Simple Challenge For Bigfoot Supporters

Status
Not open for further replies.
If someone lies, and it is easily provable by one's own words, phrases, sentences, and posts contradicting him- or herself in one locale (e.g., this forum), how is that a personal attack and not a simple truth when it's brought to attention?

By that logic, wouldn't all the 1,000+ callings of people "woos" by Mr. Randi, the administrators, and all others on this board be personal attacks?
 
the evilist serene said:
If someone lies, and it is easily provable by one's own words, phrases, sentences, and posts contradicting him- or herself in one locale (e.g., this forum), how is that a personal attack and not a simple truth when it's brought to attention?
Click to expand...
OK.
the evilist serene said:
By that logic, wouldn't all the 1,000+ callings of people "woos" by Mr. Randi, the administrators, and all others on this board be personal attacks?
Click to expand...
Who now in a whatsis?
 
Oh LCTK68 ... 49TKLP3654 (practicing my memory--wow, it sucks) ... Bugs Bunny is real or ... *eyes downcast* ... or was ... *looking up, blinking, teardrop, pointing to bunny-shaped "tread") ...

Katikazi ... oops, Kitakazi ... me nocka knew tu langua todo wed ... but, if I understand your Q right ... Okay to call one a woo around here, a goof, a guy, a girl, a meatball ... why not a liar if it's true and backed up right here? (Who got called a meatball anyway? ah, nevermind ... )

needa nap ...
 
Sorry, Carcharodon, you just aren't very good at insulting people. Please use some creativity in your rants so they will at least have some entertainment value.
 
Come now, Marcus. Let's give credit where credit is due. After all, he called me a bell end. Some English friends informed me that this mean dick head to which I could only reply "but of course" and feel silly for not getting it right away.

Anyway, getting back to normal I have some interesting news to share. It seems it may well be possible that I may finally get an answer directly from Dr. Meldrum concerning my e-mail to him a few months back and the issue of my sig, matching cast 'dermals'. On June 6th Meldrum is scheduled for an interview that will be posted at Melissa Hovey's board. There is a current thread entitled 'Questions for Jeffery Meldrum' for members to post to. I have recently joined Melissa's board (who has been gracious in her welcome of me) and posted an abridged version of my e-mail edited by Diogenes. Ray and Greg have recently brought up the issue over at BFF but haven't been getting very encouraging feedback on the matter. Any thoughts that Meldrum may have to share on the matter I will of course share with everyone hear and I'm keeping my fingers crossed that he will.
 
Spektator said:
'S been all quiet on the bigfoot front, hasn't it? Everybody rested?
Click to expand...
:s2: zzz... mm rmf... ha ha... hoo Patty... no, no, I like a little fur on my boobs... hmm? Who hey in the what now? *kitakaze rolls out of hibernation*

Oh, hey there. Didn't you get the memo? Oh yes, we all had a chat via patented bigfoot telepathy (free subscription if you have the decoder ring) and decided to let the thread have a nap for at least 5 youtube bigfoot videos. Passed that a few days ago, you say? Oh my. Well then in that case...

I have been told that Meldrum in the interview I spoke of in my last post was specifically asked about matching dermatoglyphics and gave a detailed answer. I have not myself heard the interview yet as I've been rather swamped this last week but I'm told he speaks on the matter near the end of the 1hr 30min interview. Here's a link:

Let's Talk Bigfoot.

The show is put together by Melissa Hovey, Kathy Strain, and Teresa who's last name I don't know. Now if you don't mind, where was I?

zzz... ooo Patty, work that funk in da trunk.. zzz...
 
Has the smoke cleared yet? I'd like to post.

Dr. Meldrum did answer Kitakaze's question about dermatoglyphics in successive casts (47.32 in the show). He also said he went back into the manuscript after seeing Matt's work, which makes Crowley's section of the SI review where he calls the chapter "inexplicable" inexplicable, IMO.

Regarding stride, Fahrenbach didn't specifically say how it's measured, but,

"Stride–consecutive footprints made by the same foot."

In the case of Blue Creek Mountain, 6' where they went down an incline, and 10' at Bluff Creek when the animal apparently ran. 5' is average and trackways have gone on for miles.

Aside from artists and hoaxers, fungi make crop circles. Assigning them to aliens because they can be complex and hard to explain is too von Däniken for me.

A crop circle appeared in Asheville, NC, recently. It was on the news, but I fell alsleep before the segment. I don't think the alien ship was spotted, or I might have stayed awake.
 
Last edited:
So, it seems I can go back to my beauty sleep...

:s2:
Please awake me when reliable pro-bigfoot evidence shows up...
(I'm afraid this sleep will last forever)
 
Diogenes said:
And the answer was ........................?
Click to expand...
Short answer, his words- "Unfortunately no."

I have to thank Teresa Hall for asking the question to Meldrum exactly as I wrote it in my letter to him on her show. The detailed answer was that he had hoped particularily in the case of the Blue Creek/Onion Mountain casts and also the Walla Walla casts that matching dermals could be demonstrated. Unfortunately, casts that showed artifacts (as he referred to them) did not do so in corresponding locations so as to infer a match. Meldrum stresses that the 3 conditions which need to be met to obtain casts displaying dermatoglyphics all occurring is extremely rare. These are a foot displaying clear dermatoglyphics (without significant wear or damage) stepping in a substrate that will preserve the features and do so long enough to be discovered by someone prepared to preserve them. He reminds us that there are only four or five cases of casts with possible dermatoglyphics.

I do know of one member, a Texas researcher by the name of Luke Gross at Melissa's board under the handle 'Giganto' that claims to have casts from two individuals with feet measuring 14.5 and 9.5 inches displaying dermatoglyphics which matched the features in the prints before casting was done. I asked him about matching dermals and he responded:

Dermal ridges were found on one of the smaller tracks and a few on one of the larger tracks, but not from the same creature. Due to leaves, grass and other debris on the ground there was no sign of dermal ridges on the other tracks.
Click to expand...


Meldrum states that after speaking with Matt Crowley on the issue of artifacts that he immediately returned to his manuscript to included caveats for them in his forthcoming book. He now states that Matt's experiments only account for the Blue Creek/Onion Mountain casts. He says they do not account for the other instances. He also states that people tend to be rather preoccupied with dermals but for him the many tracks displaying the subtle features of an appropriate anatomy are more important.

Incidentally, on the matter of the Skookum cast he says that while he can not state with 100% certainty that it is the imprint of a sasquatch he can state with complete confidence that it is not an elk. He bases this on experiments carried out involving elk experts and elk parts. He says that wrist of a 650 lb elk was far too small to match what he indentifies as an achilles tendon but just right for a creature of the purportions shown. He also cites the fact that the hair flow patterns are incongruent.
 
William Parcher said:
Any questions or comments on the $80K that Meldrum was given to find Bigfoot?
Click to expand...
Doh! See, now this is why I should have asked everybody before the interview if they had any good questions for Meldrum. Luckily though, Teresa and Melissa are bringing him back soon, in about a month I think.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom