Compromised by an Errant Bigfoot Researcher Again?
I’m deeply disturbed by the connection of David Paulides to the the Bigfoot massacre theory of MK Davis, especially since this morning Loren Coleman of Cryptomundo put an email said to be authored by David Paulides in his blog posting about Rene’s Film. For what it’s worth, I generally think it is a violation of internet ethics to place a private email on a public site without permission from the sender. But there it is, accusing John Green and Bob Gimlin of “harboring a very, very dark secret” or at least implicating that they bear some sort of culpability in this matter. [Update: see note from Loren Coleman regarding the source of the email in comments, below.]
I emailed David Paulides a few days ago for clarification after seeing him mentioned in one of Loren Coleman’s earlier postings: Bigfoot Massacre Theorist, John Green & Coverup. I got no reply to my email, which is unusual for him as he usually responds to my emails right away. I realize Dave could be out traveling, researching, deep in the woods, or anywhere. Maybe he didn’t get my email! In case he hasn’t seen my email, here’s what I wrote:
I noted today that Cryptomundo has run an article about MK Davis and his accusations against John Green, and that Loren Coleman implicated you when he posted this, “Needless to say, Green feels that M. K. Davis, and now Davis’s new associate, Dave Paulides, have lost all credibility in his eyes.”
http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/davis-back/
I’m writing a short response to what I read there – and would like to know from you – do you believe the MK Davis analysis of the film site? Also, are you really an associate of this man?
Thanks,
Linda Martin
http://www.bigfootsightings.org
No response. What could it mean?
I’ve met David Paulides only once. I was working at a Happy Camp restaurant at the time; when he finished his meal he introduced himself to me and gave me his card, not knowing at the moment that I own this Bigfoot blog. Of course I told him right away who I was and about this site. Since then I’ve exchanged a few emails with him and reviewed his first book, The Hoopa Project. I’ve started a Bigfoot Reading Group project for the review of his second book, Tribal Bigfoot, during the month of September.
Now suddenly I see he’s implicated in a controversy (the Bigfoot massacre theory) that is creating waves in the Bigfoot research community, especially as he’s upset John Green, who most of us revere as an early Bigfoot researcher and author of some of the most respected books ever published on the topic of Bigfoot.
I want to state clearly, straight up, that I don’t agree with this Bigfoot massacre theory, don’t support it, and am distressed at the entire issue. As a former law enforcement investigator I’d think Mr. Paulides would reserve judgment until after Bigfoot skeletons have been recovered from the site, if that could even be possible. No body, no story… you know what I mean?
I already demonstrated in my earlier post on this topic, Bigfoot Massacre? Bloody Nonsense! that the supposed evidence of a bloodied hand seems to have been enhanced unnaturally by photoshopping some red into the photo. Since that bloody sight seems to me to be fraudulently created, I believe all the other suspiciously bloody photos are equally irrelevant to real life. I realize I probably don’t have the same photo-enhancement software that the video-maker did, but using Paint Shop Pro v.8, there was no way I could find to bring out that kind of red on the man’s hand without turning the entire photograph red, or using masks to isolate the hand for retouching.
My respect for David Paulides’ earlier work in his two books is not diminished, but I believe that the Bigfoot massacre theory is a big mistake and I’m hoping he can distance himself from it and redeem his reputation. I’ve decided to go ahead with my reading and reviewing of Tribal Bigfoot in September, but needed to put this posting out first so everyone will know my support of Mr. Paulides’ work doesn’t extend to the current issue of a Bigfoot massacre cover-up.
I feel the need to clarify this as I’ve been burned before by a very irresponsible so-called researcher who came to my town, made a fool of himself in a big way, and by association, smeared my reputation as a beginning Bigfoot researcher. That happened in 2005 and it has taken years to recover from that association. I’m still asked about him and his associates as if I’m still associated with them, which I am not and haven’t been since the big disaster of 2005. I refer to him now as “he whose name will not appear in my blog” because he’s a publicity hound and I’m not going to help him with that.
Because of my earlier experience, I’m not happy about having someone I associate with veer off into what most of us will consider an erroneous theory… especially when that error is hurting some of the older members of the Bigfoot research community.
The thought of having a group of Bigfoot present themselves for slaughter just doesn’t make sense to me. They are so reclusive, I don’t believe they’d do that. And if someone did come upon a group, and started shooting, it is unlikely they’d slaughter them all. The remaining Sasquatches would probably attack, not run.
I’ve said it before… dig up the bones if you really think they’re there. I just hope that the situation resolves itself soon and that everyone is satisfied with a peaceful and happy outcome to what looks like a challenging Bigfoot research issue at this point. I agree with Loren Coleman that ignoring the issue isn’t a solution.
August 25, 2009
A Bigfoot Massacre? Bloody Nonsense!
John Green is a hero in the Bigfoot research community – and rightly so. As a young Canadian newsman he took time to come to the Klamath River Valley to explore early Bluff Creek Bigfoot footprints, and the Patterson-Gimlin film site. You can read his entire account of events including his part in them in his seminal work, Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us
Also implicated are Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin, Bigfoot film legends. It is a miracle that they saw Patty and now someone accuses them of helping to kill her and her family. What a terrible accusation! And it simply isn’t believable. Patterson and Gimlin were at Bluff Creek on October 20, 1967 for the filming of Patty. John Green wasn’t on the scene until June 1968 (see page 123 of his book.) [Update, 8/27/09: According to a more recent post on Cryptomundo, the footage of John Green was from late August/early September 1967, filmed by Rene Dahinden.] How could they all have participated in a Bigfoot massacre together? It doesn’t make sense and to accuse them is like attacking the holy icons of the Bigfoot research community. You can’t do that without repercussions.
I read what Loren Coleman posted about this on Cryptomundo yesterday morning – Bigfoot Massacre Theorist, John Green & Coverup – and my first impression was that the YouTube video referenced showed an inaccurate photoshopped image of a man with red hands. I tried to replicate the process with a screen capture from the original film in the video. I lightened, saturated, and adjusted the ‘before’ image of the scene and couldn’t find any red on the man’s hands. I also noted that the red hand version in the YouTube video also featured blurred faces on two of the men in the picture – another clear indication that major photoshopping took place. The man looks tanned, not bloody. I hope nobody falls for this theory, which looks inaccurate to me – and that’s saying it nicely.
My main point in responding to this is just to say that I live here in the Klamath River Valley (of which Bluff Creek is a part) and want to point out that the Patterson-Gimlin film took place in October when we’ve got a lot of red in Autumn foilage. The poison oak turns bright red at that time of year. We’ve also got dark red bark falling off the Madrone trees, and a lot of the soil here is red which could account for what MK Davis seems to think is a bloody dog paw print.
This is the original picture from the film, which I screen captured from the YouTube video before it was removed by whoever posted it there.
This is my lightened version showing no blood on the extended hand of the man on the right.
This is my lightened version with increased contrast showing no blood. Note that the red truck in the background is bright red, but not the man’s hand.
This is what appears to be a photoshopped version from the YouTube video showing blurred faces and a bloody hand.
The section of this photo said to be skin and blood could just as easily be a backpack frame style popular back in the sixties. I had one very similar to that at the time. Or it could be something else. And the red part could have been photoshopped in just like the red-hand photo above appears to be heavily photoshopped.Loren Coleman wrote a follow-up blog posting this morning with responses from John Green – which is where I got this photo. John Green said Bob Titmus wasn’t there and that the rifles were there to protect the dog at the dog owner’s insistence.
To anyone taking this massacre theory seriously – please go dig up the bones of these massacre victims to prove your allegations, and quit relying on poor quality old amateur films. When you produce impressive evidence, people may take this seriously, but not before. In the meantime, what seems to be an attack harming the reputations of our heroes (Patterson, Gimlin, Green, Titmus, and whoever else was implicated) is upsetting a lot of people.
I am amused at the thought of you on your hands and knees digging in one of our local gravel bars. As a person who has done a bit of digging around here (during prospecting) I can say it isn’t likely you’ll have much fun doing this, but if the theory is that believable to you, why not? Finding Bigfoot bones would be something like finding buried treasure.
June 25, 2007
Bigfoot Bones Hidden In Indonesian Cave, Islanders Say
According to a team of Indonesian explorers, residents of a remote Indonesian Island claim to have the bones of a Bigfoot hidden in a cave that is accessible only at low tide. But because the tide was up at the time they were there, the explorers passed up their chance to bring forth this discovery.
Alex Retraubun’s mission is to visit thousands of Indonesian islands, naming them. He works for Indonesia’s marine and fisheries ministry. Muhammad Yusuf is head of data analysis for his team. The men travel to more than 100 islands during each of their journeys, which take place every two weeks. With a schedule that tight, Bigfoot bones weren’t a priority. Their goal is to finish cataloging information and names for 17,504 Indonesian islands by the end of this year.
The islanders told them a Bigfoot used to live on their island. According to their story, after its death, the creature’s bones were interred in a sea cave.
Source: Indonesian’s off to the islands–all 17,000 of them by Laurie Goering, foreign correspondent for the Chicago Tribune, published on June 24, 2007.