[Correa Neto]

Presenting and comenting other interpretations is the standard -and recomended- proceedure when writing a scientific article (yeah yeah yeah, at an abstract or extended abstract from a congress this may be impossible).

However, one must bear in mind that sometimes new data (or interpretations) can not be addresed at a paper due to printing schedule. With books, its much more complicated, Its not completely unusual for a book to be published with sections already outdated. All it takes is a new paper to be published when no more changes in the book are allowed due to its release schedule.

If this partiular interpretation is not commented in the book, it may not be Meldrum's fault at all.

But we must bear in mind that the interpretation of Skookum cast as being from an elk is not new, even if it was never presented in such a detailed way. This should be addressed, and if he concludes the cast is from a bigfoot, he must say what were the criteria he used to conclude its not from an elk.