also became quite clear on a certain Bigfoot e-mail list that no one has the right to ask for, let alone receive, any evidence this pair of carnival barkers claim they have. We are all just supposed to let this “theory” stand there like a proud statue.
No questions please…
The “spoons” angle is admittedly bizarre.
Sheesh…
Good post, Loren…
I’m still waiting for my original questions to be answered by Mr. Johnsen. I asked and practically begged him to answer my questions.
The only answers I got were avoidance, deflection and diversion.
I have come to almost the same conclusion that Melissa Hovey has. However, my conclusion does differ from her conclusion on one aspect. It is not always money that is the motivating factor for such nonsense. Sometimes the motivating factor can be implied power, acknowledgements, or just getting your name out there as some kind of enlightened authority on Bigfoot. I think these are the motivating factors that have come into play for Mr. Johnsen, although I will admit that, initially, money and sales may have been the motivating factors. Both go hand in hand. For the more DVDs you sell, the more money you make. Also, the more DVDs you sell, the more your name gets out there and from the public’s perception, the “perceived enlightened authority” figure comes into play.
As for me and my thoughts: Initially I was open to any theory from anyone. I then put those theories to the test by listening to the data and how that data adhered to scientific principles and the scientific method. I then objectively evaluate the scenario. Based on how the theory stands up on data alone and through analysis of the data, one can prioritize the theory against other theories. This one holds a low priority. My humorous UFO BF Abduction Theory holds more weight than this ludicrous proposal. The only difference is that my theory was absolutely comic relief. The sad thing is, this theory and the proposers of this theory, actually believe what they are putting out there.
There is one difference between a joke and this absurd theory. If someone questioned me, I would laugh and say, “Yes, I was only joking around to show how ridiculous a theory could be.” In the case of Mr. Johnsen, he will attack the questioners to the point of making borderline libelous statements and make himself a victim. He will also avoid any objective and serious questions. He will deflect the conversations away from the questions or he will divert the discussion of his theory away to something else.
The problem for him is that unlike some, I keep my promises. I promised I would put him to task and I did. I also promised him that I would challenge this theory with facts as soon as he has answered my questions. And I will. The only problem is that I am still waiting for him to answer my questions after–what is it now?–four attempts. Ms. Hovey is in the same boat as I am in. We have both asked the same questions for some time now and have both experienced the same tactics and results.
We have all waited a long time for the proof of the missing stick in BF hand, the braids or ponytail, and other types of explanations. I have a feeling we will all be waiting a few more years as the proposers of this theory try to accomplish their motivating factors for proposing it in the first place. But maybe, just maybe, some type of civil litigation could take place within the next three years because certain individuals crossed the libelous line and now have opened themselves up to being put to task. But instead of being put to task in an open forum, they might now find themselves open to being put to task in a court of law for things they have said. I guess it is just a matter of how much time and effort a certain individual is willing to spend or how far other individuals are willing to continue their proposterous theories. What is that we all hear? Oh, that is just silence from the Johnsen camp when questioned about the details of the theory. Ruff, ruff or rough rough! That is either the sound of an attack dog here at Cryptomundo, according to Mr. Johnsen or that was the sound of the theory holding any tidbit of credibility as it is put to task. Yes, it is a rough theory. And yes, ruff-ruff is the sound coming from me if you want to call me or anyone that questions absurd allegations as “attack dogs”.
In accordance with my promise to you: Mr. Johnsen, when are you going to answer the questions that were posed to you?
Well, of course they would have used spoons. If they had used forks the soil would have dribbled between the prongs.
The important question is - and the veracity of the whole episode depends on this -teaspoons or dessert spoons?? Knowing this could make a vital difference to the time frame for the events.
Great Scott Martha, what a hilarious farce!!!
NEXT!
What can I say that hasn’t already been said…except that: GREAT THOUGHTS Melissa Hovey!!!
Yeah, this whole massacre thing was ridiculous. I fully agree. It’s almost as far fetched and as illogical as the the idea of 100,000 or sasquatch roaming all over the country……and still not a single piece of bone or a body part being found and cataloged??
No wonder many people think we are all loopy.
The bottom line here is that Davis has given us a scenario, a story, without any supporting evidence, what-so-ever. Either he made up this story from his imagination, or else this story was told to him by first hand or second hand sources. He needs to name his sources, or admit that he has no basis for his scenario. It is that simple.