Can you see an 'FM' on the backwall in the famous Mary Kelly photograph?

[Lombro2]

Bill Munns is Woo? I never would have believed it.

The fact that we're still looking for an unknown, unclassified, local hominid in the Schwartzwald of Whitechapel, says a lot. That's what's central of course and deserves attention. Why no "evidence" to prove who and what he is after more than a century?

The Diary and the FM are new and incidental additions to the canon or non-canon of Ripper research. Why get worked up about it? Naysayers make it sound like it's MK Davis' Bluff Creek Massacre Theory.

Of course, that theory was his attempt to explain the anomalies he found in the P-G Film and you're always going to get flak from the P-G Proponents. You'll always tend to get the most flak from the people working from the wrong premise. Isn't that true?

[The Rookie Detective]

What is odd is that a few times over the years reproductions of the photograph have been uploaded to this site and elsewhere that don't have the white reflection of the flashbulb, and thus show different or additional markings, and yet the diary's supporters still interpret the markings as "FM."

An example can be found at Jay Hartley's website.





Personally, I can't even begin to understand why he is interpreting these markings as FM.

Following from his faint red line, it looks more like a backwards J, followed by a forward J or a P or a T and then a W and another line after that....or maybe the initial mark could be interpreted as the Pi sign...

I don't get it.

To me, it looks like Mary's right hand is holding something and her arm is curled up.


This is despite her right arm being described as laying on the bed slightly bent and slightly away from her body, with her palm facing upwards.

However, this close up photo looks like her hand is holding something.

What would she have been cradling?

Or is this my eyes deceiving me?

[Mike J. G.]

Let me clarify me position here, Abby. I have seen no evidence which would suggest to me that Bigfoot/Yeti exists. But I don't like the expression case closed. To me, it seems to imply that the person using it possesses all knowledge that exists with regard to that particular claim and implies that they will refuse to look at any additional evidence that may come forth in the future which might call into question the position they now hold because their mind is already made up. I think that is a bad position to take regardless of the claim.

I am willing to change my mind on any position that I now hold but I need to see the evidence.

And finally, this is a thread which concerns the diary and initials on the wall. I have already contributed to hijacking it. If anyone wants to continue with a Bigfoot discussion they should probably start a new thread.

c.d.

Believe me, I've spent a million years down the cryptid rabbit hole, particularly all things Bigfoot. I knew a couple of pretty well-known hoaxers connected to the Georgia Bigfoot and then the other Bigfoot on ice they took to Vegas, I was a plane ride away from potentially being a part of that! I used to speak with former FX man turned Woo champion, Bill Munns, about his work on the Patterson film. I was a regular at practically every Bigfoot forum on earth.

There's absolutely no valid reason for suggesting that there's a possibility that a breeding population of giant hairy bipedal ape-men are evading science across not only the well traversed States of America, but the entire globe, unless you want to propose a supernatural element... And that's another mess of nonsense entirely.

I've never seen a single shred of credible evidence to suggest that it isn't case closed, except for, as I mentioned, the simple fact that we can't prove a negative. Other than that, far too much time and money has been spent on chasing legends, IMO, and it says a lot about the Maybrick scrapbook that we're in here discussing it, tbh

[Lombro2]

These are both considered unsolved mysteries and they seem to have a lot in common, since the Barrett Hoax theorist keeps bringing up Patterson-Gimlin and considers both their film and the Diary as shoddy hoaxes easily debunked, as well as all the Ms that people see right in front of their eyes. Yet they look for solutions in "Mrs Puddleduck's socks".

Do you see solutions in peripherology? You must have some good peripheral vision! I don't.

In the periphery, I definitely see nuzzing! But at least, I don't have central scotoma.

[c.d.]

cmon cd, its been case closed for a long time, just like its been case closed on this silly diary for a long time.

Let me clarify me position here, Abby. I have seen no evidence which would suggest to me that Bigfoot/Yeti exists. But I don't like the expression case closed. To me, it seems to imply that the person using it possesses all knowledge that exists with regard to that particular claim and implies that they will refuse to look at any additional evidence that may come forth in the future which might call into question the position they now hold because their mind is already made up. I think that is a bad position to take regardless of the claim.

I am willing to change my mind on any position that I now hold but I need to see the evidence.

And finally, this is a thread which concerns the diary and initials on the wall. I have already contributed to hijacking it. If anyone wants to continue with a Bigfoot discussion they should probably start a new thread.

c.d.

[Lombro2]

I guess now's not the time to share my own "sighting". Somehow I don't feel comfortable.

Maybe Casebook should use the photo to see if you're a Robot or a Maybrickian and then boot you out if you click on it. Ike would never be able to do another search. So much for the lone ranger.

Hi Ho Silver Away

[Abby Normal]

Well to be fair, there have been sightings or footprints seen by what I would consider credible sources. People like Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay, famed mountaineer Reinhold Messner, Tibetan monks etc. So I wouldn't put them on the same level as drunken Yahoos out hunting. I think people are seeing something. The question is what is it?

The DNA samples tested were from all over the world including one of the most famous samples of fur from an alleged Yeti from a Tibetan Monastery. Again, in every instance the analysis done showed they were from various species of bears.

So I am not sure it is case closed but I remain very skeptical.

c.d.

cmon cd, its been case closed for a long time, just like its been case closed on this silly diary for a long time.

[JeffHamm]

What is odd is that a few times over the years reproductions of the photograph have been uploaded to this site and elsewhere that don't have the white reflection of the flashbulb, and thus show different or additional markings, and yet the diary's supporters still interpret the markings as "FM."

An example can be found at Jay Hartley's website.





Personally, I can't even begin to understand why he is interpreting these markings as FM.

Following from his faint red line, it looks more like a backwards J, followed by a forward J or a P or a T and then a W and another line after that....or maybe the initial mark could be interpreted as the Pi sign...

I don't get it.

It's confirmation bias. When someone first hears of the "F M" on the wall, and then is shown a version where at least the M looks "M-like", and then has the F pointed out to them, it becomes a case of "once seen and can't be unseen".

Years ago I recall a thread where people, including myself, started pointing out all sorts of animals and people and other images found on the wall - it was like spotting things in the clouds. But yes, the consistency of the proposed F and M between images is just not there, which strongly points to them being image artefacts unique to certain images.

- Jeff

[Mike J. G.]

I can see why people here are so quick to dismiss what other people claim to see or to have seen. It doesn't fit a preconceived paradigm. People are just seeing things and smelling things and seeing things that move objects, that are really there, while they aren't. Or they're seeing a bear and morphing it in their heads, even if it's the head of a policeman or the head of the Head of our Humane Society driving through Oregon. Those weren't Sasquatches climbing an 8 foot bank on two legs. You've been driving too long...

It's impossible for me to side with a group of skeptics who like to impose their Socratic authority. So I'm going with there being an M on the wall, just like there's an M at four of the other crime scenes in one form or another, not to mention one letter signed with a name beginning with an M.

And since it isn't Monty or Fanny Mortimer, I'm going to go with Maybrick as a good working suspect. Yes, I'm tentatively joining Ike. Woo Whee!

Keep reaching for that rainbow, kemosabe.

[Lombro2]

I can see why people here are so quick to dismiss what other people claim to see or to have seen. It doesn't fit a preconceived paradigm. People are just seeing things and smelling things and seeing things that move objects, that are really there, while they aren't. Or they're seeing a bear and morphing it in their heads, even if it's the head of a policeman or the head of the Head of our Humane Society driving through Oregon. Those weren't Sasquatches climbing an 8 foot bank on two legs. You've been driving too long...

It's impossible for me to side with a group of skeptics who like to impose their Socratic authority. So I'm going with there being an M on the wall, just like there's an M at four of the other crime scenes in one form or another, not to mention one letter signed with a name beginning with an M.

And since it isn't Monty or Fanny Mortimer, I'm going to go with Maybrick as a good working suspect. Yes, I'm tentatively joining Ike. Woo Whee!

[Mike J. G.]

Well to be fair, there have been sightings or footprints seen by what I would consider credible sources. People like Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay, famed mountaineer Reinhold Messner, Tibetan monks etc. So I wouldn't put them on the same level as drunken Yahoos out hunting. I think people are seeing something. The question is what is it?

The DNA samples tested were from all over the world including one of the most famous samples of fur from an alleged Yeti from a Tibetan Monastery. Again, in every instance the analysis done showed they were from various species of bears.

So I am not sure it is case closed but I remain very skeptical.

c.d.

It's definitely case closed. The only reason to not close the case is for the pure and simple reason that we can't prove a negative.

Hilary didn't believe in a literal yeti, and Messner also went on record to say that the yeti was a bear. "Yeti" generally translates to bear. It's a bear. The vast majority of Bigfoot sightings occur in states populated by bears. The prints seen in Asia are overlapping bear prints distorted in the snow.

Bigfoot is a modern myth, certainly in North America, much like Nessie is a modern myth born in the 1930s following the sauropod of King Kong wowing audiences in cinemas, the same can be said for similar US based lake monsters.

[Mike J. G.]

What is odd is that a few times over the years reproductions of the photograph have been uploaded to this site and elsewhere that don't have the white reflection of the flashbulb, and thus show different or additional markings, and yet the diary's supporters still interpret the markings as "FM."

An example can be found at Jay Hartley's website.





Personally, I can't even begin to understand why he is interpreting these markings as FM.

Following from his faint red line, it looks more like a backwards J, followed by a forward J or a P or a T and then a W and another line after that....or maybe the initial mark could be interpreted as the Pi sign...

I don't get it.

It definitely looks more like a J to me, I can't honestly see any FM unless I try really, really hard.

[c.d.]

Hello Jeff,

Mushrooms, weed, pills, beer plus an overwhelming desire for fame.

Well to be fair, there have been sightings or footprints seen by what I would consider credible sources. People like Sir Edmund Hillary and Tenzing Norgay, famed mountaineer Reinhold Messner, Tibetan monks etc. So I wouldn't put them on the same level as drunken Yahoos out hunting. I think people are seeing something. The question is what is it?

The DNA samples tested were from all over the world including one of the most famous samples of fur from an alleged Yeti from a Tibetan Monastery. Again, in every instance the analysis done showed they were from various species of bears.

So I am not sure it is case closed but I remain very skeptical.

c.d.

[rjpalmer]

Too many artefacts get introduced, like the flash you point out. I suppose if the Rumbelow photo does show something, then it becomes a matter of working out why one photo shows something that the other does not?

What is odd is that a few times over the years reproductions of the photograph have been uploaded to this site and elsewhere that don't have the white reflection of the flashbulb, and thus show different or additional markings, and yet the diary's supporters still interpret the markings as "FM."

An example can be found at Jay Hartley's website.





Personally, I can't even begin to understand why he is interpreting these markings as FM.

Following from his faint red line, it looks more like a backwards J, followed by a forward J or a P or a T and then a W and another line after that....or maybe the initial mark could be interpreted as the Pi sign...

I don't get it.

[JeffHamm]

Hi cd,

According to Darwin, humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor. It is known that they have nearly 99% of DNA in common. Could Bigfoot and bears also share a common ancestor?

The aboriginal people of my local area have a long term verbal history of yeti like creatures existing in our mountain wilderness. Their name for the creature is "Yowie".

Cheers, George

A fun coverage of Yowie : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1xQH4vO_nY

- Jeff