Yep, There's the Braid. Right There.


Here's the braid on Patty that M.K. Davis has been talking about -- super-enhanced! Davis writes: "Follow the walk up to the point where the hair is laying over the ear exposing the ear, and onto the right cheek. This is 55 frames from where the hair strand is first observed before the ear is uncovered."



Comments

  1. First...the whole first, and nothing but the first.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Second....of all... MK... Bill Munns says, that after many viewings of the PG film, their can appear artifacts and anomalies. These come with the age of the film and generations of copies.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bill Munns is one of the least credible voices in the bigfoot community.

      Delete
    2. Don't agree... but still, artifacts and anomalies do appear in old film...well known fact.

      Delete
    3. The bigfoot community is a bunch of fat rednecks running around in the woods. What does credibility have do do with anything?

      Delete
    4. I know Bigfooters that would take you places that would turn you into a scared, vulnerable little mama's boy.

      Delete
    5. FYI mk has a copy of the original film he got from Patricia Patterson. So you won't see the artifacts like munns talks about. After all munns has a 4th generation copy.

      Delete
    6. Joe should know. That's how he became a scared, vulnerable little mama's boy.

      Delete
    7. Anon 5;32...

      You are exactly, 100% right my friend, thank you for that psot.

      Peace.

      Delete
    8. "I know Bigfooters that would take you places that would turn you into a scared, vulnerable little mama's boy."

      Yeah like Rictor huh Joe?

      Delete
    9. Joe, you've never stepped foot on American soil. Sit your gullible ass back down.

      Delete
    10. Anon 11:15, many have stepped foot on American Soil and never seen a BF but are still respected researchers. Why dont you sit your ignorant ass on the train tracks and wait for a surprise.

      Delete
  3. Thanks annon 1:53.... pretty soon MK willn be saying he sees a tampon string having out.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I BELIEVE IN BIGFOOT 100% BUT THE PG FILM IS FAKE AS FUCK, IN MY HONEST OPINION..





    ALL CAPS

    ReplyDelete
  5. Give up on this man! Its pathetic!

    ReplyDelete
  6. WHAT PART OF PATTERSON WAS A CON MAN DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well footers clearly don't understand why the conman part is important.

      the fact that its an ambiguous film and there has been nothing similar in 50 years, combined with the conman thing means its a hoax

      footers think its completely fine that roger never paid for the camera or that he used an imposter gimlin on his tour promoting the film.

      its fine that he was involved in hoaxed trackways and its fine that he obsessed with bigfoot prior to the pgf even selling a book which had a picture of an encounter with a female bigfoot. its no issue that he made up stories of a giant bigfoot lifting up his truck while he was in it. everywhere roger went there were bigfoots. funny that....

      all smoking guns im afraid

      the fact you footers have to look back to a 50 year old hoaxed film does not help your case what so ever

      Delete
    2. Anon 4:00... Ok, let's get straight into it...

      "well footers clearly don't understand why the conman part is important."

      You have nothing to back up your claim that he was a conman.

      "the fact that its an ambiguous film and there has been nothing similar in 50 years, combined with the conman thing means its a hoax."

      ... The fact that not even a BBC budget has come close to replicating the 'suit' means something else to a lot of people with open minds. Common sense should come into play here, but it doesn't, quite clearly.

      "its fine that he was involved in hoaxed trackways and its fine that he obsessed with bigfoot prior to the pgf even selling a book which had a picture of an encounter with a female bigfoot."

      ... Again, you resort to claims and then hypocritically state that the authenticity of the footage is merely that. Where and when did Roger Patterson participate in hoaxed trackways? Please help me with this... also, Patterson being obsessed with Bigfoot prior to undertaking field research is a very natural process and one that takes many library researchers from the that environment; into the wilderness. I find it quite embarrassing that anyone should highlight a developing interest against someone who was successful off the back of that hard work and dedication, and is flawed clutching at straws logic.

      "the fact you footers have to look back to a 50 year old hoaxed film does not help your case what so ever."

      The pick of the bunch out of all of your dribble. The fact that you have resorted to all of the above, APART FROM MAKING ANY EFFORT WHATSOEVER TO ACTUALLY EXPLAINING THE 'SUIT', means that this does nothing but our case, because if the creature is not a suit, it is organic... a real Bigfoot and your biggest obstacle in trying to disprove the existence of this creature.

      Lastly, who's to say that any of the countless pieces of Bigfoot video footage over the years, that one or two of them are not real? Let me guess; you? Try and explain Leaping Russian Yeti on YouTube, the MK Davis version...

      Your comment was as full of claims as I've heard on this subject in a long time, and you also have the nerve to suggest enthusiasts do the same... WHILST, resorting to any which angle possible that is based on no facts and just hearsay, instead of doing anything but explain how your 'suit' was manufactured.

      Schooled.

      (Sigh)

      Delete
    3. Joe school'd some anon trolls again. Lets see some bs responses from some more ignorant anons

      Delete
    4. Joe, what part of a con man don't you get? He was a shady character. After all, he worked in rodeos. That's all you need to know.

      Delete
    5. Joe, I respect your enthusiasm, but the PGF will never be proved real or fake so why not give it up and move on to more compelling and unhoaxable evidence like some of the bigfoot snow trackways. No human can fake a 5' stride through 2' deep snow without leaving traces of their hoaxing.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-6xkYBbmf8

      Delete
    6. The long strides were sometimes hoaxed by men wearing bigfoot stompers while holding on to a rope behind a pickup truck. I saw this demonstrated on TV. Long strides can be hoaxed and have been.

      Delete
    7. So stupid I guess that researchers wouldn't question the tyre tracks on each side of the tracks?

      Next!

      MMG

      Delete
  7. Well look what we have here, a deluded footer putting forth information founded on delusion.

    Absolutely ridiculous.

    This guy has either completely lost it or is just trolling the bigfoot community. I hope for mankind's sake it is the second option because the other is too fucking depressing.

    Another day goes by, still no bigfoot. Why do you think that is? Hint: Its not because they are super elusive magic monkey men. Its because they don't exist. Logic and reason pwns the shit out of footers, its their worst nightmare. Apply the slightest bit of reason to the bigfoot phenomenon and yep they don't exist. Too easy.

    Footers get some actual fucking evidence if these things are real and you "see" them, cos frankly you aint convincing anyone.

    And also it wouldn't harm most of you to do a bit of exercise once in a while.

    Peace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok...

      About the footage up top... what is so delusional about seeing things that are clear before your very eyes? Explain this to me please?? Is it not delusional to claim that something is not there when it is?

      You will request we enthusiasts present evidence and then merely claim it isn't there when it is. You demand that field researchers present information and then claim it is nonsense when presented. This is denial, nothing else and is a desperate attempt to side track countering anything, because you can't. You simply cannot prove this creature is not real, yet we have various scientists, one of which literally wrote the book on mitochondrial DNA, to back up our evidence.

      Allocate a couple of minutes to read this... put aside your computer games for two seconds and learn something for a second...

      http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=just-a-theory-7-misused-science-words&page=2

      Absolutely ridiculous? That would describe the type of person who expresses hate and ignorance and chronic denial on a daily basis on a subject he knows nothing about. I have never, never seen you discuss anything other than requesting ridiculous things that would be akin to a Bigfoot coming and knocking our door one day and asking for a cup to tea.

      What you keep skipping around and avoiding, is that science has now begun asking the questions. Why would it do that if there were nothing to investigate? You can preach hate and ignorance on this blog all you like, but on the wider picture, this penny hasn't dropped with you yet and you have less of a claim than us, because we have many sources of evidence and you and your mainstream science are nowhere nearer to debunking this subject. This; is your worst nightmare.

      Applying such surety on something that has evidence to support it is flawed logic and stupid. You are one of either two things; too stupid to understand evidence, or scared to acknowledge it for being wrong.

      I am going to pose you a question; if one of the leading scientists in the world declared that these creature were real, what would you do?

      Oh and no monkeys, just giant hairy people.

      Peace.

      Delete
    2. And this comes from a guy who DOESN'T believe in bigfoot, cruising a bigfoot site, arguing with
      people that it doesn't exist, Riiiiighhhhtttt....
      Talk about a TROLL that desperately needs a life, LOL!

      Delete
    3. 3:54 you're clearly a recent graduate of Fool School. Your continued used of "delusion" and "deluded" reveals you as a boot-licking JREFing psychotic nutjob.

      We congratulate you.

      Why don't you drop the JREF talking points and get original?

      "Logic" and "reason" are two other JREF faved vocab gems. Get real jerk. We all know that those who strutt their dribbling asses around mouthing off about logic, reason, rationality, and delusion, are the most hysterically illogical, unreasonable, irrational, delusional idiots of all.

      JREF is founded on delusion. It makes delusion a way of life, a philosophy. It is the religion of delusion, presided over by the delusional.

      Bearing all of this in mind, you are today promoted from the rank of skeptard to supertard. But that's not all. You are one of the supertards in the running for the positions of megatard, ultratard, gigantotard, and supremotard.

      This is your reward for plumbing the utter depths of stupidity, and for parroting the JREF talking points/vocabulary, which marks you out as a supertard unable to think for him-/herself, a being incapable of original thought, or lateral thinking.

      We suggest another institution, different from Fool School.

      Delete
    4. ^ Excellent post.

      No quarter must be given when the Tards make embarrassing posts such as Anon 3:54.

      I think Joe managed to knock him out the ball park in record time.

      Set them up and we'll put them away.

      NEXT.

      MMG

      Delete
  8. If he was a con man why didn't he sell the costume?

    People offered good $$ but no Bigfoot Costume?

    Sheesh, even if the Bigfoot is real why not make a suit anyway and make a little $$?

    A real con guy would, he was just a Rancher - Cowboy from Yakima Wa. For fucks sake

    They all have a bit of "flair" these types

    He probily had his are up animals bottoms by the age of 9 - 10 years old - Working on a ranch is the hardest work of all time.....they say the guy was a Bum & lazy too...just doesn't make sense

    I think he's credible

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. why didn't he sell the costume?

      ask patricia Patterson that as she collects her royalties every time the film is shown

      Delete
    2. NOTHING compared to the $$ he was offers even today....DISNEY was ready to step up to the plate and pay some $$ if he had a suit

      I'm talking real money...her royalties are puny even today

      Delete
    3. Real money buddie, that's a fact

      They were showing this film a junior high schools - TV here and there...never really took off

      Motion picture money

      Gay Disney money

      Delete
    4. Would it be unreasonable for a widow to attain a bit of income for one of the most remarkable pieces of footage in history?

      Peace.

      Delete
    5. Yes the Pattersons and Gimlins deserve the income generated by the PGF. It was their expedition, they did the work, they deserve the pay.

      Delete
    6. Not to mention that Doug Hajicek was authorized to offer and did offer Bob Gimlim one million dollars a few years ago if he would do a segment on the real story at Bluff Creek and how it was hoaxed. Bob Gimlim told Doug he could use the money, but would have to decline the money as his story is the truth.

      Chuck

      Delete
  9. I await sweaty yetis comment on this, he is at the forefront of sasquatch research

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why is the "braid" so much sharper than the rest of the image??????????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Enhanced or altered? Why can't he enhance the rest of the face to be that sharp?

      Delete
    2. It's been altered a little to show the possible detail of what the braid might look like in full definition, you see? What you see there is not being sold as a sharpened up version, but been put over the outline of the braid.

      Peace.

      Delete
    3. That is completely ridiculous. It's the same thing as that one guy that said Bob Gimlin is in the background of the film. Or this video:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dljgkfR72F4


      If a braid can be seen in the film, so can shoulder pad straps and zippers.

      Delete
    4. How can you seriously say what is "altered a little to show the possible detail of what the braid might look like in full definition" is clearly there and attack people who completely disagree?

      Delete
    5. Anon 7:44...

      That's just the point; the braid can be seen and zippers can't... Point made.

      Anon 7:47...

      I can say that because that is exactly what it is... An enhancement to show what the braid might look like.

      (???)

      Also, nobody's attacking anyone; if you don't like being countered on a discussion blog then review your whole participation. I mean that as respectfully as possible bro.

      Peace.

      Delete
    6. Oh and Anon 7:44...

      I have never said that MK Davis has never been wrong.

      Peace.

      Delete
    7. Did you watch the video? A shape of a zipper and straps can be made out. If someone were to do an "MK enhancement" it would be clearly visible just like the braid. It does not mean it is actually there.

      You don't attack anyone? HA! Your constantly getting frustrated and stooping to the level of a troll. What does that make you? Oh silly me, that makes you right doesn't it.

      Delete
    8. Oh my dear lord... Check this out.

      You are going to sit there and tell me you cannot see a braid, and then suggest we watch a video that points to zippers, straps and suit markings that aren't there? Do you even know what you are on about??

      I think you need to look at your argument and assess whether you contradict yourself before suggesting that anyone else is wrong, and I think that you also need to go and look at the definition of 'troll'. I am only frustrated at your apparent lack of capacity to debate properly; which would mean not contradicting yourself so much old boy.

      (Sigh)

      Delete
    9. Do you know what you're on about? What contradiction am I making? MY WHOLE POINT IS THAT THE BRAID IS NOT REALLY THERE! Just like the zippers and straps are not really there! MK enhanced those frames to make it look like what he wanted it to look like. He could just as easily "enhance" the "zippers" and "straps" to make it look like they are actually there when they are not.

      You even admitted yourself that "It's been altered a little to show the possible detail of what the braid might look like in full definition". He could just as easily do the same thing to something else that is just an artifact that is not really there, I don't know how to make what I'm saying any clearer. Maybe it's because you speak English and I speak American?

      Delete
    10. Apologies, I do believe I have read your comment wrong, but that is not to say I still do not disagree with everything else you a suggesting.

      They are not the same thing because the braid is there, in consecutive frames, with different angles of the head, and the zippers, straps, etc... are not. It's not a question of MK enhancing anything like above, the braid is there to be seen. The picture above; is obviously enhanced, it has been to suggest what is there without the enhancement and what has not been noticed before, which is in complete contrast to zippers and straps.

      In the video you provided the Dum DD DUM poster (adequately named), is suggesting there are things there, that are clearly not there. Even with enhancements, these parts of the body he is focusing on would simply not show any of the things he is suggesting are there. I can make that claim because the shape and places of suggesting tailoring does not support the proportions of where the 'costume' would have to be tailored to fit it's limb length and warrant that much realism.

      To draw attention to someone's embarrassing effort to promote a costume theory, and then suggest that something that has been enhanced in order to help the viewer locate where the object would be due to pixelation, is not the same thing.

      The head has more hair than the rest of the body, we can see detail in the body that cannot be seen due to the hair on the creature's head blurring various parts of what we see... The limbs and body have larger mass on the footage to identify, whereas anything swinging or dangling to the side of the creature's head, as thin as a braid for example, would be a lot harder to identify; hence the reason it has only been identified now by one of the few people who has a copy of the original film.

      Delete
  11. The braid looks more like a zipper to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SERIOUSLY.. BECAUSE IT IS FAKE AS HELL!!!





      ALL CAPS

      Delete
    2. Really? So the braid that you are looking at, that is clearly there, was something that a broke, rookie filmmaker, hoaxer would think of to put on a 'mask'... a mask that does not fit the capable proportions of a homo sapien head?

      Check this out; Steindorf's digital transformation of Patty...

      http://bf-field-journal.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/the-human-side-of-bigfoot-comparing.html

      Quite a sophisticated 'mask' eh?

      Peace.

      Delete
    3. The braid is nothing but an artifact. It is actually a part of the background in the part where it first flies from her head. If you can't see that then there is seriously no hope for you. I'm not saying Patty is fake, but the braid is not there.

      Delete
    4. Why is the braid there over consecutive frames at different head angles?

      Delete
    5. Originally I thought the hair moving and braid was just an artifact due to copy upon copy and picking up background shadows. However after viewing it several times it stays consistent for several frames even though this creature is covering ground at a fast rate, thus lending credibility to Joe's claim.

      Chuck

      Delete
  12. So what ever happened to the MK Davis revelation that Patty was shot thru the leg and he had an enhancement that showed the bullet pass thru? It looked pretty good to me but I have not seen it talked about for a while.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John Johnsen sued MK claiming that he had trademarked the term, "Bigfoot Massacre" so M.K. can't talk about it anymore.

      Delete
    2. Because his massacre theory is complete bull. I'm sure Joe would eat it right up and like it though.

      Delete
    3. Patty was protected from the bullet because, as you can see in the enhanced stills, she was wearing a poncho. The poncho material was thick enough to deflect the bullet enough to not cause any injury.

      Delete
  13. He enhances things to make them look the way he wants them to look. Dishonest and delusional.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with this guy did any of you ever check out the shit he was drawing on the moon I told you guys about a year ago like the alligator megalith

      Delete
    2. I also like Joe Rogan. He always asks for proof and calls bullshit when he does'nt get it. He holds his own well in his challenges. They seem to get him interviews with people who are at the heart of the subjects they are examining. But like most TV shows it is really just bubblegum for the mind and I find it to set me up pretty well for falling asleep.

      Delete
    3. I usually have the tv on for some background noise but he seems down to earth and thats rare once someone becomes a celebrity the funniest is Doug Stanhope talking about smokin dmt at his house his comedy is funny as shit

      Delete
    4. Did you check out yesterday's he had a JREF'er I started laughing I am doin a paper and I heard him say James randi I thought wtf

      Delete
  14. i relise MK hasnt any fake hooky films of a white Bf or fence jumpers/tyre throwers etc...left so hes disecting the only decent bigfoot film there has ever been with every daft notion there is. Weve had pools of blood from BF massacres, people in the background, footprints in sand, patty with hemoroids. Nw we have Patty with a cool bvraid in her hair. Every single one of his theories and digitaly enhanced 'evidence' is all warped thinking at best or downright hoaing deiberatley to try and asscociate himself as Mr Bigfoot in the american medias eyes as well as footers

    the guy is a conman and a lonely weirdo in my opinion.Harsh since i dont knowthe guy.I can make this judgement tough when i view his obvious hoaxed films. In one film,which is cleary a horse close to a camera,he claims its a bigfoot. The imfamouse 'white bigfoot' where its cleary a pony.these r observations we have all noticed yet he fails to even mention these as possibilities.this tells me he is a hoaxer withself promotion as his main agenda.
    Lets face it believing in thousands of 8-10ft 600pd apemen ambling our national parks undetected forever is a huge stretch that is going to make anyone sound strange but to add o that ropey,grainy craxzy observations id dumb.it makes a laughing stock of the whole belief people have in BF

    Ive concluded there is no such thing as bigfoot,sadly,as i wanted ot tobe true and ho[pe to God Im wrong.the evidence isnt remotely there for me
    the p/ fim is the only piece of evidence there is. Its 50yrs old and nothing has came close since ,when u concider the digital age and shrinking continent its hard to believe hybrids /apes can go undetectedas is claimed
    Thats why MK,and his ilk[squatchmaster/susan farns/scott carpenter one of the worst offenders,a squirrels fart is a BF to him/any of the you tube BF hunters]are making a laughing stock of people who are genuily trying to look into this for natural history valuation.these people appear in it for self promotion.All their films show nthing ,yet they make factual claims. titles like " 2bigfoots 10feet away" etc etc...
    sad

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know what to think about the PG film I mean it looks good and interesting but the dude was a conman but his drawing doesn't remotely resemble what he caught on film but the dude on the definitive guide to Bigfoot thing had a point that a film is just that and you can only trust a film as much as you can trust the man behind it so I honestly don't have an opinion on that like I said it does look good and it is interesting and I don't believe or see much of the bullshit put out about shoulder pads this and that and I've watched it repeatedly on my tv so I'm gonna say if it is a costume it's one of the best I've seen except the messing with Sasquatch commercials but you can't tell the height on the commercials like they did find the relative height of the PG Bigfoot but god only knows what's changed from the time of the film till the time of measurements so it's always just gonna be a mystery

      Delete
    2. Hello harry, I was discussing with Joe F. that the PGF will never be proven real or a hoax, so let's just put it to rest and move on. Yes, it will always be a mystery and that is why I just don't care about it anymore. How have you been? It's been a while since I've seen your name on here...

      Delete
    3. Anon 6:45, hey bro...

      I think you are, unintentionally, blurring the boundaries of hoaxing and being just plain wrong about something; which is what MK Davis has been a number of times to which he is quite open about. There are parts of your comment I agree with, but if you have invested thinking time into the possibility of this creature being very real and ultimately changed your mind, then there is something you need to consider. Technology has advanced leaps and bounds since Patty, yet science is nowhere closer to debunking Bigfoot... why is that? In the last 15 years, with the rise of the Internet and the linking of research groups and experiences, the understanding has switched from a dumb bipedal gorilla into the general understanding that this creature is closer to us with the evasion techniques expected of a calculative, highly intelligent creature with all the sensory perception of the most cunning of apex predators. This is why you have given up sir; because since Patty, the research field, though important, has been wrong.

      It can be claimed that if something is not yet double opinionated by mainstream science; it comes down to whether your glass is half empty, or half full, or whether you have an agenda to accept it or be skeptical of it... However, with the wider scientific dogma surrounding this subject, along with the wider negative agendas, most people cannot perceive the researchers in this subject as pioneers as opposed to a loan theorists. All research fields have started off with one person, and in recent times since the change of mindset about what this creature actually is, you will not find people who have applied their research methods and have come to any other conclusion that this creature is a reality. No mainstream science would give this subject the first bit of legitimate time so most skeptics use that to their advantage to claim it can't stand up without backing. Well I say you can't get anymore credible in Dr Sykes' field so find so let's listen to him come the end of the year.

      Bandini... Respectfully...

      I really don't know where the evidence is to rightly label Roger Patterson a conman is? He did however treat Gimlin badly; so why didn't Gimlin blow the lid of this supposed hoax to get back at him?

      Peace both.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 6:45, let me put it in words that you can understand:

      Bigfut is reel.. yu jus dont bulev cahz yu dont no that bigfut can becum envizibul ini thym he wunt to.

      Delete
    5. Hey Rush!

      Regardless of the subject matter relevant to this page, you are right. You will guess my intentions of where I would rather go in discussion by my comment content in response to Anon 6:45.

      Peace.

      Delete
    6. Good just chillin found a cool job down here that I like part time doin residential electric while I go to school you got my number man you coulda texted I figured you were busy I stood by your cause till I never heard anything so how has everything been by you

      Delete
    7. Yeah loyalty is one thing I don't take lightly man

      Delete
    8. Sorry man when someone works as an artist or inventor with no positive source of income and takes a huge loan out with the only real collateral being the hopes of catching an elusive creature on film sounds a little bad to me whether or not then man faked it like I said I don't think that's the case but we will never know for sure I'm not attacking anyone's beliefs just describing what I see

      Delete
    9. I know that bro, the discussion is what's important to me. I am quite open to other opinions... Something that people keep forgetting when I post around here.

      Ok, if he had no positive source or income, how could he put such a complex & sophisticated 'suit' together? Also, surely with his financial means, we would be able to replicate it all these years later??

      Respectfully... Peace.

      Delete
    10. I just said I don't think it's a suit either never mind we are arguing the same point that's not productive

      Delete
    11. bandini, I lost that number. Do you still have mine? Shoot me a message and I will get you caught up on whats going on.

      Delete
    12. Yes, I realize that Bandini, just trying to have a conversation, no worries.

      Peace.

      Delete
    13. Harry, Joe and Rush. Good guys all. Having a civil discussion on this blog. Does my heart good. Cheers to all. Since I have a slightly separated shoulder from 11 days of driving and footing I raise my glass to you gents. I'm a little burnt right now. But I'm glad to see u 3 going strong !

      Delete
    14. Spot on again Mike.

      Great to see 'footer's' connect here.

      Safe to say we've taken this blog back folks!

      MMG

      Delete
    15. ye, its great to post some thought and get decent ,well thought our relies to my own. it used to be like this before the incrowd took over hese boards with their inane comments. all about firsting,taterholes te...all dumb comments and this is the forum for suck things. whether we belive in bogfoot or concluded there isn't such a thing. we do all share the desire that there is an unkown anmal out there,how coolwould it be,I don't belive ther is such a thing.i think ,in todays age and envancments,the would have found more conclusive proof.yet we r left with p/g as the only film/evidence of interest

      np point is visiting the merits/or not of the p/g

      Im just glad there are still decent bloggers wanting to discuss this subject whether we agree or not, corny/nerdish I l know but welcome all the same

      Delete
  15. What part of "MK Davis is a pathological liar", does the public not understand.

    When MK Davis was asked his height on this website, he overstated his actual height by about 5 inches. Even when wearing his elevator tennis shoes with a 2 inch heel, he is not as tall as he claimed that he was. Strike One

    MK Davis manipulated the PG video by selectively adding red color and claimed that it was blood, in order to smear the names of many people. Strike Two

    MK Davis has claimed that Patty had stick in her left hand, then changed it to a rock. He also claimed that Patty had a fresh bullet wound with flying blood spray in the film. Strike Three

    YOUR OUT!

    Bill Munn's has put out on the internet, a large photo of the same frame that MK Davis is enhancing above. By comparing the two photos, YOU CAN PLAINLY SEE THAT MK'S VERSION HAS A DRAWN IN BRAID AT A LOCATION WHERE THERE IS NO HAIR SHOWING! THIS IS NOT ENHANCEMENT OR MAGNIFICATION. THIS IS FRAUD!

    MK, YOU HAVE JUST BEEN TOSSED FROM THE GAME!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Here is a 2006 photo published by MK Davis himself, and you can see that the braid is not in the picture at this point in time. There is skin showing where he will later claim that a braid is. Reason why there is no braid is that he was in the midst of trying to sell the public on a stick being in Patty's left hand, and had not yet added either an ear, a braid or his version of Patty's mouth to his heavily tampered photos. If there was a criminal law against doing what MK is doing, he would be doing Life in Prison. If he profits by just one dollar from his grand schemes, then that is criminal fraud.

      http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/bigfoot-with-a-stick/

      Delete
    2. Fraud just like Ketchum. But no one will sue you can count on that.

      Delete
    3. He is wrong about the braid but right about the hemorroid...And the hemorrhoid is more important because it proves the footage is real...Roger may have glued on tits but never would have dreamed of a hemorrhoid...Pwned!

      Delete
  16. Could be a clump of mud!
    They most likely sleep with a mud pillow?

    ReplyDelete
  17. It's a fishbone earring. The thigh bulge is a thighstrap ipod made from rocks and woven plants.

    ReplyDelete
  18. its a gunshot wound, Must have walked into Kennedy's assassin's campsite. :))

    ReplyDelete
  19. Why is everybody still after 40+ years still talking about the P/G film?

    I have had numerous encounter/sightings of Big foots over the last 10 years. I am a retired Fur trapper/hunting guide, so I am able to look for them almost every day. I say the P/G film is 100% real!

    If/when you see one, then you'll realize that the P/G film is of a real bigfoot! End of story move on to other Big foot related information.

    Start asking about the "London Trackway' now Dr. Meldrum and even Cliff Brackman are distancing themselves from it! Why? because it was all faked!

    What happened to the "Erickson project"? "We were seeing so many Big foots, we stopped filming them"! Yeah right! That was all faked!

    Now what about the "Justin Symgia Big foot shootings", it's been 3 years no body's=no evidence, just a made up story all lies! Oh, and now he is a "Big foot expert" making Videos, I'm losing sleep waiting for his tell all book!


    What about "Rick Dyer"? First the Georgia hoax, than the tent camera hoax, then he said he killed one, but no body, again, now he says he captured a baby bigfoot, and Steve Kulls believed him and flew out to California and NOTHING! Now he claims he has a live adult big foot in captivity!

    I guess "Tom Biscardi" is sitting home thinking up his next hoax! Enough said!

    My name is John w. Jones my Email address is healthyhappylawns@reagan.com

    Oh, sorry I couldn't write sooner, I just got back from Mars, with Matt Moneymaker hunting for Big foots there!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John. Thank you for your help with the scant evidence I could produce in my two week excursion through Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Midsouri. I'm proud to say I know you are right. You have shared certain things with me in private that have already proven to be true. And I thank u for it

      Delete
    2. Another superb post John.

      It's a pleasure to read your views and experiences.

      Kudos my friend.

      MMG

      Delete
    3. Come on John W. Jones. Anyone who says that they have had multiple encounters with the most reclusive and elusive creature in the world is spouting BS.

      Your claims are horse manure.

      Delete
    4. The only house shit on here is from your two, scared behind your laptops. If you knew John you would refrain from using any tone but of utmost respect.

      Clowns... Ignorant pussies.

      Delete
  20. People who have never set foot in the woods are not going to believe. I was not a believer untill I heard vocalizations. I spent three years wondering what it was. I researched on national geographic and a number of hunting web sites. Nothing came close to what I heard in the woods. After 10 minutes on a bigfpot website I came across some recordings of bogfoot shreeks. I still got goosebumps. Exactly what I hear! A number of years later I was in the se area amd foumd tracks!!! Search bigfoot tracks idaho on youtube and see for yourself. I am now a bigfooter for life. Peace.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for that buddy, anymore details?

      Peace bro.

      Delete
    2. The toes surprised me. As it stepped up it left a very distinct vertical impression. The 1st 2nd 3ed and 4th toe seemed to be the same thickness. No claws just big toes. The fifth toe was smaller and down a little from the rest. Ive never seen a human foot with toes like that. It had to have been very heavy to make such a deep impression.

      Delete
    3. My thoughts on the patterson footage is this: there is no way a broke redneck from yakima wa is smart enough or skilled enough to make a suit that is so confincing it is still being debated to this day. Not to mention where is the suit? If its that easy to make, dont u think there'd be more convincing hoax videos out there. Ive seen lots of ape suit videos and none of them look convincing.

      Delete
    4. Anon 1:03...

      Thank you very much for your account bro, very much appreciated. Is there an exact sound you can reference that is similar to what you heard? Sorry for the million questions, I'm just very interested.

      Anon 1:09...

      Can't agree more bro, good post!

      Peace both.

      Delete
    5. The noon siren at the fire station in my home town. Thats the closest think I can think of.

      Delete
    6. 1:09, how can you or anyone else possibly know that Patterson was too stupid to pull off a masterful hoax?

      Delete
    7. Ok. Wheres the proof? All u sceptics want proof that bigfoot is real. I want proof it isnt. Where is the suit? Show me a hoax videobthat evan comes close to patterson video. U cant. There hasnt been a video that convincing in the last 40 years? Like I said... if it was that easy someone would have replicated it by now.

      Delete
    8. Leaping Yeti. That's as convincing as Patty

      -Joe

      Delete
    9. The kid yelling "Hey bigfoot!" and scaring it off as he was filming a bigfoot out of his back window is the second best bigfoot clip after the PGF.

      Delete
  21. what next- will M.K they will find a hackey sack in this film ?

    ReplyDelete
  22. This braid story is perhaps the most asinine bigfoot story that I have ever read.

    Ya mon. De bigfoot got de dreads mon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hold on to your hat, there's more to come. This guy has a non-stop ability to see things in those murky frames. Next up - Patty used nail polish!

      Delete
    2. If you look carefully at some of the enhanced stills from the film, you can also clearly see that Patty is holding a set of car keys. This is proof that sasquatches are more human than ape.

      Delete
  23. The braid was superimposed. Period!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Period? M.K. Davis did say in a previous clip that Patty had evidence of a "female problem" or a hemorrhoid.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia

Samurai Chatter: Have you used it in the field?

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story