Posted by: Loren Coleman on December 11th, 2006
- Similar Phenomena:
- Sasquatch With a Shovel? »
41 Responses to “”
Leave your comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.
It’s clear to me that MK simply is out of his league. He clearly doesn’t know anything about anthropology and every statement he makes is making it worse.
Or could it be the other way around, that some First Nations peoples warped their (male) childrens’ skulls in an attempt to make them look more like a creature they idolized and revered?
I think fuzzy is on to something. Weren’t so called Yeti scale caps made in imitation of the true yeti’s sagittal crest? Why couldn’t these Native American’s be doing the same. Does anyone know the origin of cradleboarding?
PATTY THE BIGFOOT - SASQUATCH URSULA ANDRESS, OR ‘DIGGER INDIAN’ SEAN CONNERY?
(Blimey, if it keeps on at this rate, Loren, somebody’ll be slapping you in the face with a glove and demanding you satisfy their honour!)
What I find so delicious and horrible about this whole new M.K. Davis scenario, is its seeming perfection as a microcosmic encapsulation of all the difficulties fraught with the mere act of perceiving, never mind being a human being:
I look at the Patterson film, and envisage a gang of testosterone-tortured juvenile sasquatch passing around frame 352 amongst themselves to refrains of “Phwoar! Phwoar!” because they’re beholding a veritable sasquatch babe - their equivalent of Ursula Andress coming up the beach in THAT white swimsuit in the famous movie scene from Dr. No; for myself, I see an unmistable female bigfoot, with an unmistably female front and an unmistakably female rear; but SOMEHOW other guys see a guy in a football helmet and shoulderpads covered up with a rubber monkey suit.
And now there’s this M.K. Davis stick business: I see a guy who’s rapidly diluting both any credibility he once had or impact his thesis could’ve had by either -
1), and at best, unnecessary showboating in the form of endless snippet-releasing,
2), worse, postponing the inevitable rejection he suspects his theory has got coming because Messrs. Green, Noll and Murphy laughing in his face over his stick claims, if nothing else, surely must’ve given him a clue just how weak his evidence could appear to everybody else; or,
3), and worst, someone cynically exchanging repute for DVD sales, (and, to go by the increasingly hysterical raising of pitch coming from that general direction, failing miserably).
And yet to go by your current ongoing experiences, Loren, many see something completely different: a noble-minded scientist bountifully dispensing his wisdom, but being impeded in this by your ‘irritatingly cavalier sniping’ and ‘cynical imputations’.
I personally thought the INITIAL tone of your original piece was a little on the heavy-handed, simply because I was fairly certain most people’d skim it on a first impressions basis and fail to pick up on your subsequently more measured qualifications further down the page; but as it turned out, the instinctive gut reaction I suspect lay behind it proved more than highly accurate: it’s M.K Davis who’s been cavalier and cynical, not to mention lazy and arrogant and just downright bang out of order right from the start.
Even this new cradleboarding augmentation of his theory is typical of the way he’s been conducting himself: he releases it surreptitiously through a third party, so no one’s certain if he’s its true source; but even worse, he now expects us, purely on ‘his’ say so, not only to accept Patty is human, and a ‘Digger Indian’, but that somewhere along the way her tribe not only didn’t become extinct, but its females started growing to something like twice their original height, acquired huge chests more hairy and bulging than Sean Connery’s in his prime, and as a result of crossing paths with another tribe possessed of an entirely different culture, are presently to be found wandering around America with hordes of kids tucked under their arms with huge great sets of planks strapped to their heads.
And the horrifying thing is I’m intensely aware, if they can be wrong, so can I.
They say that if aliens from other worlds are really here, then why don’t they show themselves - maybe they do, but we’re all just too blind to see!
I recall predicting interesting explanations. Stuff like this fits my suspicions. Isn’t there a line in ‘Alice in Wonderland’ something about ‘Stranger and stranger?’ This is getting that feel to it.
Beam me up Scotty. I think she’s goin ta blow!
I think I see where this is going. The next “leak” by Mr. Davis will hint that the “fur” on the creature is actually a bearskin covering worn by these “Hidden Indians”.
They also speak Cherokee and frequently visit a “farm” in Madisonville, Tennessee.
I don’t mean to be so sarcastic, but I’m getting bummed out by all the Sylvanics, Indian shaman, Blobsquatch garbage that gums up whay should be a systematic, scientific and honest search for this mysterious and haunting creature.
It is as if well meaning and hopeful researchers get bored or frustrated in their quest and sell out to sensationalism and the National Enquirer. What Gives?
I don’t recall the timeline, but I remember seeing ancient skulls and cradle boards used by the ancient Mayans in the Yucatan Peninsula at the excellent museum in Merida.
Fuzzy, that’s a *really* interesting thing to ponder…wonder if we’ll ever *definitively* find the answer?
A critical point to remember is that head binding is a “higher” cultural practice that only comes about in societies where everyday needs are not an issue. For example, the Chinook Nation had plentiful salmon year-round (both fresh and dried). Because they didn’t have to worry about food, they were able to explore different viewpoints of beauty and art. It wouldn’t make any sense to me that Patty (a hair covered yet naked human as defined by M.K.) would have the luxury to bind her children’s heads but not the talent to make clothes (or shoes or weapons, etc.). It should also be noted that head binding will not create a sagittal crest as suggested by M.K. in the above reference.
hey loren, wonderful new informative new article about the p/g filmfootage situation. thanks bill
#1 and #7 have it nailed. Those were my exact thoughts as I read this blog.
This is just getting silly IMO.
How many sightings for this secret tribe? Zero.
How many sightings for Bigfoot? I’d think several hundred at least.
What about the size and stride of bigfoot? What about the BIG FEET? The sounds? Are we really supposed to believe some tribe is really Bigfoot?!
joppa has nailed the real issue. I can understand and appreciate re analyzing existing decades-old evidence with the use of new and increasingly advanced technologies, as shown in the work done on Legend Meets Science- clearly more was learned using those tools. But I question spending much more time on anything other than, as joppa put it- “a systematic, scientific and honest SEARCH for this mysterious and haunting creature”. I’m new to this discussion, so forgive possible novice perceptions. BUT, it seems to me that all the real evidence is in the woods- the cold, dark, scary middle of the night- woods. Is it perhaps high time we stepped it up a few notches and figured out, as a community, how to get more of our researchers and qualified enthusiasts out where the evidence is? I’d like to hear more discussion about location- more about field techniques used so that we can all get better at the search. I’d like to see a ramped up effort to take what we’re learning about their behavior and start using it where it has the most effect, the woods. Meantime, I’ll be back here at my house awaiting your findings.
uh, I mean sign me up!
Next MK’ll be saying that Chief Bigfoot was really a Bigfoot, and that that’s really why US soldiers killed him in Wounded Knee.
Man, this talk is getting old. I really expect for this whole charade to come crashing down any day now.
I really don’t know what is going on with these people?! Can’t you see that this thing is not a human? Today the BF is a xxxxxx Indian and who knows, tomorrow it will be the unshaven guy from next door. Some time ago people thought the gorilla was a monster and not a usual animal from some rainforest.
I’m not a professor, but I think this kind of ridiculous speculation is degrading for the theme Big Foot! No one has ever proved that this thing is just a fairytale. We have here a good evidence and they say this is just a xxxxxx Indian. This is silly! The Americans are the great masters of the willful deception and cleaning up.
The phrase “clutching at straws” comes to mind!
That’s one big Indian woman and so hairy? I think not some how.
Kathy, you are, of course, correct — I didn’t believe that Bigfoot was the one doing the cradle boarding — just that it is really interesting to think that the first nations might have done it to resemble a creature from their world.
I remember a biology teacher telling us once that anthropomorphizing animals is one of the biggest false assumptions that people can make in studying animals — and leads to some of the greatest errors in interpretation of their behaviour.
Please, the skulls in certain tribes were deformed because of the use of a head-binding board, not a cradleboard.
It is a shame that this has been allowed to get out of hand.
Mr Davis should have announced his findings all at once instead of piecemeal.
Many of us, including me, have dismissed his theories already.
Perhaps it would have been different if we were allowed to view his findings all at once.
It may have changed the overall perspective of his findings.
You know, if Mr. Davis had released all of this info at one time, in a well thought out and complete form, it is possible that he might have been taken seriously. However, all of this promotion and leaking bits and pieces of info here and there is coming across as cheap and tawdry marketing. Add into that the fact that none of the people involved can’t answer questions that are put to them and have to attack the questioner instead. Come on, didn’t these guys learn anything from johor? What did they expect, really?
What I see here is fitting what is seen into a preconceived theory. He has this theory that Bigfoot is human and as a result, he is going to find a way to fit all evidence withing the confines of this theory. This is seen in mainstream science all the time, indeed it is what bothers a lot of people here about mainstream science. Sure, “cradleboarding” can cause that sort of head shape, but where is the evidence that this is what indeed caused it? Even if Bigfoot was carrying a stick, how does this prove that it is a tool using Indian digging for food? I feel it is important to look at the facts with an unbiased mind rather than trying to bend them to conform to any one theory in particular. Right now, I suspect that although MK Davis feels this all makes perfect sense, there is a lot being read into things here.
Why is it so difficult for some people to believe in the existence of a bipedal APE? Oliver the chimp was bipedal.
Kathy Strain says:
“It wouldn’t make any sense to me that Patty (a hair covered yet naked human as defined by M.K.) would have the luxury to bind her children’s heads but not the talent to make clothes (or shoes or weapons, etc.).”
That’s one reason why I just can’t buy into the theory that Bigfoot bury their dead. They are sophisticated enough to make shovels to dig graves, but have to throw rocks, nuts, etc. at people they feel threatened by?
It just doesn’t make sense to me.
I agree with the piecemeal torture, but let’s just wait and see what he’s got (or what he hasn’t got).
Apart from that, you don’t even need common sense to see that even if a woman was head-bound from birth (regular custom in many cultures world-wide, from China to Egypt) it doesn’t explain that the rest of the Patterson-Gimlim individual looks far from human.
Take a look at this child.
And compare with the hairy subject of the P/G film.
Boggle. Utter boggle.
You mean M. K. Davis really meant H.S.s. Miwok and others?
He needs to go back to amateur astronomy, and maybe change his name.
To those who threw away Loren’s books: you could have just given them to me, I’d like to read them.
Cradleboarding? Now we are really getting down to it.
This is really getting good.
Top Marks to the esteemed Mr Coleman for standing his ground I think! If Mr Davis doesn’t want questions asked about his “findings” then perhaps he should consider different ways of presenting them to the public in future?! As for this latest “revelation” I think Shineyegal hit the nail on the head - Clutching at straws indeed! Or perhaps a sheaf of “digging sticks”?!
Apparently someone doesn’t realize that Loren is doing EXACTLY what any good researcher does. He asks questions and demands proof; or at the very least a probable theory.
Any one of us can make up a baseless theory but that doesn’t help further the research, it just mucks up the water. We have more tools at our disposal than ever before. DNA, night vision cameras, heat sensitive trackers. With enough effort and discipline we should be able to find a fair bit of evidence.
I saw a movie once where town elders dressed up as monsters at night to keep order in the town. Since watching that movie I’ve wondered whether the Bigfoot legend began with Indians dressed up as bears (or other mythological creatures) to scare off settlers or other tribes. Didn’t Bigfoot sightings start with the Indians several hundred years ago? What was the source of the mythological creatures they mimicked, if so?
20. Rifleman - Your “Introducing a crazy theory one piece at a time so we’re more likely to accept it” theory, YES.
This seems like an X-Files conspiracy where the government doesn’t want us to know Bigfoot exists, so they plant an “expert” to throw out crazy ideas that will make US look crazy.
There seems to be some confusion on other boards with terms being used.
Cradleboarding is the practice used by most Native Americans to carry their infants. The child is strapped to a flat flexible board and often carried on mom’s back. On occasion, use of cradleboards create a flattening of the occipital bone (back of the head) as seen in Figure B above.
Head-binding is the practice of using artificial means to alter the shape of the head. It can be accomplished by wrapping the cranium with tight bindings, or as the Chinook did, using a hard backed board and securing another board across the child’s forehead. Over time, this would flatten the back of the child’s head and create a slope to the forehead, making the head elongated and somewhat pointed at the back (see figure A above).
Head-binding was only used by the Chinook Nation in Washington/Oregon and a few tribes in Idaho. It was never used in California or by other tribes in the west. Neither head-binding or cradleboards can cause a sagittal crest.
MK has it spot on. In addition some Indian tribes are alleged to hang their babies upside down with weights hanging from the arms to stretch them, and to make them 7 1/2 foot tall. Later they sit around with Prit-Sticks and glue lumps of hair too each other.
Maternal grandparents have the task of sucking the babies’ toes to make the feet deformed and 18 inches long, and fathers teach the young to bound along at 35 MPH with steps 8 foot apart to aid the hunt. Finally, there is a coming-of-age initiation ceremony where the elders gather and roll the youngsters in liquidized skunk and dog sick to make them smell to high heaven.
And there you have it, bigfoot.
Now, let’s have a look at Nessie…
I don’t think these guys even believe a word of what they are saying. They are probably dreaming up crazy theories in order to stir up enough controversy/attention so as to have an early surge in sales before word of their inferior product spreads. Kind of like an over-hyped movie that is not screened for critics.
I’ve tried to hold my tongue until more solid information comes forward (read as: MK Davis presenting his entire case), but I’m sorry, this is just getting weirder and weirder!
Are we being asked to believe that a hidden tribe of Native Americans has been living undiscovered in North America for centuries, one that is essentially a primitive society like the Tasaday of the Philippines? (Forgive me if I rather bluntly say that this is really starting to get a bit out of hand here).
Loren, thanks for continuing to post this information on your blog and for having the sort of patience that it takes to remain calm in the midst of what is surely building up to be a very volatile debate.
Well, it would have to be a technologically simple tribe living undiscovered in North America for centuries, in whose gene pool both Acromeglia and Hypertrichosis are so dominant as to be “Normal.” To me, that seems less plausible than the theory of an unrecognized New World ape or relict hominid living undiscovered (by “Science”) in North America for centuries.
I said it before and I stick to my guns. MK is using this back and forth boloney to generate massive FREE publicity.
It is possible that the guy in the suit paddleboarded his head before he got in it.
Hmm, this reminds me of when I was watching a video of the world’s most advanced robot tried to climb stairs, and fell on its head, followed by a curtain being slid in front of it.
I really like Fuzzy’s take in post #2. So, I’ll try and throw another reason out why this practice might have been used.
The famous Dunce cap was invented, or re-invented, because it has been believed that a higher consciousness can be obtained by humans if they were able to perceive that their consciousness emanated or was concentrated from a point roughly 2 to 3 feet above and in line with the crown of the head. Hence, you see the images of wizards and witches donning conical headwear that ends in a point directly in line with the crowns of their head. By wearing such headgear, the psychic, or universal, or whatever you may call it, energy is channelled or better conceptualized with the use of such headwear. Thomas Dunce invented the conical cap with exactly this theory in mind.
“Head-binding”, of which I was not aware until this thread, seems to create a head in such a shape as to produce greater receptivity to this energy.
Just a passing thought, so take it for what it’s worth, and nothing more.
Thanks,
DR
My bad. John Duns Scotus is apparently the real man behind my story.
I know I had read about a Thomas Dunce though.
Can’t trust anything you read. Or my own memory.
A lesson there somewhere. Thanks, and overflowing apologies.
DR