Posted by: Loren Coleman on May 24th, 2008
“Back and to the left, back and to the left”! Gary the Cat, May 22, 2008.
I would like to pass along my thoughts concerning the meeting with MK and others after the Ohio conference since I had the opportunity to attend this clandestine meeting. Actually, the meeting was held in a corner section of a large public room that overlooked the pool; anyone that was curious could have sat down and participated.
I would like to thank MK for allowing a number of curious individuals to take a closer look at his work with the Patterson film. He could have easily called it a night after the conference and went to bed for a few hours of sleep. MK’s dedication to the enhancement of this film is second to none and I admire his perseverance.
(Side note) Immediately after the 2:00 am meeting, MK had to drive 13 hours so his family could make previous commitments. I think I can safely say, MK is very committed in everything he does.
What I observed in the after hours meeting was a continuation of what MK talked about during his time as speaker. He did show some additional enhancements and demonstrated his use of digital filters to bring out the hidden details within the film. One must be very careful when using digital filters for enhancement; they can be your best friend or your worst enemy. He was very careful in how he explained the questionable sections of the film, but he did mention “shock wave” from a possible bullet when describing how a portion of the flesh moved between frames.
But when seeing the film clips and listening to him, you did come away with the sense that he was trying to portray someone was taking shots at the subject in the film.
Having done limited video enhancement work myself, I have seen how filters can heighten detail in subject areas as well as mask the same area depending on what filters are being applied. I do not agree with MK and others that the creature in the film fell forward at one point; that is just my opinion. I will attempt to verify my observations at a later date using the MK slideshow technique. I also don’t agree that the leg bulge is the result of a gunshot, just my thoughts.
I’m glad we can politely discuss MK’s work on the film in a logical manner and I think all the work being done on the Patterson film is interesting, but we should put the Patterson film behind us and focus our energies on present and future scientific research techniques.
William M. Dranginis, May 23, 2008.
Perhaps the words, “Patty was shot” were never uttered, but people who attended his informal talk came away with the impression that that is what he meant. He is said to have shown “the shockwave that went through her body” at the moment in question. He showed, immediately following the hernia/gunshot wound frames, that Patty “stumbles,” and he showed frames that he claimed exhibited bloodstains on her heel and in her footprints. He discussed how Patty “came down on her leg differently” after the hernia/gunshot wound frames. He then showed where she later trips, and at another point claims that she fell down. All of this is clearly intended to build the circumstantial case that Patty was shot.
In fact, Davis claimed that she was shot at again, and showed where her hair moves and she bobs her head in “reaction” to the bullet just missing her.
It’s clear that Davis meant to make a case that Patty had been shot, and my correspondents did not understand this case to be provisional in any way. So while he may be accurate that he never said the words “Patty was shot” or something like them, he did mean to “propose this theory” as you asked in your question. You may have noticed he doesn’t deny it, but he seems to be saying something along the lines of, “when you are brainstorming, you throw a lot of mud against the wall and see what sticks.” But the attendees that I’ve talked to didn’t hear the theory as provisional. They took it as a well developed theory offered as an explanation of the facts. In fact, Davis was so persuasive that my correspondents believed it.
Blogsquatcher, May 23, 2008.
I was also at this “clandestine” gathering at the Ohio conference.
There was nothing secret about it. Just around 10 people sitting in a lounge area staring at a laptop. Everything that Bill D. spoke about was exactly what happened. M.K. never did actually say the words “Patty was shot”. But he sure as heck lead us in that direction.
John Cartwright, May 25, 2008.
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct). Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015. Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.