Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

[kitakaze]

If you're through ridiculing me, how about letting the whole board know how I did? I'm unsubscribing to the thread (in order to avoid inadvertently seeing Greg's posts) and might miss the awful humiliation you have in store for me.

Hey Lu, don't go. I'll miss your input. You give better links than Huntster (sorry Hunt).

 

[kitakaze]

Chilcutt volunteered and Jeff was quite open to the idea. The one Chilcutt set aside, BTW, was contaminated. It was falsely reported to be faked.

Didn't Meldrum seek out Chilcutt?

 

[kitakaze]

Such as?

They're reluctant to challenge their own observation skills. I confirmed the fallibility of my own. You should try, Huntster. I think you'd fare better than me.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

But then we all know what Greg thinks of Dr. Meldrum.

WE ?

Mouse in your pocket ?



Psychic are you ?

The prize is yours !!!

 

[William Parcher]

An interesting, but unanswerable question is:

What would Meldrum have done if Chilcutt had instantly declared all of his "dermal ridges" to be casting artifacts?

 

[LAL]

Hey Lu, don't go. I'll miss your input. You give better links than Huntster (sorry Hunt).

I'm just unsubcribing; I haven't left yet. Here's a link for you:

"Woah! Don't look now, LAL, but I think we might just have proven that a serious debate about a topic on these forums can be carried out without resorting to name-calling, stone-throwing, eye-poking, insult-hurling, and/or personal attacks!

I...I need a beer." -desertyeti

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=6796&st=75&p=142203&#entry142203

Blast from the past. Now I need a beer and I've been sober for 22 years.

Grover examined sites too.

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/sbs/somer87.htm

Thanks, BTW. I'm going to go have an A&W and cool off.

 

[LAL]

An interesting, but unanswerable question is:

What would Meldrum have done if Chilcutt had instantly declared all of his "dermal ridges" to be casting artifacts?

Matt noted, "I learned from Dr. Meldrum that he had seen ridges spontainously develop on test casts some years ago for which he had no solid explanation. He may have discovered this process."

So, he might have said, "I thought so".

But tests were done in his lab after Chilcutt identified dermal ridges on OM to see if they could have been caused by the pour.

Regarding the "wicking effect", which is in question, he said this:

"I just wanted to add a significant qualifier that Scott (Herriot) and others seem to repeatedly understate or altogether neglect. Matt's findings address a specific set of circumstances -- i.e. casting with relatively thick cement in extremely fine dry wicking material at very warm temperatures. These conditions were indeed present at the Blue Creek/ Onion Mtn track ways. They were certainly not present at the Skookum heel imprint, the Walla Walla
River tracks, the Elkins Creek track, GA cast, the Hyampom tracks, the northern Idaho tracks, or any of the Elk Wallow and associated tracks (Blue Mtns, WA). Matt has done a great job exploring the artifacts that may accompany casting under specific conditions, and more tests are called for.

But let's be accurate in the characterization of the state of affairs regarding the presence and interpretation of dermals in footprints generally."

 

[desertyeti]

An interesting, but unanswerable question is:

What would Meldrum have done if Chilcutt had instantly declared all of his "dermal ridges" to be casting artifacts?

That's kind of like asking: "What if there had been DNA testing when Jesus was runing around claiming he's the son of God?"

 

[LAL]

Didn't Meldrum seek out Chilcutt?

No. Chilcutt saw him on telvision talking about a cast. He contacted Jeff and gave him his credentials.

Jeff left him alone with the collection for several hours. When he came out, he had several casts he found compelling.

He's the only one who's fingerprinted an entire colection of primates.

 

[kitakaze]

No. Chilcutt saw him on telvision talking about a cast. He contacted Jeff and gave him his credentials.

Jeff left him alone with the collection for several hours. When he came out, he had several casts he found compelling.

He's the only one who's fingerprinted an entire colection of primates.

Very interesting, good to know. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

......
But let's be accurate in the characterization of the state of affairs regarding the presence and interpretation of dermals in footprints generally."

Yes, let's be accurate..

Exactly who, besides Bigfootologists are really looking at ' dermals in footprints ?

In what other field is it an area of concern to any extent ?


The whole idea of proposing the existance of a creature around foot print characteristics is ridiculous ...

 

[desertyeti]

And being as Chilcutt failed to recognize the casting artifacts on the Onion Mtn., Walla Walla, and Elkins Creek casts, and also misinterpreted elk wrist hair for hominid dermatoglyphics, it's been demonstrated that he's failed at a very basic, and very repeatable challenge. Any serious researcher would discount any of his prior interpretations and have to examine the materials for themselves, and/or bring in a different specialist.
Ergo, Chilcutt's credibility with regard to this topic is nil.
So...back to the challenge at hand.
Anyone else want to take a stab at the 3 prints?
As promised, I'll give full explanations of the what, where, how, and why in a few days.

 

[RayG]

Anyone else want to take a stab at the 3 prints?

Not sure I see the value in having us unqualified folks look at them (and no, I'm not speaking for those who might classify themselves as qualified).

I'd rather see the test taken by folks like Green, Meldrum, etc. etc. who have already made claims about bigfoot prints. If they cannot tell real tracks from fabricated ones, it calls into question their pronouncements about alleged squatchprints.

My guesses mean diddly.

RayG

 

[carcharodon]

He who called you a spaz reported you?

I guess we trolls had better watch it.

I know. Funny isn't it LAL? I get called a spaz. I totally ignore it and don't admonish this poster for name calling. It bothers me not. Then later this same person who called me a spaz decides to pm me and tell me to cool it. I asked this poster to please leave me alone as I was getting tired of this poster pulling me up all the time and ignoring everyone else's tantrums and childish badgering and insults. Then soon after I get reported by this same person for obnoxious language and attitude.

You know LAL, when I first came here I was polite enough and was even good enough to answer kitakaze's questions and give in depth answers. I tried to ignore the ridicule and childish antics of some posters towards others. I then gave up and thought I might as well join in seeing as how it seems to be the norm here. Kitakaze then took it upon himself to pick at my posts and pull me up on this 'behaviour' even though other posters have been doing exactly the same. Remember the 'gossip' comment? Well hey at least I was refering to a poster who actually posts on this board and would actually see the post and at least I wasn't ridiculing somebody who doesn't post here and has no chance to counter whatever points had been made against them. Which is worse?

 

[carcharodon]

Not sure I see the value in having us unqualified folks look at them (and no, I'm not speaking for those who might classify themselves as qualified).

I'd rather see the test taken by folks like Green, Meldrum, etc. etc. who have already made claims about bigfoot prints. If they cannot tell real tracks from fabricated ones, it calls into question their pronouncements about alleged squatchprints.

My guesses mean diddly.

RayG

Now here is where I agree with Ray G. With regards to myself and LAL the 'experiment' is kind of like trying to prove the messenger wrong instead of trying to prove the message writer wrong.

Like I said before, it would also be far more interesting to compare a series of tracks such as a mini trackway instead of just individual tracks. Not that merely looking at photos of said trackway is ideal either (as Huntster pointed out) but it would be kind of cool to see what kind of trackways DY can come up with. I'm still interested in whether or not he has considered the $100,000 Willow Creek reward any further. Perhaps this will be start for him to go further and try and embarrass both the museum and John Green??

 

[kitakaze]

Just wondering but is anyone aware if ape prints vary much in terms of ridge width? I was just going over the LMS and when Chilcutt comments about (paraphrased) 'in human footprints the ridges run horizontally along the width of the foot, on primates the ridges run diagonally, and on this casting the ridges run vertically down the side of the foot. The ridges on this cast are about twice the thickness of the human print.' my radar went up.

First of all, what sounds more likely- casting artifact or sasquatch is so unique in everyway that even it's dermal ridges are abnormal? Sounds like he was misinterpreting that cast.

 

[LAL]

And being as Chilcutt failed to recognize the casting artifacts on the Onion Mtn., Walla Walla, and Elkins Creek casts, and also misinterpreted elk wrist hair for hominid dermatoglyphics, it's been demonstrated that he's failed at a very basic, and very repeatable challenge. Any serious researcher would discount any of his prior interpretations and have to examine the materials for themselves, and/or bring in a different specialist.
Ergo, Chilcutt's credibility with regard to this topic is nil.

And you who have examined none of the above know this how?

He did note artifacts, if not casting artifacts, on Elkins Creek, he determined the toe area on a Walla Walla cast had been touched by human fingers, the Skookum heel matched other casts that showed apparent dermals in the heel area. The interpretation of the heel strike didn't rest on Chilcutt's findings.

The other casts he found compelling were not taken in dry conditions, so how did the "casting artifacts" happen to be a match, if they were caused by the "wicking effect"?

I certainly think other specialists should be involved.

 

[LAL]

First of all, what sounds more likely- casting artifact or sasquatch is so unique in everyway that even it's dermal ridges are abnormal? Sounds like he was misinterpreting that cast.

Abnormal? For what? A Sasquatch?

We're apes. Why are our patterns different from other apes?

I've brought up the second cast from that trackway. The ridges Chilcutt took to be dermals were evidenly identical to the one's Chilcutt took to be dermals. They were fainter, because a passing vehicle had deposited a layer of dust on the print. Now, how do the "casting artifacts" get there prior to casting?

And check this out:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?showtopic=16440

Using actual Onion Mountain soil neither tube nor Melissa seem to have been able to produce "desication ridges".

 

[kitakaze]

...the Skookum heel matched other casts that showed apparent dermals in the heel area. The interpretation of the heel strike didn't rest on Chilcutt's findings.

Simple question- was Chilcutt accustomed to working with casts of the type being used by BF investigators before going to see Meldrum? He said this of the SC:

I examined the achilles heel, actually two parts of the heel, and even though there wasn't a lot of ridge detail, the flow pattern was the same as the others. It was the same type of animal.

So there wasn't much ridge detail but the flow pattern matched. That would be the unique to only sasquatches vertically up and down the edges of the foot flow pattern. Yet this is exactly the identifying feature of the casting artifacts.

BTW, do any primates show dermal ridge separation of up to or beyond 2mm?

 

[desertyeti]

Not sure I see the value in having us unqualified folks look at them (and no, I'm not speaking for those who might classify themselves as qualified).

I'd rather see the test taken by folks like Green, Meldrum, etc. etc. who have already made claims about bigfoot prints. If they cannot tell real tracks from fabricated ones, it calls into question their pronouncements about alleged squatchprints.

My guesses mean diddly.

RayG

I guess I'm hoping the value will come from people who consider themselves unqualified, but are interested enough to take a good look at some track photos and maybe notice a fwe features they've never pondered before. Then, if and when they choose to read the opinions of BF "researchers," they might be able to actually think back to their own impressions (no pun intended) and interpretations. I'm a huge fan of forming one's own opinion based on data, rather than simply following the words and opinions of others.

The second hope I have for this is for folks to see that there's nothing magical or mystical or cryptic about the ability to interpret the interaction of objects and sediment. It's all just simple physics and fluid-flow. This way, if and when Meldrum or Noll or anyone else out there consents to take me up on an evaluation of their skills as trackers, everyone who's seen this thread will at least have some idea as to what I was using to evaluate their opinions, and how difficult it can be to interpret tracks. Plus, I'd make available the entirety of the exam materials ofr evaluation on the forums (sort of like I did here, but with a lot less "blah blah blah"...hopefully).