December 7, 2006

A Sad Week , I wonder if they are taking applications for "Nessie Hunters"

There is no picture for this blog, as I find nothing funny or amusing about this sad situation.

Have researchers in this field been too hard on M.K. Davis?

Hum, I don't know to be honest. When I read all the various blogs and message boards, the overall impression I get is frustration. Once again, bigfoot researchers are being told there is a "new discovery" - but you must wait to find out what it is. I think this is the source for much of the frustration directed at M.K. Davis.

This DVD and movie being discussed is really a sore spot with some. Personally, I would hope M.K. Davis can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that what he is saying is true, before he commits those comments to film of any kind - but that wish may be in vain.

Recently amid controversy, the person responsible for the filming of the DVD stated that M.K was considering leaving the field of Bigfoot, due to the harsh criticism by some... This person then went on to issue a threat against a crypto blogger, basically if that blogger did not apologize to M.K Davis, and M.K did infact pull out of Bigfoot and the DVD project, he would infact take this blogger into court and recover any and all financial losses stemming from M.K.'s pull out from the making of this DVD.

Being someone who works in the legal field - I had to sit up and say out loud "How"?? I would really like to know how that person figures they can recover financially from someone else - if M.K. backs out of a verbal agreement with him... This is very interesting (or comical depending on how you look at it). There must be some obsecure contract law I am unaware of - and if thats the case, then I would appreciate someone updating me on the recent court ruling - or one I missed.

Saying Im sorry.

This crypto blogger did post an apology - which I thought was very big of him. I think its to bad that M.K didn't take that advice a few days ago when it was offered to him. Much of this could have been stopped days ago, had M.K made a general statement saying "I did not know the use of the words "digger Indian" was a
derogatory term, and if I offended anyone, I do apologize". This could have ended much of this.

The message is being lost.

If M.K is at all correct about anything in this "new discovery" - I am afraid the message may be lost because of all this drama. Isn't there enough "drama" in the field of Bigfoot research? Why create more or allow it to continue when you can do something to stop it?

And now, this :

"First, let me say on behalf of MK Davis, a seriously felt thank you to all who stood by him in this last (of many yet to come) shouting match over his newest findings. Here is what we have in a nutshell. (MK has suggested to me that ALL be made known prior to the DVD release through s secured chat room)."

Secured Chat site? This is how the information will be released that M.K put out a Press Release on? So, now my fellow bigfooters - you must either buy the DVD, watch the movie - or gain access to this secured chat site.

Why did M.K. send out a "press release"?

Seems to me he waisted his time typing, if he only intends to give out the information of his "new discovery" to whomever decides to try for membership into this secured chat site.

Everyday this goes on - I am less and less interested.

I can get this kind of information from the National Enquirer to be honest. Do I think there will be some "startling new revelations" revealed by M.K. Davis - No, I dont. I like M.K. he is a good man, and he has always had good intentions, everyone speaks very highly of him, and we have always had very nice exchanges. But I must admit, I am stunned by all this, M.K. issued a "press release" he knew would hit the bigfoot community like a ton of bricks - then told us all to "Wait for the movie"... But, then the announcement of a DVD... Then came the horrible radio program which started the rest of this.

M.K. has made some incredible claims in relation to the Patterson/Gimlin film in recent days, but you know what - I wont spend my money on a DVD or a movie to get the information of this "new discovery". Why? Because I wouldnt expect M.K. to pay for information I have.

When I think about the energy expended in this battle of words by some in the bigfoot community, I shake my head - and wonder what good any of this does for the research. Some seem more entertained by this drama, than the research itself. I often wonder if this happens so often because footage rarely comes out, new discoveries happen very seldom and basically this builds frustration within the researchers, thus the verbal attacks on each other. Its sad when you think about it for too long......

So, I will post something fun tonight :) YEAHHHHHHH ITS FRIDAY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*Join in the discussion at*


  • At 9:50 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…


    The problem is not that M.K. Davis has some new evidence to show us, the problem is people not paying attention to what he is saying. His new evidence concerns the creature in the P/G film, not the bigfoot creature in general.

    He didn't make a racist remark about "Digger Indians" as the "unamed blogger" in your blog indicated.

    I am bothered that you would make a point of this in your blog, naming M.K. but not naming the "blogger" who started some of this controversy. Yes, your "unamed blogger" did apologize to M.K., as he should have, but it was such a poor apology that nobody believed he was sincere.

    People who know M.K. Davis are angry because they know M.K. Davis' character and they know the character of your "unamed blogger".

  • At 10:30 AM, Blogger Melissa Hovey said…

    You know what, thats fair. I didnt name Loren Coleman, but I figured everyone knew who I was talking about. I am not an apologist for Loren Coleman - and I didnt want my comments to be seen that way. Loren Coleman can speak for himself.

    I wasnt going to do this - but since this issue wont go away..

    "Digger Indians

    Term indiscriminately applied to many Native Americans of the central plateau region of W North America, including tribes in Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Arizona, Nevada, and central California. The name is supposedly derived from the fact that they dug roots for food. It has no ethnological significance and was a term of opprobrium."

    Now look up the word Opprobrium:

    NOUN: 1. Disgrace arising from exceedingly shameful conduct; ignominy. 2. Scornful reproach or contempt: a term of opprobrium. 3. A cause of shame or disgrace.

    ETYMOLOGY: Latin, from opprobrre, to reproach : ob-, against; see ob– + probum, reproach; see bher-1 in Appendix I.

    While Im sure MK did not mean to offend or upset anyone - he should have checked out his word usage prior to using this specific term. He has access to the people who could have helped him here, he chose not to take that route. Now, as I see it, he could have ended this a long time ago, and gotten to the business of the information by simply making a general statement - and moved on. How easy is that?

    MK is taking bad advice. He should be relying on those with the information - not those who have simply heard something. His intention with a press release was to reach as many people as possible - well congrats with the press release and the radio program from hell, he did just that.

    I like MK - hes a good man, and I dont believe for a second he ment any harm with what he said, but that needs to come from him, not me, not you, not Johnston and not Loren Coleman. MK got himself into this by not fact checking, and he refuses to do something very simple to get himself out.

  • At 11:34 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think if you are going to bring up this issue, then you have to reveal that Loren Coleman removed a number of posts to his own blog where readers expressed an opinion that the statements were not racist.

    Dissenting points of view are not allowed. None of the posts I have saved to my computer are offensive, yet they were removed rather capriciously by Coleman.

    Loren Coleman censored criticism of his race-baiting and attempted character assassination.

    So criticize Davis all you like, but don't make Coleman out to be a saint in this.

    His attempt to portray that his readers were in agreement is wholly dishonest.

  • At 7:40 AM, Blogger Melissa Hovey said…

    Posted by Anonymous:

    I think if you are going to bring up this issue, then you have to reveal that Loren Coleman removed a number of posts to his own blog where readers expressed an opinion that the statements were not racist.

    Dissenting points of view are not allowed. None of the posts I have saved to my computer are offensive, yet they were removed rather capriciously by Coleman.

    Loren Coleman censored criticism of his race-baiting and attempted character assassination.

    So criticize Davis all you like, but don't make Coleman out to be a saint in this.

    His attempt to portray that his readers were in agreement is wholly dishonest.

    10:34 PM

    Hello "Anonymous" Well, as to the commentary by you about Loren Coleman removing posts or not allowing dissenting opinion to his own - I would have to say, thats his decision. I have no control over the content of Cryptomundo.

    Blogs are about the views of the person doing the writing. If Mr. Coleman chooses to remove a potential post or delete one already posted, that is well within his rights.

    No where did I defend Mr. Coleman, and for you to make that assertion is incorrect. Also, you make the same comments I hear constantly on one specific site about "race baiting" - yet you say nothing about the words Mr. Davis used. Did you not read the first entry on my blog - look above. I have established WITHOUT A DOUBT, these Native Americans Mr. Davis Speaks of, do in fact have a name, that is not the one he uses. Mr. Davis owes these people an apology and for anyone to argue to the contrary, is simply wrong and showing a lack of sensitivity, I would hope is common in the year 2006. After finding the information I did in this respect (which took me 3 seconds) I can not with good conscious use those words used by Mr. Davis to refer to this group of Native Americans - and I would encourage all in the field of Bigfoot Research to not use this term as well.

    Mr. Davis needs to apologize. I have told him that personally. If Mr. Davis would stop taking bad advice, this might go away. Yet, he chooses to take the advice of someone not trained to deal with the public, and he continues to post angry tirades - he says are in defense of MK. He is not helping Mr. Davis, nor is anyone who would tell Mr. Davis the use of the term he uses to describe this group of Native Americans, is a good idea.

    Mr. Coleman does make a good point in his most recent post. Everyone wants him to ask the tough questions of Greg Long etc. But, for some reason, Bigfooters are off limits? There is a bit of hypocrisy. If you cant take the heat - do not put out a press release to begin the string of bad information, RESEARCH, RESEARCH, RESEARCH and that includes picking up a dictionary to look up words you may not be familiar with - or names, before you use them. And when you make a mistake - admit it.

    If Mr. Davis had simply apologized over a week ago - we would not be discussing this today (this is called Public Relations 101). He was wrong, he knows he was wrong - yet he will not admit it, and he is wrong on a number of issues.

    I think you missed a few things. Mr. Coleman didn't have to tell many of us that what Mr. Davis said was wrong. He did put out the information to the general public (which is his right) but I didn't need Mr. Coleman to tell me that the words used by Mr. Davis were in fact inflammatory. I think many are just upset because Mr. Coleman called Mr. Davis on it. Don't say something your not prepared to defend.

    If I ever issued a press release announcing a "New Discovery" I would EXPECT every single person in Bigfoot Research to badger and make my life generally miserable if I did not tell them this new discovery - and continued to only release bits and pieces through people. I don't "Trust" anyone - I want to make my own decision, and I am smart enough to do so.

    Now, having said all that, let me say this:

    This blog will NOT become a forum for those who dislike Mr. Coleman based on current - or past events, to come and bash him, The same applies for those who would only want to defend or bash Mr. Davis. The comments on this blog by myself are based on Mr. Davis's own words - which he has not denied.

    If anyone thinks they can simply post derogatory posts about either one of these men, let me assure you that is not going to happen. I will not have this blog or its readers drug into a war. If you can reference a specific source and show me where, or how, I am wrong, so be it, I would encourage you. But, to date - no one has, not even Mr. Davis, and I assure you - he knows how I feel.


  • At 12:06 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I think you may have misunderstood my motive or perhaps I did not make it clear. So let me apologize for that. I was not attempting to inflame the situation although now that I reread my post, I can see how you would feel that way.

    My purpose was not to “bash” Loren Coleman, but to set the record straight on what had occurred in events you are referencing.

    Coleman has accused me and others of being one of Davis’ “minions” -- a derogatory term meaning something akin to a "bootlicker." It is usually used in reference to the Devil, as in "minions of Lucifer." I do not see anyone upset that Coleman is using this term for his critics publicly in his blog.

    There was no misunderstanding that he meant to demean. No one is arguing that he meant it benignly.

    I think if you are going to be fair, you have to call into question the appropriateness of ALL such statements -- especially when you question Davis' use of the term "Digger Indian", which even you will admit may have not been used to demean, but might have been an unfortunate choice of terms, or merely one of ignorance.

    Why is one term more reprehensible than another?

    If MK Davis needs to apologize for his remarks, doesn't Coleman need to apologize for calling his readers minions?

    I was a Cryptomundo reader. Coleman posted that he had over 200 people supporting him, implying they agreed that Davis’ was being a racist. This is not true.

    I do not believe Davis’ comments to be racist and I think he made that clear in the context he used the terms. Obviously, you do not agree and that is fine.

    I do, however, believe Coleman used the term "minion" to denigrate certain readers and supporters of Davis.

    I believe there is more going on here than some lame, left-handed “apology” from Coleman, especially when it is used to insult a group of people who do not agree with him.

    Yes, he has the right to limit the comments on his blog, but it is dishonest to remove those supporting Davis and then to present a false image that his readers agree with his stance on it. It is even worse to call them names.

    I also believe it is inherently wrong to question the use of the term "Digger Indian" and not question the use of "minion" in the same subject.

    My comments on your blog was an effort at fairness. I do not know either individual personally, as I do not know you, and I do not have a dog in this fight except for what transpired with Coleman.

    Just food for thought, that’s all.

    By the way, thank you for not censoring me.

  • At 8:31 PM, Blogger Melissa Hovey said…

    Welcome Back "Anonymous".

    Frankly I am at a loss for words.

    Your problems with Loren Coleman are purely personal. For some reason you identify with those he chose to call "minions" - and you feel every right to do so, but those who were offended by the use of the words Mr. Davis used to describe the Mewuk's is fine?

    There is nothing I can do about that situation. I'm not sure why you feel its necessary to take your concerns out on this blog site though. Did I publish any factual errors? Did I misquote the site, when I discussed the Mewuk Indians? I don't think so.

    If your upset with Mr. Coleman, you should address your concerns where they can be of more use, this blog has nothing to do with Mr. Coleman.

    My comments go to the heart of an important issue - how this specific group Mr. Davis singled out, wishes to be treated. I wont have The Mewuk Tribe of California thinking all the people in this research think the way Mr. Davis does. And, just like you it is my right to speak my mind.

    Mr. Davis owes the Mewuk people an apology - its that simple. And to hold out on that apology simply because Loren Coleman called his supporters "Minions" is really very childish. Its time for Mr. Davis to step up and end this.

    By taking this approach and continuing to make excuses, do you think it's helping Mr. Davis with the larger audience?

    I really think this is nothing more than a game of "tit for tat", and regardless of whether you think Mr. Coleman's apology was as good as you would like, he did more by way of an apology than Mr. Davis has to date.

    Now, you don't have to agree with my position on this, but the fact remains, Mr. Davis used inflammatory words when he used the name he did for the Mewuk tribe of California. You can argue about that until your blue in the face - and it wont change the fact that he did in fact do that, and he needs to apologize.

    Don't defend one person, and criticize another - thats not being fair either.

    This has turned into a very sad situation. And I do not see it getting any better, anytime soon, as I have a sneaking suspicion when Mr. Davis releases his findings - the sh*t will really hit the fan. Especially if he holds tight to the things I have heard recently. My advice to all - is to calm down, take a step back, and think before you type.

    I will not apologize for someone else, as I don't think that is my place. I spoke to the issues with Mr. Coleman, and I said he may have went too far - but, thats not good enough for some. Sorry. I can only say what I feel. Just like you. I am looking at this with "no dog in this fight" I neither agree with Mr. Davis or think he is horrible for saying what he has said. While I think he should issue an apology, I don't see that happening - and thats a shame, but who knows.

    Its his reluctance to issue that apology I find the most disturbing. I sure wouldn't want an entire group of people to think I intentionally insulted them.

    But thats just me. Defend Mr. Davis all you like, be angry with me for not getting nasty with Mr. Coleman - but it doesn't change a thing, and it could be argued its only making this situation worse.

    Just my two cents.

  • At 10:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Well, then, if nothing else, perhaps we can offers ourselves up as an example on how to respectfully disagree on a matter without resorting to name calling?

    We shall see how all this turns out.

    Thank you for your thoughts on that issue.

  • At 11:02 PM, Blogger Melissa Hovey said…

    I have always said, it is possible to disagree with someone, and remain civil during that disagreement, and even respect the person you disagree with. Not everything needs to go to a personal level.

    Debate and discussion is exactly what this research needs - and sometimes it may get a little rough, but thats the nature of the beast. Its all in how we handle things in the end.

    I like how you handled your final comments. I think you set an excellent example.



Post a Comment