The idea that we’ve been lied to about the origin of the “Patty” film seems far-fetched.

None of us are willing to believe that our “heroes” of Bigfootery could have been involved in a huge cover-up story for some nefarious deeds in the forest.

Too scary.

Too bloody.

Too far-out.

Too unbelievable.

Too traumatizing.

Easier to just forget it, laugh, or whatever you do best.

***

This week MK Davis visited JavaBob and his wife, Vikki, here in Happy Camp. He was on his way to Bluff Creek with fellow Bigfoot researchers and life-adventurers Ken Gibbons and Don Monroe.

Since I’m JavaBob’s neighbor I had the opportunity to meet these visiting men and listen to their stories and theories. We even participated in a long “round table” recorded discussion that included JavaBob and myself.

[Note: Mostly the men talked. I have a tendency to become very quiet in groups.]

Patty Bigfoot

Patty Bigfoot

A highlight of our meeting was the opportunity to see MK Davis’ video collection, including those videos he believes indicate a Bigfoot “massacre” situation at Bluff Creek.

You may recall I saw the YouTube videos of the “massacre theory” back in August 2009 and was quick to condemn this new and terrible theory.

Well, MK Davis hasn’t dropped it, and at some point is likely to make more of his findings public.

What I noticed about MK Davis is that he’s a quiet, soft-spoken man very set in his belief and dedicated to his work.

He is one of the best video analysts in the Bigfoot research field, if not THE best.

He is meticulous and focuses on details.

He appears to be professional and intellectual in every way.

He was able to show me a few things that caught my attention enough to think that maybe his massacre theory has some merit.

The first thing was a dog’s paw print in the Patterson-Gimlin film. What was that doing there? He refers to it as the bloody paw print.

The second was the reflection of the face of the dog, “White Lady,” when she leans forward to sniff at what MK Davis believes is a partially buried Bigfoot corpse. There was something black, something red, and a small pool of water. The reflection was what got to me.

Back in 2009 when I first saw this video I thought the black and red on the ground could have been camping equipment.

I no longer believe that because (1) the dog’s handler obviously was letting the dog sniff at something, and (2) the reflection of the dog’s movement was in water.

Why would a dog handler have a dog sniff at a wet backpack? That makes no sense, but MK Davis’ theory that the dog was sniffing at a dead Sasquatch’s remains makes more sense if that dog is being used to locate more Sasquatches.

The third thing MK Davis talked about that made me pause and wonder was the logistics of getting Patty on film. Why was she sitting out in the open when they came around the bend and saw her? Surely she heard them coming through the woods. Was she allowing herself to be seen because she was mourning over a dead child or other relative? That is MK Davis’ belief.

On the other hand, if murdering white guys were killing her family, wouldn’t Patty have run for cover rather than sit out in the open and mourn? When she was seen, wouldn’t she run to the nearest forested area rather than walk solidly to the far-end of the gravel bar?

There’s no doubt Sasquatches can run, and they are fast. Why wouldn’t she run from people attacking her?

A couple other things MK Davis showed us startled me.

He had a video that shows a possible bullet entering Patty’s leg. One moment a section of her leg is covered with hair, and the next moment there’s a circle. I know this has been mentioned on the web before… but I never saw the video analysis until now.

Patty and Linda

That was me in 2006 at the Willow Creek Bigfoot Museum in front of a large poster of Patty. The sasquatch face in this poster is not the original. It was altered.

Here’s another thing I wasn’t aware of until now. He has a video of her mouth showing that the photo has been changed. Why didn’t I realize this before? The original film (a first generation copy he got from Patricia Patterson) shows her having a small red mouth, and the well-known photo of her displayed in the Willow Creek museum has been altered with long, thin lips, perhaps thought to be more attractive, or less human.

What’s going on here?

Why was the photo altered?

Was someone shooting at Patty?

Why would someone do that?

According to MK Davis, the motivation was that a company was losing logging workers because of the presence of “Bigfoot” forest people near their job sites. They may have paid people to come into the forest to eliminate the threat.

As far-fetched and unpleasant as this all sounds to us, we need to prepare for hearing more about it, because MK Davis was at Bluff Creek this week doing more research to prove his massacre theory.

This isn’t going away.

I was surprised at the details of the film on MK Davis’ computer. It is much clearer than what we’ve seen on YouTube videos. MK Davis is a talented film analyst.

This video shows what kind of analysis MK Davis is capable of and it clearly shows that Patty was a real Bigfoot.

Where the massacre theory fails to attract believers is with personalities. Bigfoot researchers on the whole love and admire some of the principle people who may have been involved with the massacre if it actually took place.

People like John Green and Bob Gimlin have reached hero-worship status in the Bigfoot research community.

Also, we’re not ready to see our paradigm shift to the extent of thinking the PG film story was a cover-up. We want to cling to the happy story of two Bigfoot researchers with a movie camera getting lucky at Bluff Creek.

I admire MK Davis’ tenacity in the face of ridicule and his determination to unearth the truth. If anyone can do it, he can. Whatever else you want to say about him, remember his video-analysis ability and extended-time attention to minute detail far-exceeds what most of us are capable of.

Meanwhile the new film by Tom Biscardi and crew is about yet another theory regarding the Patterson-Gimlin film.

Biscardi’s film attempts to disprove that the film was of a real Bigfoot.

He believes now that it was a costume, based on interviews with Bob Hieronimus and others who knew Patterson and Gimlin at the time.

The fact was that a costume was used for a separate Bigfoot movie, which was fictionalized.

From what I’ve seen on MK Davis’ computer with his first generation videos of the film, with some stop-action videos and others that are enhanced, there is no doubt whatsoever that Patty was a real Bigfoot. A forest creature. Probably a cousin to human beings.

I believe that once again Tom Biscardi was hoaxed by the hoaxters.

It happened in Stagecoach Nevada.

It happened in Georgia.

It is happening again, as I see it.

My honest opinion of Tom Biscardi is that he is gullible.

Not evil.

Just gullible.

And then, being an attention-seeking promoter, he acts on his misperceptions in huge and embarrassing ways.

The trailer for Biscardi’s new movie:

***

In the past I said that I wouldn’t mention Biscardi’s name on my blog, but I’m getting over it and am planning to restore the lost original archives of this blog from 2005. The site crashed in early 2007 and I never put the former posts back until now. It is a big job; still in progress.

***

Recently Phil Poling of Team Tazer and the Snohomish Sasquatch YouTube channel had some harsh words to say about people who are still investigating the Patterson-Gimlin film. He says,

“It’s been 40 years of examination, and bickering back and forth, and we’re not one step closer to a solution than the day it was shot. Don’t you all think it is time to put the damn thing in a can, stick it in a drawer, and forget about it?”

Forget that it is the best Bigfoot movie we’ve ever seen… is it time to find something new? Time to go squatching?

***
This is one of the most analyzed films in history, and the entire truth is still not known to all.

There’s no agreement and researchers can’t even agree to disagree because it is an emotionally-charged issue. Can we get past that?

***

I have a new theory… that if all Bigfoot researchers were mature enough to respect all the others and appreciate their specialties, we could work together to find the solution to our quest to understand Sasquatch.

This is something like building the tower of Babel. The workers on that project all developed different languages and were prevented from continuing on.

Will Bigfoot research be the same?

Can we for once communicate on the common-ground of mutual respect and come together to share our findings, theories and opinions?

What would that take?

A miracle?

After all, we’re only human.

***

What do you believe about the Patterson-Gimlin film?

Is the original story correct?

Should all other theories be trashed?

Should a massacre theory never be mentioned again?

Is Biscardi being hoaxed?

Is Phil Poling onto something?

Bookmark and Share

10 Responses to What If Everything They Told Us About the PG Bigfoot Movie Was a Lie?

  1. pritpal panesar says:

    ancient woodland people shuold be left alone.these people have a connection to us.try and talk to them we as human beings might learn some thing from them. technology is not everything.they are surviveing in a world where we are destroying everything.

      • Paul says:

        I think this is great information and we are getting closer to identification then ever before. Great stuff continue to investigate we will find out.

      • samuel getz says:

        my great grand father Solomen Getz was an engineer in 1871 he constructed several Limestone cooking ovens in what is now called Limekiln State Park he had a large amount of workers were Local Native american’s Limekiln State Park is located on the rugged Big Sur coastline in california on Hyway 1 one day as the story was told to me as a young boy the native workers refused to work back in the forest location because hairyman was present and about,the workers reported the Hairyman was angry about what was going on with the costruction on the limekiln’s they said Hairyman would trow rock’s at them while they were working,they said they would not do any work untill Hairyman goes away back in the wood’s this just one of the old stories about Bigfoot my family would tell me I myself have had Four Sighting’s of bigfoot in that same area since 1971,one thing I know for shure the large male bigfoot I saw was about 8 feet tall and had a human like face lips were not thin very little hair on the face,his legs were very thick and he was very wide at the shoulder’s not much of a neck he ran through the forest with little effort

  2. Dean says:

    Just found the site. Been interested in Sasquai for some time, but as a scientist myself remain skeptical with one caveat. The PG film shows something real. Why fake a female with swinging silicone sisters? in 1967, a time that was still very male dominated in its thinking even in California. Not logical to fake a female in the time period of our country’s sociological framework. If I were going to fake something like that, then I would make it the largest, darkest broad shoulder ferocious looking male I could given the technology of the day. But Patty is clearly a female.
    Nevertheless, I am worried that all the so-called ‘lay person’ research (moneymaker’s BRFO, etc) is tainting the oportunity for true rigorous science to be credible on this issue. Just read the boiling controversy associated with the Erickson Project and Dr.Melba Ketchum DNA work and you will see what I mean. That is so compromised by lawyers, non disclosure agreements, and personal acrimony that nothing relevant or informative will come from it. I have never heard of the massacre story you describe. If its real, its terrible sad, not surprising, but the bodies should still be buried there, even though its grown up since Patty was filmed. Someone, like Dr. Jeff Meldrum, should go do some digging. Finally, I am disappointed in formal research..academic researchers,..failing to take up the mantle of BF research. They can only do it with private funding, to avoid ridicule, but it is still fertile ground for serious trained scientists.
    Just some thoughts from a first time viewer/reader.

  3. Yes I do have to say MK Davis is one of the best researcher However the PG film was not real. I have seen a real Bigfoot in 2002 face to face and I also have analyzed the PG film and other films. The PG film was a man in a suit and I have even made a copy of that suit they used in the Film. I can show that the PG film was a man in a suit and I can also show that the tracking dog film was also another film hoax. There was 3 films shot there at Bluff Creek the PG film, the tracking dog film, and the film of Jim McClarin walking the path of the Bigfoot. These are the 3 films that was filmed in that location. And all 3 films was shot in the same time frame.I can prove this with real images and not a story. The red coloring you see in the PG film and other films was done by Ron Olson and ANE when they remade the films. That red color came from when they try to recolor the film to make it look like it was filmed in the fall when these films was shot on Labor Day Weekend of 1967. Before you can analyze any films or video you have to see what who surrounds the films and videos and you have to look at what the films and videos gone through first before you analyzed them.
    Like the PG film.
    People don’t know that the film that everyone has analyzed is a remade film by ANE and Ron Olson. The PG film we see today and we do research on was made in 1968 no one even to this day has never done research on the original film it was all done on the remade film from 1968. The film itself is marked 11-7-68 this is the date on the PG film. The real name of the PG film is American Bigfoot. No one will point this out but I do. Also marked on the film is SFS and this stand for Science Fiction Subject.
    Here is what is marked at the end of the PG film
    767R 11-7-68 SFS/American Big foot
    Now if this was a real Bigfoot on this film then they would have never marked the film a science fiction subject but they did.

  4. bob says:

    lots of hair around its face? females are more hairy i belive then males ? had an a goodlook at one in p.a. year 1976 june in a field 30 yards away size right face not what i saw more human it was oh don’t forget the red eye’s viral enfections ? will cause it… anyhow one will show up dead some day then who will have the last laught ? lots of storys up in thoughts pocono’s mts. and caves the goverment blasted one shut in the 30′s near water gap on 611 i think that will hold all evencedence you could ever want if you could dig it back open again…old timers said so big you would get lost in it…

  5. BT Richards says:

    THE PG FILM IS A HOAX.. GET OVER IT!! MOVE ON!
    bob “Bigfoot” Heironimus, the man who WORE THE SUIT,
    passed a lie detector test.

    Just because you want a conspiracy, don’t not mean there is one. Sorry.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xha5d_Fc7jg

  6. chazz says:

    the film is real OK Im a engineer all my work has to be perfect Ive studied this film many times from a lot of research shows there is no way the film makers of that time could have made the movements and body parts move as this film shows just me saying it is real and this creature does live through out parts of North America

  7. sharon buck says:

    Lie detectors don’t always work my friend that’s why they are not admissable in court.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

CommentLuv badge