There simply is no solid evidence for any kind of massacre and the speculation of such damages the reputation of good men like Bob Gimlin and John Green. I go back to the fact that any detail recovered from the Patterson Film which goes beyond the resolution of the film is not reliable for evidential purposes but can be interesting for discussion only. My best,

How can scoftics continue to have such traction, baldly obstructing legitimate scientific inquiry, ignoring the evidence utterly, and generally not having the slightest idea what they are talking about?

People like Davis are why. Plus the attention they get that they simply shouldn’t be getting.

This stuff doesn’t need to be analyzed. It needs to be laughed at, or better yet, ignored.

Scoftics – in lieu of the evidence for their case, of which they have none – keep saying that what keeps crypto alive is a desire to believe. Well, no. That’s what keeps scofticism alive. Or any line of thinking (like, say, Davis’s, which is to crypto as sawdust is to a redwood forest) backed by nothing originating in the real world.

But here, we see how it works. If this were your only exposure to the sasquatch, well, what would YOU think?

Me too.

Wishy-washy to the Nth degree, but I like the guy. Money is a good motivator for a lot of people to keep “changing their minds”, I guess.

Ultimately I feel sadness at all of this “Davis-Green” brouhaha. It distracts from legitimate research and documentation of sightings. Plus it gives debunkers and ultra-skeptics “ammunition” in their attempts to discredit Cryptozoology as a legitimate discipline.

I don’t think Davis “needs psychiatric help.”
But by continuing to engage in unverified speculation AND potentially libelous accusations with a respected and legitimate Crypto researcher, he is really inviting ridicule upon his person and deligitimization of his beliefs. Well, he’s the one who is hurting himself. And without any smidgen of proof to back up his claims, he is REALLY digging a hole for himself with a BIG shovel.

And by keeping the “story” going, more attention is given to something that does not deserve scrutiny. And gives it an extended “shelf life.”
That is of course, MY opinion. Loren would see it differently.
And that’s fine. Just think there are better things to talk about than Davis giving Crypto Research a Black Eye and then persisting on doing it. His views have already been summarily dismissed. What’s the point of airing them further???

There, I said it.

Bravo to Loren for using this website and the strength of his reputation to prevent self-serving silliness like this from going unchallenged.