You'll Never Guess What M.K. Davis Found In The Patterson Film
M.K. Davis has just completed a 20 step process for frame, allowing the resolution to increase, giving us the clearest view of Patty we've ever had. With this new found clarity, With this new detail, Davis has found a strange object...
For Abohli!!
ReplyDeleteFor the lktominati cult, too!
DeleteHa!! Aren't we meant to be based in an airforce base or something?
DeleteHa!!
Yes! And we're one person, too. German moniker,I believe.
DeleteJoerg might be interested to know that an entire Air Force base has been set aside for storage of Bend Over's dingleberry covered butt cheeks.
Delete^
DeleteCervelo ?
Please 12:26... Please tell us how many people I am and how we all cult it up on an airforce base? I'm fascinated...
DeleteHey there Iktomi- welcome back! Shout out to all- especially Abohli and Dover. I have a feeling site troll Winston will be banned again soon!
DeleteHe comes around now and again and he will go away soon. My feeling is that his relapse gets found out in the end.
DeleteJoerg, on the subject of getting "found out in the end," how was your date last night with Bend Over's dingleberry covered butt cheeks?
Delete^ You're killing me, keep it up ;)
DeleteComedy gold.
Delete12:53 atta boys himself again like he's a different person.
DeleteWhy haven't I been invited to the airbase yet Iktomi? I am so offended! ;)
DeleteYes you have! You're me remember and I'm you remember! Everyone on the Internet is us, so in theory, we've all been to the magical airbase.
Deletefancy a game of hide-and-seek?
DeleteYeah... Meet you at the mental institution in an hour.
Delete" I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together! " "Cuckoo ca-choo!"
Delete^ classic.
DeleteFor He had been saying to him, "Come out of the man, you unclean spirit!" And He was asking him, "What is your name?" And he said to Him, "My name is Legion; for we are many."
DeleteThat'll go down well in therapy group.
Deletekinda like you do at the aa meetings
DeleteWOW! Thank you Iktomi, this is fantastic! Primitive type tool use, sticks, rocks and pieces of gut(?) or hide or maybe even bark....
DeleteThe MK Davis video is interesting. Any ideas on what could be attached to Patty's left side?
DeleteAn arm by chance? Just a guess.
DeleteYou didn't watch the video, I guess.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWell done MK,Patty looks better than ever,not sure about the handbag though :) although it does look like there's some thing there,ummmmmmm interesting xx
ReplyDeleteThere is definitely something there -- it's Bend Over's dingleberry covered butt cheeks! Just ask Joerg.
DeleteDC is the sicko buttcheek enthusiast.
DeleteI think the big round object that MK Davis is seeing could be a shadow because it only appears when patty is near a tree stump. Maybe sunlight reflects off of the creek or white sand and creates a shadow from her round butt.
DeleteTime to ban the fool!
ReplyDeleteIf we all just email Shawn, I'm sure something will get done.
DeleteI'm sure his defamatory remark toward MB under the Rochelle Tornado Report posted on Friday @ 7:05 might do the trick. Implying that someone's a p******le is downright slanderous and can carry heavy consequences.
DeleteThis
Deletehttp://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2015/04/heres-footage-of-huge-tornado-that-hit.html?showComment=1428717934850#c5227720614728862033
Yep, thats a problem!
Deletethis site troll as you call him/her has completely got the best of all of you...all you guy's do is talk about what they said or exchange barbs...just ignore them or they win..19 of the first 20 comments are about the site troll...only eva posted about the thred
Delete^ hi tony.
Delete^ Same person posting, even this post is the same person, infact every post is by the same person since the blog opened.
DeleteWith the exception of BenD Dover.
Hopefully MKD is profiting financially on Roger Patterson's work. Otherwise, he wastes more time obsessing over the Patterson hoax.
ReplyDeleteGot monkey suit?
DeleteWhat an absurd response.
DeleteGot unicorn suit?
Unicorn soup?
DeleteFind a source of video unicorn evidence that is being endorsed by the equivalent of an anthropologist, a primatologist, a wildlife biologist and a pioneering plastic surgeon, not to mention a frequency of reports for unicorns that accounts for ten thousand years of cultural references that transition three whole databases of contemporary reports (that has physical evidence to support)... And you might have at least a decent comparison.
DeleteSo a pack of Unicorn Top Trump playing cards is out then?
DeleteHA HA HA HA HA!!!
Delete60 years of searching for an imaginary being.
DeleteWe'll find 'em. We've got $6000 an appearance Jeffrey Meldrum on the case.
HA HA HA HA HA!!!
And in 60 years, researchers have every source of evidence short of a modern type specimen. Scientists get paid for their hard work... That might be news to an unemployed bum, but hey!
Delete60 years??
DeletePlease tell me, besides Scott Carpenter, Mitch Waite, and myself, WHO IS ACTIVELY RESEARCHING BF??? 3 PEOPLE ON THE WHOLE PLANET?? Sure there are others, but actively researching/daily?? And who is pro-kill? It sure is an uphill battle....we need more researchers!!
60 years. There's hard headed and there's hard headed. Maybe next 60 years.
DeleteThere's also more reputable scientists pitching in all the time... "Another 60" it might be to someone a little "glass half empty", on a couple of levels.
DeleteMore 'reputable' scientists pitching in to not find bigfoot. Good job.
Delete"We'll do an even better job of not finding bigfoot the NEXT 60 years."
The glass is half stupid.
More reputable scientists pitching in due to the frequency of evidence... You hope and pray that they don't find "Bigfoot", cause it'll make those therapy sessions a little more frequent than one would like... We don't want to have to leave the basement more than once a week now, do we?
Delete"The glass is half stupid"... Yes, it appears you are intelligent enough to read between the lines of my comment, well done.
Things are not as they appear, fool.
DeleteYou hope, at least... Twonk.
DeleteIktomi, you best hope they don't find "bigfoot" because you'll have your own big foot in your mouth.
DeleteThis video is hilarious. Davis at around 6 mins points out the flap of the suit head, and calls it a "roll of skin". Footers are funny!!!
ReplyDeleteMan, this suit looks bad up close. Terribad.
Got monkey suit?
DeleteSure looked like Patty had a "Y" stick, and a rock, huh Icky!!
DeleteOne suit, that could easily been destroyed or is hiding away in ONE unknown spot. Allegedly thousands of giant monkey men in our forest. Which have to move, eat, reproduce all that fun stuff. Which should be far easier to find? Ill give you a hint since you seem to be huffing paint thinner. Its the thousands of monkey men, oops I meant GIANT monkey men.
DeleteGot durp de durp?
(you do)
Looks like it has a diaper butt in that costume.
DeleteSorry, it doesn't work like that. Suit making techniques are not a negative, and we have an entire field of SFX & fur cloth techniques for over a hundred years to draw from in testing the premise that what you see in that footage is organic. And guess what? Regardless of whoever's lazy opinion that it's a costume, not even the very best can point to a fur cloth technique that trumps all that time period of custume & SFX 47 years ago.
DeleteWe don't know how many "monkey men" there are in the forests, speculating on the numbers of something you don't feel is credible is not good science, and we have physical evidence to the sign they leave, not to mention the known diets of recognised large mammals that require to feed to survive in the wilderness of the U.S.
So what should be easier, finding a magic monkey suit technique from the databases of examples out there that shows you are at least a little accurate? Or, finding a type specimen of a creature that buries its dead, who is the most elusive creature on the planet, that has 70% of the country that's in wilderness to do it in?
Got monkey suit?
Got bigfoot?
DeleteNo... We do however have sign of a bipedal primate, twice the size of normal humans, not to mention video evidence of one should you continue to fail fantastically on sourcing a monkey suit.
DeleteAnother complete FRAUD brought to you by the man who perfected the art of video fraud. He has about a 5th generation film that he is working with, which is garbage. Others have taken the original or first generation film and made a high resolution copy, frame by frame, and have never seen the crap that this dude comes up with. For this new chapter demonstrating some undiagnosed illness, how can you tell that he has photoshopped a white pouch onto Patty's left hand? Easy. When she swings her left hand in front of her on her head turn, THERE IS NOTHING OTHER THAN HER HAND THAT IS VISIBLE. The fraudster forgot to photoshop the phony object in the forward arm swing. Furthermore, you can see a photoshop line on the rear swing, when he added a little extra white coloring, and/or isolated the area and colored it white.
ReplyDeleteThis is the same technique he used when he photoshopped a braid onto her head. But where is it now? This is the same technique he used when he photoshopped lips onto her face. In the past, he has already claimed that Patty had a stick in her left hand. Now, that stick is gone because he photoshopped another phony object into her left hand. I am still waiting on pins and needles for him to resurrect his diagnosis of internal hemorrhoids. Do you remember the paddle board claim that he has made? How about when he tampered with the the contrast to bring out a phony hand print on a log. Or, the initial pool that he tinted red by removing the other two primary colors. Same deal with the puddle that he claimed was a Bigfoot hide, that a dog sniffing it, had passed on concurring his diagnosis. And his misidentification of the people in the film. The list of the man's antics, is endless. Where are the men in white, with the straitjacket?
Thats because these willfully ignorant sh*tsticks like Iktomi and Dover need a variety of bullsh*t to keep the video in the loop. Every enhancement just makes it more and more obvious its a sh*tty looking suit. How many medical excuses have you tards come up with to explain all the suit malfunctions? A herniated muscle in her leg? LOL. Your heads are herniated. The thing is these people don't need proof, just sh*tty evidence that as long as you can't prove its fake, well its gold for them. Why stop lying when you have adoring fans of your work on a blog trying to talk scientifically about it. Thats what spurns ol' MK on. Knowing Joektomi is going to add his not-so-brilliant commentary on it, or the hundreds of goons on here just like him.
DeleteOh, yeah? Wen I gets my nex unemployment check imma gonna fine bigfoot and wont I have the last laugh.
DeleteJoe
Easy there tiger, I don't endorse everything that is said to be in these analysis.
Delete"In conclusion, after a thorough review of the copy of the Patterson-Gimlin film provided to me, it is my professional opinion that it represents a live hominid and not a human in a costume. As noted above, there are multiple details of areas on the filmed individual’s body that correspond to those found in a human. Also as stated above, the replication of some of these anatomic landmarks would be difficult or impossible to accomplish in a costume. Additionally, it would take a detailed knowledge of human anatomy to even be aware of some of these anatomical features, let alone possess the technical skills to incorporate them into a convincing costume. That information is only known to a very select percentage of the population, of which I happen to belong.
While it may be difficult for one to accept that in our modern age there can be a large, undiscovered hominid living in our forests, the facts have to be faced. In the words of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s famous character, Sherlock Holmes: “When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”
-O. Allen Guinn, III, M.D., F.A.C.S. Aurora Plastic Surgery
Lee’s Summit, MO
... Got monkey suit?
Oh! And not even in direct sunlight, the most unforgiving of suit conditions, do we see anything but organic skin folds, fat deposits and muscle groupings;
Deletehttp://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Munns-%20Meldrum%20Final%20draft.pdf
Plenty of comparitive pictures here for you, I know how you guys don't like to read.
Hey Joerg, will you share some of your "detailed knowledge of human anatomy" to discuss the "features" of Bend Over's dingleberry covered butt cheeks?
DeleteHa,@ 2:11 comedielcty inspired genius
DeleteAll the way from central tahas,,,
Don't get no better den dat!!
Last time I checked... I won the debate. : p
DeleteEasy champ. No one has declared Bigfoot or Unicorns a species.
DeleteYeah... But with the frequency of evidence that supports the existence for the former, I don't think unicorns are ahead on the probability scale for an impeding discovery at this rate.
DeleteEither is bigfoot.
DeleteIt is apparent you two haven’t been following the latest discoveries into Leprechauns. Last week a 19 foot Skelton was unearthed in an Irish Peat bog and Shamus O'learly was quoted as saying "Well I 'ever in ma life, iz only tort tha grewed to 10 feet"
DeleteThe National Leprechaun Museum in the heart of Dublin has sent along their best Anthropologist, Zoologist and Biologist to investigate. Ronnie, Ronald and Gretta MacDonald with the old pub cat as back up.
Congratulations Joerg! For "winning" the argument, you will receive an all expenses paid night out (including dinner at the all you can eat Golden Corral buffet!) with Bend Over's dingleberry covered butt cheeks! Whatever else happens between you two crazy kids is completely up to you!
DeleteSo I'm guessing the "Joerg" thing is going to stick around. I hear Golden Corral gives you diarrhea.
DeleteAs Bend Over's dingleberry covered butt cheeks likes to say: "No pain, no strain, no clogging up the drain!"
DeleteWell and truly won. You make having an ego easy, nerds.
DeleteThere now are 1.5 million Bigfoot researchers out in the field, at any given time. Looking for 3.5 million ape people.
ReplyDeleteMatt MoneyMaker
'There here" "I know"/
Bobo
1.5 million???????????????????????????? WTF... I would say at most we have 5000 interested and maybe, just maybe 500 serious people, then 100 if that who go looking and NONE who are out 24/7/365
DeleteI think he might have meant that there are 1.5 dingleberries on Bend Over's butt cheeks.
ReplyDeletewithout reading the article i'm going to guess he found bigfoot had an iphone on it's hip in a bearskin pouch .
ReplyDeleteAm I right ?
.. I think it is a Prospector's Gold Pan that she found by the creek ;;
ReplyDelete.. When she is carrying it parallel to her body it appears to be round .. when she turns her wrist we see the pan Edge-On so it appears to be gone .. when in fact .. it is still in her hand ...
DeleteThere is nothing there. MK failed to discover anything once again, so that he again fails to regain his once coveted position of authority on the Patterson Gimlin film.
DeleteIt is impossible for something to be so paper thin, that it could not be seen when Patty swings her arm forward. Get real.
It could be a rock.
ReplyDeleteNo, it's photo manipulation. MK is very good at that, and very experienced. The end justifies the means.
DeleteI met M.K. Davis at crypto conference in Texas, 2004. He came across as a creepy little bastard, not too friendly either. I do appreciate his work though.
ReplyDeleteYes, thank you MKD for your work in not finding bigfoot.
DeleteThe original resolution is the limit in increasing detail - for example, if I took a picture with resolution of 100 dpi, it will contain a specific level of detail. By increasing the resolution to 200, my software has to read the existing data and create additional information to fill in the spaces (interpolation). In other words, the program has to make up the pixels of information to fill in the voids created by the higher resolution. The only way to increase the original data is by scanning the original at a higher resolution - but even then you're bound by the amount of detail that was captured in the original to begin with.
ReplyDeleteDid you just arrive from 1994? We know how pixels work, Einstein.
DeleteGET OUT OF HERE WITH YOUR ACTUAL FACTS!
DeleteActual facts about pixels, not bigfoot. We don't need a pixel lecture from the photoshop fairy.
DeleteVideo frames have less detail so what MK see's is more descriptive then what we are currently seeing.
DeleteNo doubt its a bigfoot but I'm thinking it might just be an artifact due to light.
Save your insults for someone who gives a F...
Facts have zero business on this site.
Deletem.k. davis = fuctard
ReplyDeleteI think whatever is in the hand is interesting but more importantly the enhancement helped the clarity of the breasts, which are an interesting detail of the so called costume the skeptics tend to ignore. It's one thing to build an amazing costume that could not be done 60 years ago and another to add realistic breasts.
ReplyDeleteThe only way to determine what is on the frames in question is to scan the original negative (carefully preserved, of course) at a high resolution for processing.
ReplyDeleteInterpolation is a huge problem for film restorers who only have old prints of the films they are working on. In order to find out what is on a specific frame they have to compare it to another copy of the same frame taken from the original negative.
Obviously there is only one Patterson film and the original negative is most likely long gone. And there are probably no copies left taken from the original negative source which makes this analysis speculative at best and does not do much to conclusively rule out that the film is not a decades-old hoax.
What has bothered me about the entire incident is the circumstances surrounding the making of the film. According to an early 70s True (it may have been Argosy) magazine article which I remember very well, prior to Patterson spotting whatever it was he filmed, his camera was inside the camera case which was strapped to the saddle.
As soon as he saw the "bigfoot", he jumped from his horse, pulled his camera from his bag and then started filming. The original few seconds of film refutes that order. It clearly shows the camera was running before he got off his horse as the frames show the ground jumping about from the same distance it would have appeared from the height of the camera bag. That means the camera was out of the case and already running, pointing to the ground before he got off his horse, not after as he claimed. He was, in short, waiting to film something precisely at that moment.
That small detail makes me suspect that the entire thing was a hoax. A well-done hoax, but a hoax nonetheless.
Until the original and complete negative is found and a high resolution scan is made, I am suspicious of any claims to have discovered anything in it. What researchers have to work with is far too grainy and worn to be really conclusive.
as for the dingleberry guy it's a shame that he is so bored that this is the best thing he has to do I'm guessing his parents didn't pay him
ReplyDeletea lot of attention
I can completely understand that probably one of those guys that weighs about 430 pounds and pays webcam girls to make him feel straight
Delete