Great idea, DY! Try Rick Noll. Maybe he's still willing to let you examine the original Skookum Cast.
LAL, surely you remember Rick's non-scientific
conditions/limitations that DY would have to accept in order to examine the cast? To the uninformed you make it
sound like DY could just waltz into town and examine the cast at his leisure, when that's not the case at all. As I said elsewhere,
"I'm certainly not against DY looking at the original cast, nor even making a scientific pronouncement about it, but as a scientist, he should not be forced to play by non-scientific rules."
Others voiced similar concerns.
I'd like to see you fake an entire trackway and invite Dr. Meldrum (who's examined five) to examine it in situ.
And I'd like to see and experiment to determine if Dr. Meldrum (and others) can "
differentiate between prints made by real feet, and prints made by forgeries", as DY asked in the initial post of this thread.
The conditions are pretty reasonable on the $100,000 challenge.
In your opinion. The challenge admits, "
...the conditions are not easy", and in my opinion they're not so reasonable either.
For example, the first paragraph says,
"
One hundred thousand dollars is being offered by the Willow Creek China FLat Museum for anyone who can demonstrate how the "Bigfoot" tracks that were observed in the Bluff Creek valley in northern California in 1958 and later could have been made by a human or humans."
What do they mean by "
and later"? Does that mean a single applicant must duplicate ALL "Bigfoot" tracks that have been found after 1958?
Anyone know whether a formal challenge has been issued? I ask because they state,
"
A formal document settiing out the requirements to qualify for the award will take time to prepare..."
When they say, "
The money has been arranged for..."
How so? What do they mean by "
arranged for"?
Just duplicate the tracks as they were found in 1958.
As they were
found? Where? Which ones? Why so many specific conditions on how the tracks are
laid, but not which ones they're being compared to? Read Green. His slim, reference-free volume
The Sasquatch File (pages 21-23, 29, 30, 37-39, 45, 46), indicates numerous tracks in different terrain, on different days, in different locations in or near Bluff Creek.
Here's how they specify the conditions:
...a successful applicant will have to be able to make flat-footed, humanlike tracks with more than twice the area of human feet and longer-than-human strides which do the following:
- Traverse a variety of terrain, including climbing, descending and crossing steep slopes covered with underbrush;
- Show variation of shape and toe position and stride accommodating to the terrain;
- Sink into firm ground to far greater depth than human footprints specifically as much as an inch deep in hard sand where human prints barely penetrate at all;
- Leave hard objects in the ground, such as stones, sticking up above the rest of the track.
I wasn't aware ALL the tracks/trackways, whether they were in Bluff Creek or not, show such variety and detail.
In addition, the applicant has certain restraints on HOW he may leave these details behind.
"The applicant will also have to make these tracks under the following conditions, although not all in combination:
- In the dark, hundreds in a single night;
- In places where it is impossible to bring any vechicle or other machine or any equipment except what humans & animals could carry;
- Without doing anything to attract the notice of people a few hundred yards away."
At least this time there seems to be some choice, as not ALL conditions need to be applied at the same time.
Since the Wallace family claimed Ray faked the tracks and supposedly knew how it was done, it should have been an easy matter for them to collect the $100,000.
Is that why the challenge is worded in a way that seems to excludes them? "
...it is not meant as a challenge to the people who originated that story, who may well be perfectly sincere."
In fact, they were the reason the reward was offered in the first place. John was tired of their nonsense.
Is this a fact, or merely your opinion? John seems to think 'they' may be perfectly sincere, it's the
publicity of a perceived hoax at Bluff Creek that was the impetus for the challenge (at least that's what the challenge says).
Great point LAL. A point which has never been successfully refuted.
Why, was there a challenge issued to refute it?
RayG
