M. K. Davis began releasing information publicly on November 26, 27, 30, and on December 3, 2006, to promote a film project he reportedly was doing with Pat Holdbrook. Concurrently, Davis and a filmmaker began discussing and promoting to the public another film project.
I found that the Patterson subject was carrying…a stick. ~ M. K. Davis, December 3, 2006.
The following details the 2006 release of Davis’s information leaks of what he and his associates mutually said they were seeing in the Patterson-Gimlin footage. Such material included postings on sticks, the unfortunate “digger Indian” episode, responses and apologies. This is not about re-opening old wounds. Instead, it is about checking in, in quiet pursuit of knowledge, months later.
No one forced them to release any of their alleged information or their statements, of course. While patience was being asked in 2006 by them, Davis’s continued release of parts of what he promised to present in both films was for public consumption by Davis, Holdbrook, and the filmmaker (who doesn’t want his name even mentioned any longer).
Their releases of this information is part of the public record.
Read of this now, reflectively, to decide if any of the “evidence” presented in the last 18 months has confirmed the earlier promised claims. With M.K. Davis hitting the spring and summer Bigfoot lecture circuit anew (from Ohio next weekend to California in August), he needs to answer questions he raised in the fall of 2006. Where is his promised alleged startling evidence for Bigfoot being some type of “Caucasoid” subhuman, with a digging stick in its hand?
Please read below closely, as some of what you will read is the filmmaker’s, not Davis’s, interpretations, within that individual’s release, including the quote in the title above.
This person behind the initial claims is the “producer, videographer and editor of the upcoming Davis release,” as he has noted above his name via his comments sent in to Cryptomundo, also as “wildphotographer” – which if sent in are thus released for use on Cryptomundo. (Read your “Terms of Use.”)
This person has also publicly posted (Dec 6, 2006, 3:09 PM) as Wildphotographer, the following paragraph, under the heading “Concerning MK’s evidence” – reposted here according to “fair use” for rebuttal commentary below:
mk has suggested to me that ALL be made known prior to the DVD release through [a] secured chat room.
He has, in my opinion, solid evidence that this is no man in a suit. He has, again in my opinion, solid evidence that this is no ape or ape like creature as we know apes. It is DEFINITELY NOT Gigantopithecus blacki. His color enhancements CLEARLY show what is believed by MK to be a fabricated tool in the left hand of the creature which is dropped. His closeups of the body of the creature, in my opinion, shows what is likely Caucasoid skin showing through a ragged, patchy covering of hair, not a smooth, continuous coat of fur as is usually deduced by most when viewing the film. And, there are facial and cranial features that virtually eliminate any speculation as to the creature’s true classification.
In rebuttal, here are some helpful facts from Cryptomundo:
(1) The implied logic in these series of statements convey that something is to be deduced in the name of Gigantopithecus blacki.
Of course, nothing other than mandibles (jawbones) and teeth have been found for Gigantopithecus. No one knows what a Gigantopithecus looks like, really. No cranial or facial features for Gigantopithecus can be fully assumed from the teeth and mandibles that have been found, despite Dr. Grover Krantz’s and others’ reconstructions, which all are based on thoughtful speculation.
(2) Some great apes carry sticks and manipulated sticks that do not translate into them having any culture. Read more about this aspect here.
(3) The scientific name Gigantopithecus blacki, of course, has nothing to do with the color of Gigantopithecus, its fur or its skin, as such details are impossible to tell from the fossils found.
In 1935, German paleontologist Ralph von Koenigswald discovered the teeth that led him to declare his find a new primate. The species name von Koenigswald picked, G. blacki, was bestowed in honor of the discoverer of the so-called “Peking Man” (Homo erectus), Davidson Black (1884–1934), a Canadian paleoanthropologist, who spent most of his adult life digging for fossils in China. The species specific portion of the name, simply stated, Gigantopithecus blacki, is after a famed colleague, not the color of the great ape’s skin tone.
(4) White or pale skin color is found in various species of primates. It has nothing to do with these primates having “Caucasoid skin,” which may be a misnomer in this usage, as the affinity for Bigfoot is not established, for a variety of reasons. Indeed, in great apes, some chimpanzees – depending on factors related to age, range, and subspecies – have “white skin.”
The photographs posted within this blog illustrate this point specifically for chimpanzees.
Okay, eighteen months later, in all calmness, where’s the evidence for the earlier claims of “new discoveries” seen in the Patterson-Gimlin footage by M. K. Davis and his associates?
Real science is not advanced by DVD sales. – Spoon Nose
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am encouraged by the thoughtful responses to this blog. As an update, everyone may wish to examine in some depth Roger Knights’ full comment below, of which I wish to point out this sentence:
I can say with assurance that they’ll be not just surprised but mind-blown by one particular “find” he’s made, which he just divulged to me. Roger Knight
Of course, the promises of much to come is to be read in what we hear indirectly from Davis again, and I look forward to seeing and hearing more about this after Davis’s “surprises” are revealed at Don Keating’s gathering on May 17th.
Follow CryptoZooNews
Not Found
The resource could not be found.