Spit that Bigfoot kool aid out and grab your head funds. It's time for
another episode of Sasquatch Odyssey with your host, the Grand Puba of Bigfoot Podcast,
Brian Kingsham. I don't thanks so much for joining me for the show
on this beautiful Sunday in the South. I wanted to bring you guys something
on the bonus show that I put out over on that Bigfoot podcast on Friday.
If you aren't listening to that show, we're about twenty one episodes in
over there, and I'm telling you we're having a lot of fun and talking
about some of the subjects that frankly, nobody Hilton Bigfoot is really talking about.
And one of those things that we've decided to cover on the show is
this Bluff Creek massacre theory hypothesis. I don't really know what you would call
it when and I have had a couple of people reach out to us and
ask us to cover this on the show, and it's something we've been interested
in, but frankly, we just really didn't pay a whole lot of attention
to, which honestly seems to be the case all around Bigfoot. It seems
to be just like a non issue at this point because MK Davis and Todd
Gatewood are back in the Bigfoot News, if you will, talking about this
new image that they've put out in the zeitgeist that everybody's probably seen by now
that people have been accusing them of using AI, but it's actually an upscaled
image. I honestly started really looking into this over the last week because Daniel
Barnett, the young UK researcher that runs the Mythical Legends podcast, reached out
to me about a week ago and said, Hey, I'm going to interview
MK Davis and Todd Gatewood on my show. I don't know a ton about
each of them. Would you come on and act as my co host for
that episode? So Daniel and I are actually going to be doing that.
If you're listening to this today, which your Sunday, I'll actually be doing
that interview today with him, and I will put it out at some point
for you guys over here on Sasquatch Odyssey sometime in the future. But in
addition to talking about the work that they're currently doing on the Patterson Gimlin film,
I also think it's very important for us to look back at the history
and talk about some of the outlandish claims that MK davis has made about Roger
Patterson, Bob Gimblin, John Green, Renee de Hendon, Bob Titmas,
tons of people that were involved in and around the PG film back in nineteen
sixty seven. So what you're about to hear here is something that I put
out on Friday on that big podcast. It's the Bill Miller document from back
I think around the mid two thousands that Bill put out with the help of
Thomas Steinberg and several other people that helped him gather all the information about this.
But it basically lays out the facts surrounding the case that MK davis has
tried to make that basically, Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin slaughtered a family of
Sasquatch on the sandbar on October twentieth, nineteen sixty seven, and then,
with the help of other people like John Green, Renee de Hendon, Bob
Titmas, covered it up for decades. So the next twenty five minutes or
so is going to be me reading this Miller document in its entirety exactly how
it's written to sort of lay the foundation for you guys who may not know
this story, and all the players in the game, which now includes David
Polidi's hear some of the things that he's been involved in. Some of the
emails that he sent to John Green are going to be read here verbatim.
He's been a key player in this over the years, and I've really never
heard anybody talk about it. So without further ado, I'm gonna stop talking.
I'm gonna let the episode play as it appeared on that big Foot podcast
on Friday, The Massacre of Bluff Creek. Just when you thought you'd heard
it all, by Bill Miller. Just when you think you've heard it all,
there comes a story so bizarre that it boggles the mind how it could
possibly have gotten started in the first place. As I looked into the matter
myself so to see what evidence someone could possibly produce to support the horrific claim
alleging that a family of Sasquatch were murdered in Bluff Creek, California, in
nineteen sixty seven and were then butchered like something out of a B grade horror
movie, I found myself in total disbelief at the extent that someone would go
to try to sell such a story, and how gullible others would need to
be to buy it. It was soon apparent to me that this tale was
born not from fact, but rather from rumor and innuendo with an added sleight
of hand. It has been said that the bigger the lie, the more
people will believe it. Those words have never been truer in this case,
or how else could otherwise intelligent people have been taken in while what I refer
to as tabloid research practices had taken them over. Allegations being born through what
I deemed to be poor investigational standards were quickly being leveled at select individuals before
a real inquiry had even begun. Because so much of this story appears to
have been created from fallacy, it is difficult to imagine that an agenda wasn't
being fulfilled somehow by shooting first from the hip and then asking questions later.
It wasn't long before a select few individuals were claiming to have inside information about
a very very dark secret pertaining to Bluff Creek, and without offering any specific,
substantiated details, they were instead demanding answers. In one particular case,
the idea of taking a polygraph examination was being sought for John Green by one
David Plaids, author of the books titled The Hoopa Project and Tribal Bigfoot.
But before I get started, I would like to share with you some of
what I have pieced together of this alleged massacre at Bluff Creek by putting some
of the widely scattered about and far too often unfounded assertions being made based solely
on what I consider to be poor investigational practices and interpretations evolving around a darkened,
overcontrasted multi generational film copy. The first I heard of anything whereas Roger
Patterson and Bob Gimlin have partaken in the slaughtering and butchering of a family of
Sasquatch and Bluff Creek back in the fall of nineteen sixty seven came by way
of Bobby Short. Bobby has one of the most well known sights on Sasquatch
his bigfoot encounters. At the time, I was not yet privy to the
details pertaining of what was being alleged to have occurred in Bluff Cree concerning the
killing of a family of Sasquatch. Instead, I was offered a short,
simple, generic response on June eleventh of two thousand and eight, which said,
let me take you back to times when Renee used to say he had
a secret about the filming of the Patterson creature. I know the real truth,
and I suspect John does too. But the trouble is, with advancements
in technology, it would appear that keeping that secret isn't going to work any
longer. Ask him, if you won't tell you, I will. It
has now been fifteen months since that time, and Bobby has yet to tell
me precisely what this secret is that John Green was alleged to be harboring.
However, after being offered an invitation by Green to read a series of emails
and responses that Bobby and others had sent to him over time, I feel
that I've gotten somewhat of a better picture as to the conspiratorial mind, said
of some of those individuals who would later become a part of the fiasco leading
up to what has been referred to as the massacre at Bluff Creek. Despite
John Green and others having written quite thoroughly about the events that transpired in the
summer of nineteen sixty seven at Bluff Creek, California, and again later that
fall, when Roger Patterson and Bob Gilman had gotten a film of what appears
to be a female Sasquatch in the same general area. There came no shortage
of questions that could have been answered had the interested party just taken the time
to review the available materials already in print. One such source is On the
Track of the Sasquatch, written by John Green and published in nineteen sixty eight.
On pages forty five through forty nine, is a summary of the events
that caused John Green and Reneede to Hendon to merge upon Bluff Creek in the
summer of nineteen sixty seven so to investigate fresh foot tracks that were reported to
have been left on Blue Creek Mountain the night before. During that visit,
there was some movie film shot of the area by Renee, along with still
pictures by both Renee and John, so to make a record of their trip
and what they had seen. My understanding is that sometime after their return to
Canada, Renee made an edited version of this film, which was later used
to give talks on the subject at various venues. Yet, in some of
the emails I have read between Green and Bobby Shore, there were these types
of questions being asked in which the apparent source of Short's information had involved M.
K. Davis and a multi generational copy of Renee's film that Chris Murphy
had apparently shared with Davis. Here's some examples of these types of questions that
Bobby presented to Green. Have you ever sat down with MK and just taken
the time to understand it before you cast a critical eye? Am I to
understand that you did a quick turnaround immediately after Bud Ryerson's phone call and flew
back down to Orleans's airstrip in a chartered airplane with Renee to merely look for
more tracks, And that you waited for Don Abbott to arrive several days later
merely so he could look at these tracks. Come on, John, that
doesn't fly with anyone, least of all me. You hadn't been home twenty
four hours when that phone call from Ryerson came in. That's in your eight
book. You had already seen the tracks in Bluff Creek. What did Ryerson
mean when he told you what you're looking for is here? Why did you
hire a handler and a tracking dog to look for more tracks? Why did
dal Moffatt insist on two rifles for protection protection from what tracks. These are
but a few of the questions that were being put to John that a mere
reading of his books would have had answered them all. As for me personally,
I have a method that I like to use in such matters, which
is called Ockham's razor. Ockham's razor is quite simply a principle whereas entities must
be multiplied beyond what is necessary. In other words, it was most logical
and certainly acceptable that John Green would want to be called if fresh tracks showed
up again in the Bluff Creek area, that a tracking dog could be put
on the scent as soon as possible. It was also quite reasonable to believe
that a dog handler would want rifles on hand in the event that his highly
skilled dog was able to lead the group to their quarry. Let us not
forget that no one really knew what they were dealing with or what would happen
in the event of a confrontation with whatever it was that had been leaving the
large tracks on the ground at the time. Keep in mind that it would
be almost two months later before Patterson and Gimlin came upon and filmed one of
the creatures responsible for leaving the large foot tracks on the ground. Until that
time, the world had only heard general descriptions from eyewitnesses as to there being
a large, upright ape like creature roaming the Pacific Northwest. It only made
sense that the dog handler would want to play it safe and have the added
protection for his K nine. In further review of the correspondence between John Green
and several other people who were seemingly hinting at something sinister that happened at Bluff
Creek, I ran across an email whereas David Polie had said to Al Hodson,
I actually got my hands on a fairly old copy of the PG film,
full framed with segments on it. Nobody has seen. It is in
the expert's hands, and many of our impressions of what actually occurred is playing
out. I actually believe that John Green and Gimlin a harboring a very very
dark secret. Really, to those who don't know, Al Hodgson is Al
the man who owned the hardware store in Willow Creek, California, at the
time Roger Patterson shot his famous film. It was the same evening after Roger
Patterson had filmed the Sasquatch October twentieth of nineteen sixty seven, when Al got
a call from Roger, who was using the payphone outside Al's store, so
to tell him what he and Gimlin had witnessed only hours before. While David
Polaides has been careful not to commit himself to certain specifics, he had made
particular references that pointed in the direction he appeared to be heading in this ridiculous
tale of slaughtered Sasquatch. In one of his emails, Polites attached some images
to John Green that were not of the PG film, as he had mistakenly
thought, but rather from the Renade de Hendon film taken during Green's return visit
to Bluff Creek in late August of nineteen sixty seven. It appeared that Polites
may have been unaware that the old film that he had told Hodgson about coming
into possession of was actually the edited version of the Hendon's film on Blue Creek
Mountain that had been attached to a copy of Patterson's film for public showing purposes
and other venues. I still find myself wondering how anyone could think that the
two films were shot at the same time. The facts was that the lush
green scenery of Late Summer and de Hendon's film compared to the deepened red fall
colors seen in Patterson's film is quite discernible. Needless to say that Green wasn't
impressed with the accusatory remark Polites made to Hodgson on July fifteenth of two thousand
and nine about John harboring a very very dark secret. Green responded that if
Poliites wanted to know what he saw in Bluff Creek during his visit there the
last week of August nineteen sixty seven, then the thing for Polites to have
done would be to have gone to who would best know the answer, John
Green. In an email response to Green on that particular point, Polaites arrogantly
writes, telling me how to be an investigator is like me telling you how
to be a journalist. Telling me I should go to you first is the
exact opposite protocol to any investigation. So just what should a good investigator do?
Let us review again what Polites rode to Al Hodgson. I actually got
my hands on a fairly old copy of the PG film, full framed with
segments on it. Nobody has seen. It is in the expert hands,
and many of our impressions of what actually occurred is playing out. In a
later email to Green from Polides dated August seventeenth of two thousand and eight,
Polites asked about this film that he had been in possession of for at least
one month. What is the man pointing to on the ground that you appear
to be looking down with something on your shoulder? What is on your shoulder?
We had our experts determine what was on your shoulder, and with ninety
nine percent accuracy they determined it was the attached and inserted camera. I trust
your integrity, but please tell me what is on your shoulder. The multi
generational steel frame from Dehendon's movie that Polites was referring to when asking Green what
was on his shoulder is seen below. The second image with a movie camera
inserted is a crop of the same frame that Polaites also presented to Green.
The inserted camera illustration was presented to Green, alleging it to be the large
camera that Politi's experts were ninety nine percent sure of seen. The problem I
have with Polaides and his alleged unnamed experts claiming with a ninety nine percent certainty
that Green is holding a large movie camera, is that they are using a
very dark, over contrasted copy of the Heendon's film. Areas that dark all
blend together, thus making borders all but impossible to determine. Most of the
time, Areas that are brightly lit and heavily contrasted are expanded out of their
original borders, thus giving the interpreter a false image of what's really there.
It's also known, or should be known, that movie film, especially codochrome
II film like that which Patterson used, had a highly reflective property and was
made more for outdoor light exposure. As often happens when copied by way of
artificial light, color shifts within the image take place. In other words,
colors often look differently on a copy film than they were seen on the camera
original. As I looked at these images, I asked myself what kind of
expert looking at photographic evidence, would want to make a call so bold as
to claim a ninety nine percent certainty of anything from such a poor image source
as the one being provided by Polites. It would seem to me that a
logical and responsible approach to take would be to want to see the original film,
which is undoubtedly better lit, clear, sharper, less contrasted, and
to offer a more accurately colored image for study compared to those images that these
alleged experts were willing to rest their hats on. Let's be honest, who
has ever thought that one could see more detail through a dirty window versus a
clean one? As of September seventeenth of two thousand and nine, I am
told by John Green, owner of the first generation copy, and Eric Dehindon,
current owner of the camera original, that Polites nor anyone representing him has
sought to see either man's film, which is of better quality than that Polites
was using. The end result of trying to interpret poor, multigenerational, and
over contrasted images must have surely led in part to the series of questions that
Polites put to John Green in his email of August seventh of two thousand and
nine. Some of those questions were question number one, what is the man
pointing to on the ground that you appear to be looking down at with something
on your shoulder? What is on your shoulder? John? You say that
isn't a camera on your shoulder? What is it? Then we had our
experts determine what was on your shoulder. With ninety nine percent accuracy, they
determined it was the attached and inserted camera. I trust your integrity, but
please tell me what is on your shoulder. It appears that you have something
on your belt just above and in front of your left elbow. What is
that on your belt? Is that a pistol holster? It should be noted
once again that it was January fifteenth of two thousand and nine when Polides rode
to al Hodgson and said that his experts had in their possession the film in
question. However, it appears that neither Polides nor his experts have actually watched
the entire Blue Creek Mountain sequences of John Green in motion, or they would
have known that John Green had nothing on his shoulder. As the film advanced,
they would have been forced to see Green's left hand pull away from his
shoulder, and in it, he would only be holding a small steel camera.
Going back to the question Politi's put to John Green, where he asked
what it was that Green had on his left hip, Politis wrote, it
appears you have something on your belt just above and in front of your left
elbow. What is that on your belt? Is that a pistol holster?
No better example could be made for what being thorough can do when attempting to
interpret images, because had Politi's or his alleged experts just taken the time to
study the film, they then should have noticed that, when Green turned into
the sunlight, that it was quite obvious that he had nothing on his belt
that would make someone think that he may possibly be wearing a holster or a
holstered pistol on his left hip. Even a simple lighting of an image can
oftentimes eliminate unnecessary, erroneous interpretations, none of which Polites or his alleged experts
appear to have done. This method that I speak of is mere common sense
in my view. I mean, does not a person who enters a darkened
room first consider turning on the lights so as to see better what's around them?
I certainly do. If Polaites and his alleged experts did, in fact
watch the Blue Creek Mountain film footage and motion, then they have some explaining
to do as to how it is that each one of them failed so miserably
in not catching these undeniable points. Polites had written to John Green on August
sixteenth of two thousand and nine, and said the following the job of a
professional researcher investigator is not to pick and choose who they feel as being honest
and only follow those leads, but to thoroughly and professionally investigate all angles of
an incident. This process vindicates the truthful, which I know is what you
want. I have a hard time believing that Polites or his alleged expt Birds
implemented that approach when they looked at the images from the Blue Creek Mountain film
footage. If anything, it appeared that they did just the opposite, or
how else could have many of the questions being put to Green ever been considered
in the first place. So how did all this nonsense come about? And
who was it that started this ill fated fiasco? Because so little has been
learned by those seeking these answers, because the accusers have been vague in their
so called evidence of Green and Gimblin harboring what they've alleged to be a very
very dark secret, I can only speculate. Please let me share what I
believe may have happened several years ago. Chris Murphy sent MK Davis a copy
of the Blue Creek Mountain film footage so to make some still captures for a
project Chris was working on at the time. At some point after that,
Davis started analyzing the footage in question on his own. Along the way.
For whatever reason, Davis started thinking he was seeing things in the Blue Creek
Mountain footage, and from that he formulated the notion that a slaughter of sasquatch
had taken place in the Bluff Creek area on or around the time that Roger
Patterson and Bob Gimlin were there and had gotten the now famous film that Roger
shot. From the reading of an email that I received from Bobby Short,
it was apparent that Davis had shared some of the thoughts with her, and
that led Bobby to telling me about Green having a secret that she believed that
she now knew, and that if he wasn't going to tell me what that
secret was, then she would. It wasn't until earlier this year when I
started hearing about Davis posting numerous clips on YouTube, whereas MK was alleging that
he was finding things within the Blue Preak Mountain footage that pointed to a mass
murdering of Sasquatch at Bluff Creek. Among some of his claims was that he
was looking at a gravesite that Green and de Hendon were present at, that
a man seen in those images holding a rifle was none other than Bob Titmas,
that red blood could be seen on the sand at the gravesite location,
that the presence of blood could also be seen on the ground near a fool
of water, along with an alleged Sasquatch skin seen laying on the ground,
not to mention several other outlandish claims. In reviewing several of MK's clips,
it wasn't always being made clear by Davis that he was altering the images.
However, having seen a far better quality copy of the same film, it
was apparent to me that that was exactly what he had done. Several such
examples could be seen under the title MK Davis's Illustrations that are shown below.
It would seem to me that anyone would knowledge at all of the Blue Creek
Mountain film footage, and considering the lack of image quality that MK Davis was
using, that they would see how unreliable the interpretations of MK's could be and
how important it would be to seek out a much more reliable film source.
The fact is that the pilot in the Blue Creek Mountain film footage was not
Bob Titmas. The much younger looking pilot than forty eight year old Titmus in
nineteen sixty seven was as tall as John Green, who was six foot four
inches tall, when Bob Titmus was around five foot seven inches tall. In
one illustration, it was obvious that M. K. Davis had manipulated the
color of the hands of the pilot so as to imply that they were bloody.
The same seemed to have been done with the fast flowing stream as well.
Other copies of the film in question did not show red hands or a
red stream. In some instances, there was text added to the illustrated frame
stating that the image had been altered. Three clicks of color was admitted to,
but no reference as to what one click represented in intensity. Meanwhile,
at the same time MK appeared to be suggesting to the viewer other things that
he simply had no proof of, but could be implied having now adjusted the
color of certain selected areas of the image. For instance, on Green's copy
of the same film, a scene starts at the tail end of the pilot
having just met the tracking dog. The a sleight of hand came when MK
made the hands appear bloody while offering a tail of a dog attack having just
occurred. In fact, the stream at Bluff Creek flows so fast that I
believe it reasonable to say that a fifty five gallon drum of blood could have
been poured into the water and it couldn't turn the stream red from shore to
shore before quickly being swept away downstream. To most people, it was quite
clear that the assertions that Davis was making couldn't stand up under their own weight
when thought through, and yet it appeared that some people had bought into his
claims without properly analyzing them. Another such example was Davis suggesting that he could
see blood at a location that he proposed was the grave site inserted in above
the film frame as a view of a log behind John Green. As the
movie film advanced, Green moved away from the area marked with an X,
and behind him was seen a spot on the tree whereas the bark was missing.
The color of the bark matched that of the blurred reddish brown spots on
the ground. Because blood turns very dark rather quickly when exposed to air.
It didn't seem logical to me to believe that I was looking at blood on
the ground. However, it did seem logical that, in an area where
logging had been taking place, and it being obvious that other pieces of bark
was scattered about, that the spots asserted to be blood by MK was nothing
more than pieces of bark on the ground. What a ridiculous affair this had
turned out to be. It seemed that the more outrageous the allegations, the
more eager someome individuals were to embrace the possibility, whether purposely done or by
carelessness, rumor and innuendo would take the place of fact, and the implementing
of overly darkened, contrasted images from a multi generational film would help sell the
story white had become black and black had become white? What is the truth?
In one email, Dave Polti's wrote to Green on August fifteenth of two
thousand and nine, I never stated that you were harboring a dark secret.
And yet one month before and to the day, Polaitis had said to Hodgson,
I actually believe that John Green and Gimlin are harboring a very very dark
secret. Really, another thing that should have came to mind to a seasoned
investigator and his experts, in my view, would have been to want to
know what other footage of the scene might be found on the original unedited film
that Reneedea Hindon had taken, if for no other reason than to know if
close ups of this alleged large movie camera could be seen, so to be
certain of the facts before making what could otherwise end up being seen as part
of an unnecessary, careless, slanderous claim against other individuals. It should be
said here and now for the record that I recently followed up with both John
Green, who has a far superior edited copy of the film in question than
Polaites obtained, and Eric Dehindon, who has the camera original that his father
rene when they took at Blue Creek Mount to see if Dave Polyides has contacted
either of them to see their films. As of September nineteenth, two thousand
and nine, it appears that Polites nor his alleged experts have attempted to see
either of these men's films. On August twenty second of two thousand and nine,
Polates wrote me, saying I tried my best to explain that we have
much more evidence, better evidence, more complete evidence than anyone seems to understand.
If Polites has other more complete evidence than the handful of images attached to
his emails, then I am sure that the accused would like to see it.
Of course, his email to me was written before he has seen this
article. Thus he may think differently now and wish not to be so arrogant
when it comes to the abilities of his so called alleged nameless experts, at
least when it comes to photo interpretation. I would also like to say that
I am not attributing the ideas and claims of MK Davis to those of Polit's.
What I tried to convey that from the record and the timing of the
events, that whatever it was that led the types of questions that Polites was
presenting to John Green were more likely born out of erroneous suggestions being made by
Davis that between the poor, darkened over contrasted images, combined with the power
of suggestion, not to mention the altering of some of the images by MK,
that Polites has been misled and relied too much on the materials Davis had
used. What I've attempted to do is look at the evidence as it has
been presented, so as to see if it had legs or not. My
conclusion is that it did not. We all make mistakes, and it's been
said that a mistake isn't a mistake unless we refuse to correct it. I
believe that there is ample evidence that points to Polit's making a huge mistake when
he claimed that Green and Gimlin were harboring a very very dark secret. In
my view, there are several people who owe a big apology to John Green,
Bob Gimlin, and anyone else who they wrongly in an implicated in this
most ridiculous tale, as the character of the accused was called into question.
The tables have now been turned, and many of us will be watching to
see if the accusers will have the character to admit to their mistake. So
far, MK Davis has removed all of his videos from YouTube dot com.
Special thanks to John Green, Eric Dehindon, Al Hodgson, Thomas Steinberg,
Chris Murphy, Sebastian Wang, and Lauren Coleman for their role in helping me
gather the information that I solved. Also a very special thanks goes out to
Barry Blunt for taking the time to go with me to John Green's home on
two occasions so as to view the photos of the edited first generation copy of
Renee to Hendon's Blue Creek Mountain film. While maybe not as clear as seeing
Green's film copy in person, it was Blunt's photographic efforts that allows the reader
of this article an opportunity to compare the quality of Politi's film image source to
that of John Green's. Bill Miller Bigfoot Field Research is peting medi