62 replies to this topic

[Saru]

The world's foremost expert on chimpanzees has expressed an interest in the Bigfoot phenomenon.

New York Daily News said:

The scientist and activist has spent her fair share of time with apes: in the early 1960s, her research in Africa showed that chimpanzees could use tools, were not vegetarian, and had distinct personalities.

Read more...

[Kasey2601]

I don't think I would translate her fascination into being the one to champion the "cause" of Bigfoot. After all, how can you champion a cause whose existence has no proof? She even says herself that there's never been a hide or hair proven to belong to a bigfoot.

This is just old news that the NYDN has dug up to make fresh again. The link in the article about the same revelation during an NPR interview is six years old.

[Myles]

This is not worth the story.    So someone asked her a question and she resonded.   I would say her response did more to disparage the bigfoot believers than it did to add credibility.

[OverSword]

To be fair there are alot of unidentified hair samples.  That is samples that turned out to belong to no known animal.  Additionally Jeff Meldrums, Senior Proffesor of Anatomy at Idaho State University, who wrote his doctoral thesis on foot anatomy states that some of the plaster casts he has examined and also cast during his own investigations, could not have been faked and were definetly made by a living animal.  Seems like the only thing missing is a corpse, may we never find one if they do exist.

Another thing to keep in mind when discussing cryptids is that the silver back gorilla was at one time a crypted.  It's existence was finaly verified after 50 years of well funded research  (by the British crown).  Guess how it was finaly confirmed to exist?  They brought back a corpse.

The fact that most people insist that without shooting or capturing one we can't confirm thier existence makes me think that if they do exist it is not predicated by our being able to confirm it so I hope they remain a 'myth'.

[dharma warrior]

Goodall echos the sentiments of most bigfoot skeptics. The idea of a new bipedal hominid is fascinating, but the lack of any real scientific evidence is disturbing. The use of the term disturbing was a kindness on her part.

[Myles]

OverSword, on 03 October 2012 - 02:16 PM, said:

To be fair there are alot of unidentified hair samples.  That is samples that turned out to belong to no known animal.  Additionally Jeff Meldrums, Senior Proffesor of Anatomy at Idaho State University, who wrote his doctoral thesis on foot anatomy states that some of the plaster casts he has examined and also cast during his own investigations, could not have been faked and were definetly made by a living animal.  Seems like the only thing missing is a corpse, may we never find one if they do exist.

If he really said that, then he is not to be taken seriously.
A responsible person would have said that it doesn't appear likely that they were faked.  I bet I could fake footprints that he believes are real.

[keninsc]

Yeah, all of us here share a fascination with Bigfoot else we wouldn't be here to begin withmthat isn't an endorsement of the creature bing real, just that we have a fascination with Bigfoot.

This is simply an article ment to stir the pot more than anything else and while it's not coming right out and claiming JG is a Bigfoot believer it's designed to give you that impression. Much like political ads try to make the other guy out as being the closet thing to Hitler you've ever seen but just stopping short of actually saying it.

[Stardrive]

Myles, on 03 October 2012 - 03:19 PM, said:

If he really said that, then he is not to be taken seriously.
A responsible person would have said that it doesn't appear likely that they were faked.  I bet I could fake footprints that he believes are real.

And your qualifications trump Dr. Meldrums how?

[Myles]

Stardrive, on 03 October 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

And your qualifications trump Dr. Meldrums how?

A blanket statement is not an intelligent remark when it comes to this topic.  Most people with a background of being with animals and a background in engineering can create fake footprints that could fool people.   He said "could not have been faked and were definetly made by a living animal".  This is a false statement.

He has been trumped.

[keninsc]

Naaaw, he hasn't been "Trumped" at all. You don't know the context of the conversation or the actually question he might have been responding to for his answer and words to be in their intended meaning to be clear. But feel free to freelance when ever the mood strikes you. All you know is the snippet that is attributed to him.

Dude, get over the ego thing......please. Pretty please with sugar on top?

[scowl]

Did Dr. Meldrums say what differentiates "fake" Bigfoot prints from "real" Bigfoot prints? There are hoaxers who would like to do a better job and the doctor's advice would be very helpful to them.

[Myles]

keninsc, on 03 October 2012 - 06:19 PM, said:

Naaaw, he hasn't been "Trumped" at all. You don't know the context of the conversation or the actually question he might have been responding to for his answer and words to be in their intended meaning to be clear. But feel free to freelance when ever the mood strikes you. All you know is the snippet that is attributed to him.

Dude, get over the ego thing......please. Pretty please with sugar on top?

Wait a moment there.    No ego here.    I said "If he really said that,".    It is true that if he stated that the bigfoot tracks were "definetly made by a living animal" then he is stating false claims.  That means he is saying that bigfoot exists with 100% certaincy.

[OverSword]

scowl, on 03 October 2012 - 06:52 PM, said:

Did Dr. Meldrums say what differentiates "fake" Bigfoot prints from "real" Bigfoot prints? There are hoaxers who would like to do a better job and the doctor's advice would be very helpful to them.

LOL!  If you download Linda Moultin Howes very first PODCAST (earthfiles.com)  she does an extensive interview with Dr. Meldrums.  He is very eloquent and reasonable.  Keep in mind you are talking about a University professor who would be drummed out on his ear if he was making conspiracy claims or public statements about bigfoot that were too far out.  The man did a good scientific investigation and relays his findings, that's all.  I believe his exact doctoral thesis on anatomy was based on the bone structure of the feet of chimpanzees.  He is probably the most renkowned and respected man in his field.   Myles, if you don't know what you're talking about, and in the case of Dr.Meldrums it's fair to say you've probably never heard of him, perhaps you should look into past a 10 word statement I made about it before passing judgement.

[OverSword]

Myles, on 03 October 2012 - 07:54 PM, said:

Wait a moment there. No ego here. I said "If he really said that,". It is true that if he stated that the bigfoot tracks were "definetly made by a living animal" then he is stating false claims.  That means he is saying that bigfoot exists with 100% certaincy.

Since he is the expert, and not you, then you may be incorrect.  Listen to the podcast and then decide he's full of it.

[Myles]

OverSword, on 03 October 2012 - 07:56 PM, said:

Since he is the expert, and not you, then you may be incorrect.  Listen to the podcast and then decide he's full of it.

defin
I disagree with many experts in many fields.
I don't believe bigfoot exists. Dr.Meldrum said they definitely do exist.    I have a right to say I think he's wrong on the subject.    Also there are many qualified experts that do not believe bigfoot exists.  I'm not alone.   Bigfoot believers find one qualified expert and rally around him.
It's Ok that he believes in bigfoot.  I don't like his statement.