Shooting Incident At Bluff Creek?
Posted by: Loren Coleman on May 22nd, 2008
Within the Bigfoot community, Patterson-Gimlin film analyst M. K. Davis lately has been reporting on seeing all kinds of new physical characteristics (e.g. a ponytail, top knot, braids, white skin, humaness) for the Bigfoot in the 1967 Patterson-Gimlin footage.
Now it may be revealed Davis has a broader new theory that includes even more assertions.
M. K. Davis shared in Ohio at Don Keating’s conference, in talks with individuals at a publicly-held small gathering, that “Patty,” the nickname given to Bigfoot in the famed film of October 20, 1967, taken at Bluff Creek, California, may have been part of a “massacre.” Those individuals in that meeting have carried the information to a wider audience, thanks to the web and worldwide email exchanges.
People reported that Davis speculated that Patty was shot twice, allegedly by Robert Gimlin, who has steadfastly maintained he merely stood guard with his rifle. Gimlin says he did not fire one shot at the Bigfoot he saw that day. And indeed, Davis says he never said any such thing, as such. But the source of the speculation, as you will learn as you read this and the next blog, is M. K. Davis.
Rumors have been circulating since this last weekend of this new bit of speculation about a “Bigfoot massacre” in 1967. In Cryptomundo’s continuing attempt to air all sides of these issues, despite misunderstandings by people on both sides of the fence, you will find in the blog after this one an exclusive lengthy statement from someone who has been involved from the beginning with M. K. Davis, regarding what is becoming known as “the theory” - filmmaker John L. Johnsen.
Davis may think that his “speculations” are not being heard or read about widely, but throughout May 20-21, the Internet chatter was heavy.
Typical comments include ones like these:
“Sorry MK, but massacres at Bluff creek???? Gimlin shooting Patty, twice??? I think you’re seeing something because you want to, not because it is actually there.”
“Just more crap from the PG Film Illusionist!”
“Nonsense.”
While M. K. Davis and his work was acknowledged and appreciated, few jumped on the bandwagon to support fully his newest lines of speculation.
One emailer did write: “Not taking sides here….I wouldn’t be too quick to be judge & jury on MK. He may know something we all don’t know.”
On the record, certain individuals, far and wide, important to hominology, have reacted to Davis’s latest claims.
PNW Bigfooter Joe Beelart said: “That’s other nonsense about rifle shots and such is speculation and should be completely disregarded. Bob Gimlin says he didn’t shoot. Bob Gimlin is a man of great integrity and his word is to be respected.”
Two others, both Russian hominologists, who heard about the theory from people who were in Ohio, have shared their comments here, for the record:
Absolute nonsense! Wild fantasy! - Dmitri Bayanov
and
I’ve received that fantastic info about shooting Bigfoot in the Patterson film.
I think it’s just fancy, just imagination by MK.
I studied the film from frame to frame, all the 960 frames, had drawn graphs of all the movements of Patterson and Patty, and am sure that no sign of any deviation of the Patty’s natural and smooth movement occurred. That bulge mentioned by Marlon is the thigh muscle very convex up to a ball just at the moment of an impulse of power to straighten the leg. And in the next instant the leg is being straightened without any sign of Bigfoot being harmed. If a bullet hit that point on upper leg (thigh) the leg could not be straighten after that so quickly and naturally. And all the movement continued in the same natural rhythm as before “the shooting”.Igor Bourtsev
For more reactions and indepth details about M. K. Davis’ theory, click and read the exclusive John L. Johnsen’s statement, from the filmmaker who worked for years on this matter.
Why doesn’t this guy just stick to what is on the film footage? A tall, hairy…something walking away, looks back and then enters the tree line and is gone. Unless there is footage never before released that he has gotten his hands on. Massacre–don’t you need a large number of victims for there to be a massacre?
massacre |ˈmasikər|noun
an indiscriminate and brutal slaughter of people : the attack was described as a cold-blooded massacre | she says he is an accomplice to massacre.
• informal a heavy defeat of a sports team or contestant.
verb [ trans. ]
deliberately and violently kill (a large number of people). See note at kill .
• informal inflict a heavy defeat on (a sports team or contestant).
ORIGIN late 16th cent.: from French, of unknown origin.
We have as of yet to publicly capture a good photo of one, let alone be able to slaughter a large number in order for the events to be called a massacre. Of course, if they did shoot Patti and had brought the body back, they probably would have thought twice before releasing any film footage. After all there’s no sign of aggression. Even at that time there would probably be problems for patterson and gimli. Besides 2 gunshots usually makes the animal look your direction. I’ve done that deer hunting to get the buck to move its head so I could see if it was legal or not. Unless he has footage never before seen with patti “jumping” or showing any amounts of pain, I do not see the characteristic signs of anyone (man or animal) getting shot. The “victim” will either jump or jerk in reaction to the “sting” or they will just fall down dead. Either way, there would be physical evidence on Patti in the way she is moving.
Again, all of this is speculation, folks. No one is saying all of this is fact, and I do not see where anyone said that Bob Gimlin was the one doing the shooting. It seems that certain parties are the ones speculating that Gimlin was the one that allegedly did the shooting. Nowhere will you see me say (or quote) that Gimlin did any shooting, or even allegedly did any shooting. Just remember, folks, those of us who were privvy to this information from the conference are not saying this information is true.
Hmmm, who do I believe? Who do I believe, M. K. Davis or Bob Gimlin? Hmmm, Bob was there.
Bob is a man of integrity. M. K. Davis was not there. What about his integrity in light of recent claims?
I going and sticking with Bob Gimlin! Any one else?
Has anyone looked for a nearby grassy knoll, from which a second shooter could have shot?
Best
If this beast was shot, it must have been with a BB gun!