Review: Manbeasts: A personal investigation by Adam Davies

1. Paperback: 164 pages
2. Publisher: cfz (7 Oct. 2014)
3. Language: English
4. ISBN-10: 1909488216
5. ISBN-13: 978-1909488212
6. Product Dimensions: 15.6 x 0.9 x 23.4 cm
7. 
   

I had seen Adam Davies on a number of TV documentary programmes such as Monster Quest and it was good to see someone who took his subject seriously and so, when I saw two books by him I decided to order them.  Unfortunately, there was a problem with one so I only got the book under review.

When it came to actual work on expeditions the reading was good.  There was space given to how and why Davies decided which expeditions to mount and how compromises need to be made ~but not when it came to investigation. No one can afford to mount expeditions along with all the equipment needed out of their own pocket continuously so money from TV companies helps...a lot! That side of things I am okay with. You have to be a realist.

I can also understand why Prof. Brian Sykes did not want it known that he had funded Davies trip to the United States.  You have to remember that, in the United States, it seems that  "Bigfoot experts" put more effort into name~calling, making wild claims against one another and worse than they do in looking for the elusive hominid.  Sasquatch is safe from being discovered by those going out looking for it!  So, had it been revealed that Sykes, who was behind the "infamous" mystery hominid DNA project had funded someone who was known to believe in these creatures...big "Bang!" in the, uh, "community".

Above: Bigfoot  looming over Davies and Simmons as they sleep?

I was somewhat puzzled that the account was given of an alleged Bigfoot caught on camera (a 1 second shot?) standing over Davies and Lori Simmons while they slept but the photo was not reproduced.  When the photo first emerged I could not see what he reported  and reading his description in this book and looking at the photo again...I still cannot see it. When questioned over the image Davies responded: "...i can say, though, that there was nobody else in our vicinity, that we were asleep..." Wow.  Now, in this book Davies questions what some witnesses have said about sightings because of lack of evidence or some other nuance. Yet here he asks the reader to accept that he knew no one else was around because he and Simmons were asleep?  No. I'm not sure who was behind the one single photo (questions are unanswered as to why only one photo) Bigfoot Evidence has dealt with this photo so go check them out.

http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/breaking-cryptozoologist-adam-davies.html

After the SOHA (Southern Oregon Habituation Area) debacle which saw a big dent in Davies reputation (I believe he was conned) it is fair to say that "Squatchin'" has not been good to him.

It is an interesting book, however, on the downside 11 of the photographs were ruined by heavy lines running down one or both sides of them ~the sort of thing you get when ink cartridges are running out or very bad scanning. This is annoying in that when you buy a new book you expect to get a better quality product.

I was also very surprised at some paragraphs that made no sense such as bottom of p. 66 "I was glad to be told that wChinese mountain cat hen we got to the other side of the lake, the phones would be unable to get a signal"

Davies does not come out of this well, in fact. He resorts to name calling, such as two people who had handed him business cards in the past with "Explorer" on them were "utter twats". One has to hope that one of those two people never comes up with a vital piece of evidence that could add or prove Davies case re. "Man~beasts" because if they read that line... Then we have a helicopter pilot who would not attempt a landing in mountainous terrain ~a pilot has to think of their own and passenger safety and that is no joke~ is described as "pilot pussy" and someone as "a fat bloke" and there are other examples and by about the third time I read it I didn't care if he had "heard a tiger in the wild!".

Then you have a location "...we arrived at Juwkaa Pani. Jukwaa Pani..." Which is it?

there were several sentences I had to re~read three or four times to make sense out of because they were just plain badly written. I have to wonder about the editing because many of these obvious

faults should have been spotted easily during that process. 

Davies comes across as arrogant and egotistical in places not to mention misogynistic person and none of this is helped by accounts of hard drinking sessions. You expect a little "colour" in accounts of expeditions but in this case I think just looking at organizing expeditions and notes on field work would have been far better. Never having met the man it may just be that this is a false impression created by the book but presumably Davies proof read it and approved?

As I've written, the book would have been far better without some aspects but the accounts of seeming ~reading of them in this book~ slap dash expeditions raised more than a few questions.  Certainly I think Davies might achieve more with better funding and despite his belief that concentrating on just looking for one "man beast" might waste years of his time, I think that good financial backing, more cameras and the ability to stay a month or more on an expedition might well yield better results in, say, the case of the Orang Pendek.

A book I waited for excitedly and read in a day but was a disappointment. Not a great book ~certainly not a "classic of cryptozoology"" as someone on Amazon wrote~  but if you are interested in the subject you will want it for your bookshelf.

There Can NEVER Be An Excuse To NOT Investigate A Case

Imagine this.  There are UFO 'researchers' who seriously ask "What do you mean by 1973 UFO wave?"

Seriously. Ufologists these days seem to get their education on the subject via You Tube and TV...and sensationalist and inaccurate books. It's almost as though nothing happened between 1947~1995.

So, what is ~or was~ seen as the best recorded and most significant UFO wave of sightings world wide Is to many just unknown. J. Bernard Delair of the old Contact UK produced a very detailed edition of The UFO Register summarizing what was known.

Now let's suppose that you read that issue of The UFO Register in 1974, or later, and from all the cases cited there are a few lines detailing an alleged UFO landing and entity being seen, but an entity the description of which is unique. We were always told look for rare seemingly genuine events where non humanoid entities are reported. There was such a case.

1974~1980 I wrote to the people who were supposed to have looked into this case.  No responses. So any and every new book dealing with that period or AE/CE3K cases is checked. Same lines. No new details. I have scoured thousands of these reports I have on file and checked many other sources. Nothing similar so the "craft" description and entity description are unique.

In 2015 I finally got in contact with someone at a major UFO organization in the USA.  Yes, they had the case on file and even provided me with the files.  No investigation had ever taken place. Why? Even Ted Bloecher (Google him) stated in the file that the case was deserving of investigation. The reason nothing was done?  No one could be bother "It might turn out to be a hoax" based on the fact that the description and notes made by someone at a radio station at the time just didn't "do it" for someone.

I checked everywhere I could on the internet once I got the percipient's name. No claims of a hoax or a joke.  Nothing. Just constant cut and paste of the same lines describing the incident.

However, the whole point of investigation is to disprove or prove a case. A joke? Fair enough. At least investigators learn something more. Genuine...well, I leave that up to you.

I am hoping that the organization I am in touch with will consider re~opening this as a cold case. It could be very significant.

More...eventually.

Southmead Hospital (Bristol) To Panic Cull Foxes

I have messaged the hospital which seems to think an unwell fox will break in and attack and kill. Pest Control should be the very LAST people to contact as thet do not care if it might be a vixen looking for food for cubs or what season it is: they are only interested in the money.

Culling any and all foxes because one looks ill??  This is the year 2017 and there are groups like the National Fox Welfare Society who should be called first. Foxes have lived on Southmead Hospital grounds, that I know of from when I lived in Southmead, since the early 1970s.

A "cull" is knee jerk panic.  Read the headline.  Good to see people have protested the move.

This is the 21st Century and some pest controllers are far more dangerous than any ill fox.

Foxes could crawl through maternity ward windows and endanger babies, says hospital considering cull

Sarah Knapton

The Telegraph12 August 2017

View photos

A diseased fox has been seen loitering around the maternity wards at Bristol Southmead Hospital 

A hospital in Bristol is considering culling foxes outside a maternity unit because they believe the animals could climb in through the windows and pose a threat to newborns.

Bristol Southmead Hospital announced last week that pest controllers would ‘remove’ the animals ‘to ensure the safety of mothers and babies.’

NHS managers said they had become aware of one animal in particular which looked diseased, and had been seen in public areas.

However the proposal has sparked an outcry from locals and conservationists who have set up a petition which has already attracted hundreds of signatures.

View photos

Bristol Southmead Hospital 

The hospital said it had temporarily halted its plan and was consulting with animal groups.

"Foxes have lived peacefully on the site for a number of years,” a spokesman said. “However, recently we have had more sightings of foxes particularly around our maternity unit.

"To clarify, we contacted pest control because we are particularly concerned about one of the foxes who looks like it may be unwell. The fox has become bolder in behaviour and is being sighted more regularly in public areas.

"So far we have contacted some alternative animal welfare organisations and we are pausing all existing activity while we consider their recommendations."

Details of the initial cull were first announced on the hospital’s Facebook page, in a post which warned that many of the maternity unit’s windows were left open during the summer, and said there was a ‘potential risk of foxes entering the building.’

But within hours, people had complained about the plans.

Nikki Hamilton posted: "I love the NHS and will always defend to the hilt but not happy that exterminators are killing the foxes", while Caroline Littlewood said she was "appalled" by the plans.

Debbie Swatton added: “Shame on you Southmead Hospital and Carillion. I’m sure if you had sought advice from a wildlife sanctuary, such as Secret World or Badger Care Wildlife, they would have helped in a more caring way.”

The hospital said it was now looking at other ways to deter the animals and said it had not killed any foxes.

Southmead Hospital

11 August at 14:37 · 

We have received a number of messages regarding foxes located near our Maternity unit and around our hospital site. We recognise that many people are concerned for the welfare of the foxes; however as a hospital our priority has to be the safety of our patients.

We are grateful for all the recommendations of animal welfare organisations who might be able to help and we will make contact with them for their advice on the most appropriate action to take.

While under normal circumstances we would endeavour to directly respond to all messages, unfortunately in this case we are unable to respond to every message. We hope this post goes somewhere in addressing any concerns or questions you have.

- UPDATE -

We have had a number of people asking whether we have shot any foxes. We can confirm that we have not killed any foxes.

Foxes have lived peacefully on the site for a number of years. However, recently we have had more sightings of foxes particularly around our Maternity unit. To clarify, we contacted pest control because we are particularly concerned about one of the foxes who looks like it may be unwell. The fox has become bolder in behaviour and is being sighted more regularly in public areas.

So far we have contacted some alternative animal welfare organisations and we are pausing all existing activity while we consider their recommendations. We have also taken advice from them on how to deter foxes in future; one of their suggestions is that people on site do not feed the foxes. We will be sending out messaging to staff, patients and the public with this advice.

- FURTHER UPDATE -

You may have seen that a petition was recently created in response to comments about a fox near our Maternity unit.

Please see below our response to the petition:

We understand that this is a very emotive issue and people feel very strongly about the welfare of foxes on our hospital site.

To provide reassurances we can confirm that no foxes have been killed or harmed at Southmead Hospital and we have no intention to.

We are not sure where the petition’s reference to two foxes being caught has come from, but this is not the case. Nor do we have any intention of culling foxes.

Action was taken after concerns were raised by senior nursing staff at the hospital about a particular fox near the maternity department. We would not have been doing our job as a healthcare provider if we had not responded to these concerns, even if the potential risk is low.

We have paused all action in response to the comments we have received and we have contacted The Fox Project and were redirected to Fox-A-Gon. We are awaiting more advice before taking further action.

In the meantime, we are advising staff not to feed foxes around the site.

We understand that the foxes on our site provide pleasure to some patients and visitors and have lived in harmony with them for many years. We hope to find a way of continuing to do so, while also ensuring we do what is in the interest of all our patients.

We thank everyone for their suggestions of alternative organisations who may be able to help us resolve this matter.

On WHY Should I ~WE~ Bother with these Reports?

I get asked "Why?" Why am I looking into these reports?  It's all crazy stuff anyway.

I have talked to alleged "contactees" as well as abductees (though showing how silly it gets some prefer to be called "experiencers" or any number of other names for various reasons) and I have spoken to those who have had odd experiences that seem to conform to what are called part of the alien abduction event. 

I have even examined one percipient, Mrs G., who was red on just one side of her body yet normal pale skinned on the other side, following strange night time events.
I have spoken to and even accompanied one woman who had a life time of strange experiences on a night watch.  Both of us sat in a deserted park play area ~nothing appeared.  This woman had experiences from a teenager onward. She had been ridiculed and found me to be the only one willing to listen, ask serious questions and not dismiss her as a "nut" ~in the late 1970s/early 1980s that was still UK Ufology's response to these claims.  This witness, Mrs C., was in the passenger seat of a car driven by her husband, in 1978, when a large headed type entity appeared in front of the windscreen of the car.  So clear that Mrs C. could make a detailed drawing later. But at the time she looked at her husband who claimed to have seen nothing other than his wife look at him oddly. She was not looking dazed, sleepy or staring ~just looked normal.  All time accounted for so no "abduction"

Aliens? Psychological?  You only find out via investigation.  For all i know these two ladies are still percipients in events.  Though both felt they could talk freely to me, they were being called names and facing some hostile comments from "respected Ufologists" and one eventually turned to the Church while the other just broke off contact.

In 1958, a man driving near Bristol (UK) was involved in a vehicle interference case and there was missing time involved.  He contacted BUFORA in the 1970s as things still bothered him. I received his appeal for help years later as "You are interested in these things, aren't you?"  As it turned out the man had, by then, moved to Rhodesia/Zimbabwe now and stood by all he had written but having been ignored that was it.  No longer interested.

I coined a term "UFO Time Lapse" ~though in some cases no object was sighted but all the details seemed very similar to those in cases where objects were sighted.  I asked BUFORA to adopt this term in the late 1970s (1978 I believe) since there was, as I pointed out, a good few of these events being reported. No. Norman Oliver seemed the only Ufologist interested in the term being applied!

Norman Oliver in 2013 Cr:UFO ARchives  http://ufoarchives.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/

When, in the late 1970s,  I took over as head of Research and Investigation for the British Flying Saucer Bureau (f. 1953) it also led to my eventually reviving and updating the old Flying Saucer News to The UFO News Bulletin. I found that Contactee George Adamski was still help up as a credible percipient in alien contacts.  About as credible as Arthur Bryant in my opinion back then. But I discussed Alien entity cases and the look of horror on some faces! 

There was a case that I later made the cover item ~I took time to draw and re~create the scene as described by the percipient. Handed the magazine in to be printed and a week later got my copy: the cover had been removed by BFSB Committee "order" and replaced with a photocopy of the BFSB symbol. I was not told about this and when it happened a second time I quit. No more publication because no one else had the skills to produce it.

When I asked about old cases I knew the BFSB had "looked into" the files were suddenly "Somewhere. Not sure where" for about five years. The BFSB did not want its 'reputation' to be tainted by this silly stuff.

The final straw came after a talk I gave on Close encounters of the Third Kind at a BFSB meeting was interrupted several times as it was pointed out that, "unlike Adamski these persons have furnished no proof" and "But we know from what Adamski told us~~"  I quit the BFSB!
Ufologists over and over again ad nauseum talk about non existent "Ministry" cover ups or "suppression of cases by government bodies" yet have done exactly the same since the very first days of flying saucer 'investigation'.

Major (Retd) Donald E. Keyhoe's National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomenon (NICAP) ridiculed or explained away AE cases. The list goes on and even James and Coral lorensens Aerial Phenomena Research Organization (APRO) obfuscated some cases. In the UK I found only Norman Oliver to be seriously interested in the investigation of these reports.

After Budd Hopkins and the whole missing time furore we have "Greys" everywhere but it took until the mid 1980s before the UK latched on and then it was hip and cool to follow this trend.  The UK suddenly had Greys seeping out of the woodwork.  Anything or case before 1987 became a "screen image" by the Greys.  It was Greys. All Greys.  Then Insectoids...and Reptileans..and hybrids and...blah blah blah.
Back in the 1970s I had an idea, Lord (Brinsley) Clancarty and even Sir Victor Goddard thought it had merit. I knew people involved in all sorts of radio work and some had detected odd signals not identified at that time.  I had even sat in cars at 0300 hrs as mobile radios were tuned in to scan certain frequencies.  So why not get a network in the UK listening for unusual signals or even sending out "message" signals into the ether?  The network could be built on as it went along but we would have an unofficial CETI (Communications with Extra Terrestrial Intelligence) project that could concentrate on certain known anomalies. Then I was told "no".  It seems that certain people high up in astronomical circles thought it was "deplorable" that a "bunch of amateurs" do this type of thing.  Back then, if "Sir" whoever objected the Old Boys Network swung into action.

There was a funny side to this.  Apparently, someone had complained that I was "Like bloody Quatermass!" (the UK TV sci fi horror series of the 1950s).  On a train journey to get to RAF Brize Norton in the 1980s I was going through papers when a group of airmen got into my carriage. They noticed the UFO material but didn't say much. At the next station a Group Captain I had met before and he looked at me and then at the younger men: "Watch yourselves, Professor Quatermass is here!" he said loudly. The airmen had no idea. However on a few other occasions I was referred to in a joking fashion as "Old Quatermass".

I have hefty files on AE/CE 3K accounts from around the world and they were scoured long ago for any non humanoid cases that seemed to have credibility.  few did. Some were outright hoaxes or explained in other ways ~which original sources, such as Flying Saucer review, knew were hoaxes yet promoted over the years as genuine.  Even the 1958 "Scottish Landing" turns out to be a hoax by FSR  or one of its associates yet is still cited as genuine to this day.

SETI and those "in the know", always said any aliens would not look like humans. Would look anything but human. But in the last decade or so many now say the humanoid form may be some kind of galactic standard form. Which is why I never gave up looking at any reports and found a few of great interest.  However, one case that had high strangeness and involved an AE type not recorded before or since took place in 1973. And it was dealt with by the Allen Hynek created Centre for UFO Studies (CUFOS).  Pay dirt ~this elite organisation was on the spot. Except, as I found out a few years back, the report was not investigated because no one could be bothered.  Seriously.

And when cases crop up or are thoroughly investigated do Ufologists join together to look for more information in a scientific way ~ie. do they look for back up information both pro and con a case? Only when you look at all possible explanations and exclude them do you have a case worthy of note. But, no, it's name calling, back~stabbing, even lying from one Ufologist to another and often a percipient is stuck in the middle of this. "This testimony does not conform with what Budd Hopkins or Dr Jacobs ascertained so its a fake!"
Ufology as a whole is not scientific.  And every year since 1998 (?) we have heard from the same old same old media faces that "Full disclosure will take place this year/next year!"  Still waiting. Ufologists need to practice full disclosure of how they mess things up ~not all of them because there are credible investigators out there~ and base things on personal bias rather than based on facts.
Since 1975 I have been looking at AE/CE3K reports and I will continue to do so, yes, even keeping an eye on current abduction work, because that is how you come up with a seemingly genuine report. One to build on. One that may prove the earth has had the occasional extra terrestrial visitor and that is what science needs.  A case it can dig into.
I have a mind. I want to find things out. The weirder or stranger the claim the better because that makes my mind work and, you never know, one day.....

SOHA Bunko

There are four parts to this. I got 15 minutes into part 1 and said out loud "It's a con!"

I have seen this exact type of act regarding UFO contacts, 'psychics' but mainly in the field of weirdness.  If you know anyone who has studied psychology ask them to watch all four parts. Johnson over bearing and vocalizing loudly at the right points, cuing in lady by the stage and even "This is what the skeptics will say" points at the right moment. When his "extras" came on at the end that should  have convinced anyone.

But what was it P. T. Barnum said.....?

I really WANT to hear Adam Davies talking now about that night because I think those men were controlled, set up and duped.  Interesting to hear Johnson give yet a third version of his part in that night's events.

Hoax

"Rabbits and rats ~we shot all the foxes though!"

A few years back, while doing my police advisory work, I asked a golf course owner about local wildlife.  "Bloody rabbits and rats!" was the reply.  I asked "Don't you have any foxes?  Him: "Shot 'em!"  The post title comes from a similar idiot (I'm retired now so I can voice an opinion!)

You take the natural predator out of the food chain you get problems.

From National Fox Welfare Society https://www.facebook.com/foxwelfare/?hc_ref=ARTiPXXs0fXkldenTBPdqBH5trQ-H0wdJEALOeUPuH0RbL_lVC6fpFh6LXhEvZGxzP8&fref=nf

It's not just the hunters with hounds getting away with murder!

More often than not when the word fox is mentioned a great many thinks of the horrors of fox hunting with hounds.

When foxes have been in our care for treatment and when due to be released back into their town or city territories people will often ask that we keep them in our care as cub hunting has started or the fox hunting season is under way. However the majority of the town and city foxes thankfully never get chased and ripped to shreds by the hounds and often the real killers of the town and city foxes are overlooked.

Pest Control companies whilst lining their pockets probably account for the death of not hundreds but thousands of foxes each year. Pest Control companies have no close season so they will be killing in certain months, pregnant vixens, lactating vixens, and cubs. This happens on a daily basis. In certain situations, food will be left on a lawn and as the foxes come to eat a pest controller will be aiming his gun sights on their heads, their only crime is to be in a garden where they are not wanted. In other situations, a cage trap is set and when a fox is caught, it will be shot in the head.

Why is this happening? Some people don't like the idea of having foxes visit their gardens so Pest control companies are called in. Some schools and golf courses will have foxes on the land that they don't want there. Supermarkets, hotels restaurants, and businesses will call in pest control to kill the resident foxes.

This daily slaughter solves no real problems as when a family of foxes in a territory is wiped out all this does is create a vacant territory for another fox family to fill. The only winner in this is the Pest Controllers as their pockets will be lined again.

Foxes are not invading our gardens, it is us, invading theirs and with the constant need of more housing, supermarkets etc, we are forcing more foxes to live in an urban area, so for those getting away with murder, business will be booming!

This state just decided to kill a family of wolves raising their pups — here's how you can help stop it

https://www.facebook.com/DodoImpact/videos/1790126167671135/?hc_ref=ARQ1WwQHpOworWf_TZ7g4mHROwfhLVLcdCjHIjebl1kHUVF9dfgmsLHx9WPUhtshW6o

https://www.thedodo.com/