|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
10th July 2006, 02:44 PM | #1 |
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 19,277
|
Bigfoot_ The Skookum Cast
We have discussed this at length in other threads..
I thought a new analysis by BFF member ' DesertYeti ' brings a nice perspective to the skeptical side of the table.. Here is the text of the original post ( with DY's permission ) and a link to the thread.. http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.p...dpost&p=326297
Quote:
|
__________________
Maybe later.... |
|
11th July 2006, 05:13 AM | #2 |
King of the Pod People
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 25,628
|
Interesting. Of course, to believers, it's still not good enough--the couple of replies I saw over there from Footers seemed to hinge on appeal-to-authority fallacies ("so you took some pictures and refuted everything all these professionals said...").
I do find it heartening that one of the Footer investigators (Richard Noll) was willing to work with him, even if he didn't agree with the conclusions. It shows there's some willingness for independent investigation among the Footers. |
11th July 2006, 06:16 AM | #3 |
Scholar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 118
|
And twenty years from now that bizarre piece of non-evidence will still be touted as "the actual imprint of Bigfoot!", because, after all, no one didn't see Sasquatch squatting in the mud.
|
11th July 2006, 10:07 AM | #4 |
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 19,277
|
Surely Dr. Meldrum will be delaying the publication of his companion Book to LMS, to include this information...
|
__________________
Maybe later.... |
|
11th July 2006, 10:42 AM | #5 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
|
11th July 2006, 11:08 AM | #6 |
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 19,277
|
|
__________________
Maybe later.... |
|
11th July 2006, 11:44 AM | #7 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
|
11th July 2006, 11:50 AM | #8 |
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 19,277
|
I certainly believe he does do.. How about you ?
You don't think the implied conclusions about the Skookum cast in LMS are misleading, at best ? How about they just take the one sided presentation about the Skookum cast out of the book ? Would that be O.K. ? Maybe I should dig up some of your rants about how science ignores Bigfoot ? |
__________________
Maybe later.... |
|
11th July 2006, 02:26 PM | #9 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,548
|
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. |
__________________
Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me: Together we can find the cure Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too… |
|
11th July 2006, 03:06 PM | #10 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
Of course not. Depending on what point in publication he is, he might add a sentence or two stating that the great, famous "DesertYeti", an unknown screen name on the internet, has looked at the casts and determined it to be that of an elk, but I wouldn't bother.
DesertYeti is free to publish his opinion just like Dr. Meldrum, you, or I are.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
11th July 2006, 04:01 PM | #11 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail
Posts: 21,423
|
Bah!
I already told everyone all that about that cast. |
__________________
What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break? |
|
12th July 2006, 06:06 AM | #12 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
For me one of the greatest moments of bigfoot high comedy is Esteban Sarmiento (sp?) in LMS looking up at the camera wearing the huge magnifying goggles while looking for hair samples on the Skookum cast and his flowing Latin lover locks are hanging everywhere. It's priceless. I see that and I sometimes imagine Wes Anderson doing a similar treatment with bigfoot researchers that he did with ocean documentarians in 'The Life Aquatic'.
|
12th July 2006, 07:30 AM | #13 |
Muse
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 835
|
Hey all,
First-time poster, long-time lurker. well, not really that long. I'm the author of the Skookum Cast first-draft preliminary study above. I have an M.S. in paleontology and a Ph.D. in sedimentary geology, and have worked extensively with ichnofossils for about 12 years. The reaction on the BFF was about what I expected. Despite having never seen it, or an elk trace for that matter, several of the BFers launched the predictable "who the hell are you...you didn't study it long enough...why should we take your word over our 'experts?!'" type of tyrade. Many more however, were actually complimentary of my study. Mark Elbroch, whose book I used as a conveneient, authoritative, and recent reference in the hopes that BFers would actually take the time to investigate how "real" trackers work, has weighed in and agrees with my interpetation as well. There is no controversy as to the identity of this particular cast. Anyone with one working eye and an ounce of common sense can see that it's an elk or large deer trace. I should also clarrify that Rick Noll's help on the matter consists of critiques, not actually providing any data or additional information. He's my litmus test, and I appreciate his attempts to punch holes in my observations. They help strengthen the overall study. As for Meldrum's book and publications, I actually am toying with the idea of submitting a final draft of this work to Ichnos or a similar journal. Meldrum's book can include or exclude whatever he wants. Everyone I've spoken to in academic circles thinks it'd be a real hoot if I published this note, and help liven up the sometimes less than action-packed ichnofossil publications. We'll see. Anyway, thanks and I look forward to haunting this forum in future! |
12th July 2006, 07:53 AM | #14 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 415
|
Originally Posted by desertyeti
|
12th July 2006, 07:57 AM | #15 |
Muse
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 835
|
Mnay thanks.
If only the researchers who found it 6 years ago had actually taken a moment to look at a known elk lay, this could have all been avoided...no...wait...probably not. After all, one of the first things they were talking about in the press was how this specimen was their ticket to big-time funding from a granting institution for further "fieldwork." |
12th July 2006, 08:22 AM | #16 |
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 19,277
|
|
__________________
Maybe later.... |
|
12th July 2006, 08:28 AM | #17 |
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 19,277
|
Yeah, but you really can't blame them.. It wasn't like they had anything pointing to
an elk, like hoof prints and elk hair ... No ! Wait ! They did !! That's Bigfoot for you.. Planting fake evidence.. Do you think Meldrum will acknowledge your presentation ? Chance to see where he is really coming from ... |
__________________
Maybe later.... |
|
12th July 2006, 08:55 AM | #18 |
Muse
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 835
|
I don't know what Jeff will do with this. I haven't sent him any drafts of the work yet. Considering his likely bias, I opted to consult with people who had NO preconcieved notions about whether or not BF exists and seek their comments and criticisms. I contacted Rick Noll since he actually has the original specimen (I think), but I'm reasonably sure that the replica is close enough to the original to not require a thorough study of the original (of course, he disagrees). Hell...it looks like an elk lay...what more does one need?
My hunch, and it's only a guess is that if he mentiones my work at all, Jeff may laugh it off in the same dismissive, off-handed way that creationists use when discussing fossils. Either way, I don't really care. I'm reasonably certain that anyone with more than 8 firing neurons could look at his "evidence" and my data and immediately recognize the cast for what it is. Well...maybe only 4 neurons are required...it's a pretty open and shut case. |
12th July 2006, 08:59 AM | #19 |
King of the Pod People
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 25,628
|
desertyeti, welcome! Thanks for posting your study, and we're glad to have you here. Well, I am, can't speak for Huntster.
|
12th July 2006, 09:04 AM | #20 |
Muse
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 835
|
Thanks Cleon!
Ol' Huntster's pretty skeptical of skeptical thinking, and that's good. He helps keep everyone honest and true to the data. Data are never wrong...but interpretations usually are! |
12th July 2006, 09:19 AM | #21 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
Why not? You've done it before.
|
12th July 2006, 11:46 AM | #22 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
Welcome to the board, desertyeti! That was an exellent analysis on the Skookum cast. It's too bad that some people will continue to refuse the obvious even with something that was pretty weak to begin with. Who was the boner who came up with the idea of putting a bait trap in mud to get some more useless footprints put didn't have the wattage upstairs to put out a trailcam? Edited to fix exclamation mark.
|
12th July 2006, 12:42 PM | #23 |
Muse
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 835
|
Heya Kitakaze, thanks for your compliment. I'm not sure who the "boner" was that didn't think about using a camera system, but mud instead...it's hard not to laugh writing that one!
|
12th July 2006, 01:04 PM | #24 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
|
12th July 2006, 01:22 PM | #25 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
Desertyeti, you're most welcome. Love your latest avatar at the BFF, BTW. You gotta stay in form here, too. This is a great board and I'm sure you'll enjoy it very much. I came and joined here after lurking over at the BFF for a very long time and I think you'll find a great many intelligent, insightful people that will give serious BF claims a fair hearing. While we differ on some points, Huntster and I might be the only ones that I'm aware of that aren't pretty firmly in the 'no, I don't think so' camp but then again I'll be the first one to admit that after weighing the evidence any other camp is getting to be a tougher and tougher sell. If bigfoot day ever comes he gets to serve heaps of crow and get to nibble on a few crow wings with a celebratory beer while I tell everbody that I was really on the other guys team from the start.
|
12th July 2006, 01:28 PM | #26 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
|
12th July 2006, 01:31 PM | #27 |
Muse
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 835
|
Yeah, looks like I'll maybe set up camp for a while here...lesse...need a spanking new avataar...hmmmmmm...
|
12th July 2006, 01:34 PM | #28 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
|
12th July 2006, 02:06 PM | #29 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
Fair question returned. The answer appears to be that it wasn't a money problem, but the fact that remote cameras weren't used, while much more expensive night viewing equipment was; equipment which wasn't deployed at the spot where the cast was found.
The BFRO website regarding the discovery of the cast has a very detailed outline of objectives and activities. Night vision equipment was obtained and tested for viability. Maybe if they had relied on a trailcam at the site (and all other sites where bait was deployed, none of which got a cast) they would have gotten a photo that the folks here could roundly belittle with great glee. Had the "expedition" gotten a photo through one of the manned thermal cameras (which didn't occur) we would still have a photo that folks here could ride like a bronc. Me? Six of one, half dozen of the other. The Skookum Cast has never been much of an issue for me (go ahead, y'all; run the search engine). Why? It's meaningless, whether it's the real thing or not. Ditto a trailcam photo. |
12th July 2006, 02:29 PM | #30 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
|
12th July 2006, 02:33 PM | #31 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
|
12th July 2006, 02:57 PM | #32 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
Golden Delicious for me, thanks. But wait. Huntster, while my mind's still on it, let's back up to post #26 for a sec.
Quote:
|
12th July 2006, 02:58 PM | #33 |
Agave Wine Connoisseur
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Just past ' Resume Speed ' .
Posts: 19,277
|
|
__________________
Maybe later.... |
|
12th July 2006, 04:12 PM | #34 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,548
|
Nice work and welcome to the forums, Desertyeti!
You know, sooner or later we'll ask your opinion on the alleged bigfoot footpints pics linked and relinked every now and then. Yep, just pics, there are resolution, distortion and scale problems... Just out of curiosity, you are working with exactly what sort of ichnofossils? You would not be, by some sheer luck, in to some Cambrian stuff, would you ? |
__________________
Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me: Together we can find the cure Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too… |
|
12th July 2006, 05:10 PM | #35 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
I understand and agree what you're saying. In fact, I'd like to say that I know sasquatch exists. Unfortunately, I can't.
If I do (and as soon as I do), the skeptics here would (rightly) demand proof that I know (because "to know" is "certainty"). I don't have that proof, nor overwhelming evidence. There's plenty of evidence out there, and I saw evidence that (to me) is convincing, but it cannot hold water for others. I can only believe, if I have any hope of justifying my position (and even then, skeptics who have an ideological opposition to "belief" are a constant scourge on my ass around here). Finally, notice my statements above:
Quote:
Quote:
I could be wrong, but I don't think so. I think those critters are out there. That's my right, and it isn't contingent on making others believe, or proving anything to anyone.
Quote:
Oh, well. That's the breaks. |
13th July 2006, 06:58 AM | #36 |
Muse
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 835
|
Correa Neto, actually, I have looked at some Cambrian specimens! Nothing spectacular, but some Cruziana, Skolithos, and Arenicolites in outcrops of the Flathead Sandstone in Wyoming. But I'll look at any trace, anywhere, for any reason...well...mostly any reason!
Why you ask? |
13th July 2006, 07:43 AM | #37 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
*cue Minnie Ripperton* Correa Neto, Desertyeti. Desertyeti, Correa Neto. Yeaaaahhh, JK.
|
13th July 2006, 07:54 AM | #38 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
Huntster, I know we've got a couple of decades between us but I'm beginning to have ever stronger doubts about how long living sasquatches would be able to allude scientific description. Mind you if and when I do become a full fledged skeptic in regards to BF, I'll probably be a really bitter, nasty one.
|
13th July 2006, 08:52 AM | #39 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,798
|
I don't. I have no doubt that such a rare and intelligent creature could still be out there, being seen regularly by the lay, and with science busy looking for other bone fragments and chasing global warming politics.
Quote:
In fact, that is likely. |
13th July 2006, 09:09 AM | #40 |
Resident DJ/NSA Supermole
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sapporo ichiban!
Posts: 9,272
|
This is the part that I have a tough time with. To be regularily seen by the lay then you have to at least sometimes be seen by the not-so-lay or the not-so-unarmed or the not-so-paying-attention-to-the-road. I know we've gone over that and rarity ad pukem but for me it does give me doubt even against my own experience we don't have any conclusive proof of any of the above happening.
|
__________________
Until better evidence is provided, the best solution to the PGF is that it is a man in a suit. -Astrophotographer. 2 prints, 1 trackway, same 'dermals'? 'Unfortunately no' says Meldrum. I want to see bigfoot throw a pig... Is that wrong? -LTC8K6 |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|