John Kirk on the Alaskan Cadborosaurus Footage
Posted by: John Kirk on July 29th, 2011
First let me clarify what that underwater photo shows. It is an image captured from a Shell oil drilling film shot in either 1963 or 1966 depending on the source. The locations where it was shot was either off Santa Barbara, CA or off the Oregon coast. They dubbed the creature Marvin the monster for no plausible reason. That photo was in Ivan T. Sanderson’s repository at SITU. I came across it recently and it just so happened that Global came calling and I showed it to them. As far as I know those are the only stills that exist and I have no idea where the film is. Ask Shell.
Now regarding the Alaskan Cadborosaurus footage ….. Craig has been a gentleman and spoken on my behalf for a few days. I have a life outside cryptozoology so am currently very busy. I will respond to the debacle of the Alaskan Monster Hunt program in due course. They have all the other footage I spoke of, so why don’t the naysayers here just go and ask them? I’m not hiding anything. It’s not my footage, I don’t have it. They do. Ask them.
I am mad as hell that some readers on this site are patently falsely accusing me of hiding something. That is ludicrous. Making false claims is not part of my personality and I informed the readership of what I saw – nothing more, nothing less – so take it or leave it, but don’t impugn my name with nonsense. Have you done your due diligence by asking Discovery about the footage yourself? Obviously not as you would have known the answer. Don’t come on this forum and hide behind cute little nicknames and impugn people. That is cowardice.
By the way I am not a staff writer, don’t get paid for anything I write for Cryptomundo, but do it for the good of cryptozoological researchers who deserve to know what is going on. I am here because I want to share. I shared honestly here with you, but am now ready to pack it in after the response I got from those who point fingers when they don’t have all the facts.
There will be more on this shortly. Suffice it to say all requests to see the footage should be directed to Discovery.
About John Kirk
One of the founders of the BCSCC, John Kirk has enjoyed a varied and exciting career path. Both a print and broadcast journalist, John Kirk has in recent years been at the forefront of much of the BCSCC’s expeditions, investigations and publishing. John has been particularly interested in the phenomenon of unknown aquatic cryptids around the world and is the author of In the Domain of the Lake Monsters (Key Porter Books, 1998).
In addition to his interest in freshwater cryptids, John has been keenly interested in investigating the possible existence of sasquatch and other bipedal hominids of the world, and in particular, the Yeren of China. John is also chairman of the Crypto Safari organization, which specializes in sending teams of investigators to remote parts of the world to search for animals as yet unidentified by science. John travelled with a Crypto Safari team to Cameroon and northern Republic of Congo to interview witnesses among the Baka pygmies and Bantu bushmen who have sighted a large unknown animal that bears more than a superficial resemblance to a dinosaur.
Since 1996, John Kirk has been editor and publisher of the BCSCC Quarterly which is the flagship publication of the BCSCC. In demand at conferences, seminars, lectures and on television and radio programs, John has spoken all over North America and has appeared in programs on NBC, ABC, CBS, PBS, TLC, Discovery, CBC, CTV and the BBC.
In his personal life John spends much time studying the histories of Scottish Clans and is himself the president of the Clan Kirk Society. John is also an avid soccer enthusiast and player.
That’s good enough for me! I think I was lumped in with the people calling you a “liar” because of some comments I made, but that was not my intention at all. I only wanted to hear you confirm that, yes, there is more than what was shown, as you indicated months and months ago. Needless to say, I was disappointed when the show ran, and I keep telling myself that there MUST be some reason for them to not show it… at first I mistakenly thought that this was going to be a series like “Finding Bigfoot”, so I figured they saved it for a later episode, or they had captured even better footage with their HD cameras. However, I found out the next week that this was not the case, so we will have to wait and see. If they have incredible footage, then it stands to reason that they WILL show it at some point.
What do you think their plans for the real good stuff is?
If nothing else, educated readers of Cryptomundo are becoming well-aware of the nature of the creative editing process that occurs on reality televised programming. To continue to throw rocks at John Kirk for merely reporting on the unbroadcast footage he was allowed to view, of course, verges on the foolish and stupid.
John Kirk’s reputation is beyond reproach. He is one of a very small handful of go-to researchers that can be relied upon to assess cryptozoological material. There’s a reason the film was originally shown to him, along with Dr. Paul LeBlond. Discovery is obviously going to extract every bit of value from the footage they purchased. They will likely milk it for years. This has nothing to do with John.
Of Course it’s not your fault that Discovery is bogarting the video. I’ll bet there was an NDA involved, too (Shakespeare wasn’t totally in the wrong). I’m just hoping that this isn’t the future of discoveries, being bought as a commodity and withheld from the explorers in the field. Discovery should put this video on their website and reap the hits, or post it to a cryptozoology, or scientific website for study. They could still show it off to the great unwashed (known locally as viewers). Discovery Channel should man (?) up and quit getting honest people in trouble covering for them. DO THE RIGHT THING, Discovery.
And, John, don’t let the contentious jerks keep you from talking to us about the Caddy. Most of us are really interested in your insight, and want to hear you.
(the spell-check on the comments doesn’t have cryptozoology? On this website? that’s crypto in itself)
off to write Discovery channel about their lack of discovery…
Mr. Kirk,
I don’t believe I was one of the commentors impugning you, but if my comments in any way came across in that manner I apologize publicly and sincerely.
As for Discovery, good luck; I’ve written them 3 times and have gotten nothing but a canned “thank you for your interest” response. I’m even less hopeful with Shell as if a creature along the lines of Caddy, or any other unique or endangered animal, was shown to be in close proximity to a well I’m reasonably certain they would get rid of that evidence pronto for fear of having their operations curtailed. After hearing about what happened to the Artic scientist, Mr. Monnett, I have little faith left in mankind and none at all in governments or corporations.
I do hope we get to see the full 3 minutes of footage and relatively soon. I know several commentors were a bit harsh in their words, but please, try to remember that many of us have been hearing about this footage for 2 years. Many of us know you by reputation (and Mr. LeBlond as well) and value what you say. Our hopes were so high that FINALLY something concrete had been found, that this footage would make people sit up and take notice that ‘something’ undocumented by science was literally in our backyard. Then we got 10-15 seconds of what could have been otters, seals, any mundane creature. Its like waking up Xmas morning after being promised a puppy and you end up with nothing but socks instead.
The photograph of Marvin is available in the book Undersea Frontiers, by Gardner Soule. 4-5m long, it is apparently an unclassified tunicate-type colonial creature and has no bearing on on Caddy-type creatures.
I have not met John, but have no reason to doubt him. I know very well how one’s contributions to a TV show can be cut down to fragments. It is bizarre a TV show didn’t focus on what John describes as the most spectacular footage: it’s not in any way John’s fault, but it sadly reduces this case from “conclusive, publicly available evidence” to something considerably less valuable.
If Discovery had any sense, they’d dispense with all the “yeehaw!” nonsense, and have a full two hour show a la “Bigfoot: The Definitive Guide” with Mr. Kirk and Mr. LeBlond reviewing the ENTIRE footage. No frills, no explosions, or catch phrases. With that type of footage, why would you need anything else?
I don’t get what their reasoning is for using or abusing the footage the way they are, it makes no sense. But what I should do, as Mr. Kirk suggests, is to ask Discovery about it.
I’m sorry that Mr. Kirk was adversely affected by the poor decisions of that network. And I sincerely hope he continues to post here.
I am happy you posted this John. I think many of us are aware discovery has a habit of boning people when it comes to footage and how the Cryptofolks on the show become victims of their story making process.
I really appreciate you taking the time and writing to us about the footage. I was pretty sure there was more to it, discovery paid a pretty penny to get it and they own it now. None of this is your fault. Thanks again.
Are the photos of Marvin the sea monster available on the internet? None of the universities seemed to agree on what it was but maybe one of them still have a copy of the video of it.
No Offense to Loren or John Kirk but my statements stand.
I applaud John and his group and their passion.
I do not applaud silliness that impugns their own integrity by making ridiculous statements in the media…for example…We have 4 specimens of Caddy.
That is ridiculous, false, and silly to the point of the ridicule that followed by the interviewers.
If you want respect and credibility, separate your emotional passion from your scientific amateur knowledge John. 🙂
Like Loren does as he creates a balance between passion, hope and reality.
Stop acting like it is just a known fact that Caddy exists!
It is not a known fact even if it is in your own Head.
It is those kinds of matter of fact statements I object to and I stand by my statements.
John, do not let the naysayers get you down. And packing it in would be premature on your part. There are a variety of people who visit this site. Some post and others are lurkers. I am sure that those making any negative comments are in the minority here. The problem is, one tends to here the “squeaks” more than the “hum” of a well-running machine. So the squeaks are disruptive and tend to leave more of an impact on the listener, namely you. Don’t let this squeaky people take you off course. The other cogs of the machine definitely appreciate your reporting. I, as well as many others here are glad you posted and showed that you are a man of integrity. You saw what you saw on film and reported those findings here! Kudos!
Do you know what the real shame is? These naysayers have nothing positive to contribute to cryptozoology except their negative unfounded comments. They are armchair quarterbacks calling the game. It’s sad that they have nothing better in life than to take out their wrath and negative energy on others, in this case–you!
It isn’t the first time this sort of thing has happened and it will not be the last time this kind of thing happened. But readers are very intelligent here. They can read between the lines from posters. You have integrity and they…well, I will not stoop to their level. They are who they are! You definitely have an overwhelming amount of supporters here that appreciate what you did and what you do. Don’t let a couple of whiners and armchair quarterbacks who are not in the game, get you down. Keep up the thick-skinned approach for all your supporters here!
Glad to see you posting! That speaks volumes about you and the silence speaks volumes about the naysayers!
Is this news reel the only place to see the “oil rig” photo or photos? I’ve never heard of those shot(s) before seeing that news clip.
Let me first say that I respect John Kirk and his credibility.
In a previous comment I said “umm I’m still waiting to see the “full” footage. as much as john kirk talked about this footage, if this is all that he saw, then we were severely mislead and letdown. please tell me there is way more footage? I’m sick of seeing the same 4 seconds and that’s it……”
I’m not sure who he is referring to, but I wouldn’t count myself as one of those falsely accusing him of hiding something. If the rest of the footage has amazing video footage of a caddy, then I’m just upset why discovery would keep this from the world??? You would’ve thought they would’ve milked this footage, especially if there were multiple caddys in the footage. I sure hope we can review this sometime soon!
2 words and a question mark was all it took for me to even lower myself to being in a debate to begin with.
I come to this site everyday 365 for the last few years. Sometimes more often than once a day.
I come here as most others because of an interest and belief that not every living thing has been nicely cataloged and boxed away.
I also go to other sites but prefer here because of Mr. Coleman and his opinions, he has earned my trust and respect and as we all know the word is earned even though I’m just 1 person out of billions I still have an opinion.
I’ve noticed for awhile now that this site will gleefully throw Biscardi or Moneymaker or Dr. Meldrum to the debate most often within a day of a show being aired but whenever someone here gets their feelings hurt…we the readers get a semi sarcastic post ending with Got It.
And that’s what has upset me enough to take you off my bookmarks,,,,and this isn’t the first time Mr. Woolheater’s style of writing has bothered me.
My post wasn’t actually about Mr. Kirk at all. I’m neither stupid nor foolish Mr. Coleman. I expected Alaskan Monster Hunt to be exactly as it was. I even mentioned this to my non crypto-friends and added that Mr Kirk had found it intriguing enough to interest him.
I even mentioned in my conversation his words being something along the lines of if they show what I saw…
So I said it might be worth checking out.
Honestly people if you think reality tv is going to bring you evidence in 44 minutes then maybe some members of this readership are stupid and foolish but I don’t like to feel talked down to with a Got It thrown in, nor made to feel weird because I have a ‘cute’ little handle on the internet, names Pete by the way you can call me Mr. Leronowich.
There not hiding, better? Didn’t know a lot about the internet and was told it was a good idea to use a ‘handle’ I guess I was stupid and foolish.
And if I may have referred to Mr Kirk as a writer it was because I couldn’t think of a suitable word and his name is there with bio as the other three so what would you assume?
So maybe I’ve gotten a bit sensitive about the way you write your posts Mr. Woolheater but it isn’t the first time I’m left with the impression we are being talked down to.
We’re not the experts you guys are however we are your readers. At no time have I ever taken Mr Kirks word to be anything but that. I wasn’t there, have never seen what he claims to and only through Mr Coleman would I even consider his opinion because I read, seen, watched hundreds of these guys through the years and I don’t personally know any of them. I’m sure Mr Kirk has many detractors also I am not one of them.
That said I can recall no time in any post where Mr Kirk assumed any responsibility for what he was allowed to view.
I know he has nothing what so ever to do with anyone’s decision on what to air, when or any of this.
And I fully expect he saw what he claims, a man in his position would be likely to see these things before or if we ever would. Of that I have no doubt.
I will miss Mr Coleman’s posts though however all things come to a end and I just don’t like the tone anymore, haven’t for awhile.
Anyway flame away get the last name right and good day to you all.
Editorial comment (by Craig, or Mr. Woolheater as dabode refers to me): normally this comment would not be approved.
But I decided to post it lest any other Cryptomundian think dabode was censored.
And with that…
It’s time for you to go.
Fair enough Mr Kirk, I was one of the detractors but only because I have read your books avidly and trusted your word on what we would see. I genuinely don’t understand why the TV channel would leave out the most impressive bits of footage, what kind of sense would that make?
But at the same time, what could lying add to your own credentials, or if not lying, then why would you tell us that we would see something that would blow our minds knowing that no such footage exists?
Neither makes sense but as a passionate man of the field I honestly don’t think you would have told us of something that you hadn’t in fact seen. I think a lot of people, myself at the front of that queue, were simply waiting for some kind of comment from yourself on the matter. I’ve got it, and I believe you. It still makes zero sense though.
I also never said anything as i never even posted in those threads,lol but i am completely boggled as to why Discovery would show that little bit of footage if they have something akin to the holy grail for Caddy footage ?? Just really can not wrap my head around it, i mean if the film shows multiple ones and they raise their heads up out of the water and you see them actually protecting babies from whales but yet we got 40 seconds of grainy black and white something, i was really bummed out.
I’ve been reading about cryptids since I was a kid. I’ve been reading about cryptozoologists for a few years, which is about as long as I’ve been visiting this site. I’ve seen a lot more evidence supporting what I’ve read about cryptozoologists (most of it negative and almost all of it written by their fellow cryptozoologists) than I’ve seen supporting the existence of of any of the major cryptids. If this is how you respond to relatively mild criticism by people wh are at least open to the possibility of cryptids, I shudder to think how you’d respond to the criticism of true skeptics. Calling your readers foolish and stupid doesn’t make you any more sympathetic or believable. I enjoyed cryptozoology a lot more when it focused more on presenting evidence and less on trying to prove a point of view. If I ever see footage that in any way meets the expectations that Mr. Kirk generated by his review I’ll be back to apologize not only for what I said, but what I thought which an awful lot less flattering. The same goes for when I see concrete evidence that those sasquatch body stories were anything less than malarkey. Needless to say, I never expect either of those events to ever transpire. Until then I’m with Dabode. His comments about how Moneymaker and Biscardi were dead on accurate. If there are indeed any cryptids out there (and I’m not talking about a new species of frog), I hope for their sakes that they have thicker skin than the guys who are hunting them.
Aw come on now,
If the MIB, or the Skeptical Inquirer, or the National Geographics cameras (and none other) says Caddy doesn’t exist, it doesn’t exist!
I mean if a pin falls in the jungle on the other side of the Earth, and you didn’t hear it… it didn’t happen Man.
That motion picture (one frame from dear old Ivan) of a swimming animal sequence looks uncannilly llike the 12′ carcass cut out of the belly of a sperm whale (what are those odds?), or even some resemblance to the baby one caught by the fishing vessel not too long back.
John, I respect your work, and always enjoy reading about your latest findings. I know you are upset, but vitriolic detractors are in reality, very weak individuals. I hope you continue to contribute to this site, and share your achievements with us.
So, there is still more footage to look forward to? Nice!
Maybe we should boycott all Discovery-owned networks until the footage is aired.
Also, where can we see the 1963 Shell Oil video of Marvin the monster? Is it publicly available?
With all the hurt feelings flying around I was just hoping for clarification. So what I am hearing is that there is a lot more footage and what we saw edited was not even close to being the best footage. My biggest question is why would Discovery withold their best stuff??? When Josh Gates found the “Yeti” footprint he was all over the news months before the show ever came out. I would think that Discovery Channel would have made a huge deal about what they had and we would see it in every news channel. Think of the publicity they would get.
I think praetorian called it pretty accurately:
What’s going on here is quite clear; Discovery obtained the 3 minutes of (alleged) Caddy footage at approximately the same time they contracted with the Hillstrand bros. to do a spin-off show.
While everyone in crypto-land fumed and cover-up allegations ran rampant the Discovery Network quietly went about filming “Hillstranded,” using a few second-rate moments of the footage as a basis for the so-called monster hunt, which ended-up as merely an excuse for a couple good ol’ boys to act like macho idiots and blow sh*t up – but also, dare I say most importantly(?), a ratings coup for Discovery.
While conspiracy theories, name calling and finger-pointing continue here at Cryptomundo, I think it more likely that the only “cover up” that exists is Discovery’s self-imposed info blackout while they quietly go about filming a follow-up “Hillstranded” episode. Or two. Or three…
Rest assured that, once the public loses interest in the Hillstrand bros. antics, Discovery will finally impanel a group of experts to review the entire 3 minutes of footage – a la “Bigfoot: The Definitive Guide” – but that ain’t gonna happen until the network hacks at Discovery extract every rating’s point and dollar from the gullible public.
Welcome to network television as it exists today. 🙁
I’ll have to concur with markkill123 above. Although the internet encourages rudeness and insensitivity, I don’t seem to recall either to be in evidence during these threads. Certainly there is no reason to impugn anyone’s motives or honesty; and indeed, my incredulity comes from the realization of how disparate people’s ideas can be about what constitutes evidence–and even evidence for a particular animal called “Cadborosaurus” (instead of, say, “unknown animal”). Nothing personal. And I would still like to be able to see the footage.
Maybe the Discovery Channel, after duking it out in court with the Hillstrands and subsequently seeing them make a mockery of a show, decided not to waste such good footage on two drunk jackasses shooting at water and hooking a whale.
Just as a clarification, as I have been asked off-list, the “editorial comment” and “Survivor torch snuffing” image posted above under “dabode” message were not placed there by me.
I really don’t think flaming, fighting, and fist-a-cuffs add anything to cryptozoological inquiry, on either side.