Bigfooters covered by Vanity Fair Magazine

I don't know if obligation is the right word for me personally, but certainly I desire for the undecided to have all the pertinent facts regarding the various specific claims. Maybe that would make them less likely to believe your story, but you never cared about that. If anyone should be empathetic to the refusal of weak evidence, and the demand for proof, it should be you.
 
I apologize Professor. I had a bad night with people threatening me and name calling.

Kaze, you are right.
 
The Shrike said:
Great find, WP - thanks. I just shared this link over on the BFF to, you know, point out that the claims of editorial bias against bigfoot papers are 100% supported by the editors of our top journals.
Click to expand...

All one has to do is show the paper submitted, the referee's reports, and the editor's letter to the author to back up claims of bias.

I would be very interested to see what papers have actually been submitted to a decent journal that were rejected.

It would be pretty obvious why, I imagine.
 
AlaskaBushPilot said:
All one has to do is show the paper submitted, the referee's reports, and the editor's letter to the author to back up claims of bias.
Click to expand...

I've asked many times to see these. We won't, however, because these paragons of bigfoot science intentionally eschew journal publication. Meldrum's ichnotaxon paper is in an occasional bulletin of a state natural history museum, yet he claims in there that we have an undescribed species of hominin wandering around the forests of North America. If he thought his analysis sufficient to make such claims in a journal, then why not Science or Nature?
 
New book coming out in March on Bigfootery and Science.

Searching for Sasquatch: Crackpots, Eggheads, and Cryptozoology


This fresh and entertaining look at the search for Sasquatch concerns more than just the startling and controversial nature of monsters and monster hunting in the late 20th century, but the more important relationship between the professional scientists and amateur naturalists who hunt them—and their place in the history of science. The traditional heroic narrative of monster hunting situates mainstream, academic scientists (the eggheads) as villains rejecting the existence of anomalous primates and cryptozoology as something unworthy of study. It gives a privileged place to untrained, but passionate amateur naturalists (the crackpots) who soldier on by themselves against great odds, and the unwarranted obstinacy of the mainstream to bring knowledge of these creatures to light. Drawing on new, original manuscript sources, Brian Regal shows this model to be inaccurate: many professional scientists eagerly sought anomalous primates, examining their traces and working out theoretical paradigms to explain them. Even though if mainstream scientific thinking held that anomalous primates—Bigfoot, Sasquatch, Yeti—did not and could not exist, these scientists risked their careers and associated themselves with eccentric amateurs because they believed these creature to be a genuine biological reality.
Click to expand...


Author Brian Regal's page at Kean University...

As an historian of science I am particularly interested in the relationship between professional scientists and their amateur counterparts. I write about how the fringe and mainstream interact, co-mingle and argue, whether it is over the creation/evolution debate or American national origins theories.

My current writing is an historical analysis of the lives of mainstream scientists--particularly the controversial paleoanthropologist Grover Krantz (1931-2002)--who believed anomalous primates like the Sasquatch and Yeti were real animals, not just relics of folklore or hoaxes. I have been ransacking the archives and libraries of North America and England using long forgotten letters, correspondence, diaries, and notebooks of scientists who researched humanoid monsters. The results of this research will be published in March of 2011 as Searching for Sasquatch: Crackpots, Eggheads and Cryptozoology by Palgrave-Macmillan.
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • 51jl4XllUWL._SS500_.jpg
    51jl4XllUWL._SS500_.jpg
    40.9 KB · Views: 1
About the Author
Brian Regal is an Assistant Professor for the History of Science at Kean University, New Jersey. His previous works include Henry Fairfield Osborn: Race and the Search for the Origins of Man, “Entering Dubious Realms: Grover Krantz, Science and Sasquatch,” and Pseudoscience: A Critical Encyclopedia.

Articles
* "From Wild Man to Monster: the Historical Evolution of Bigfoot in New York State," Voices: the Journal of New York Folklore 35: 3-4 (Fall-Winter 2009):13-15. Co-written with Robert E. Bartholomew.
* "Entering Dubious Realms: Grover Krantz, Science and Sasquatch," Annals of Science 66:1 (January 09).
* "A Box Full of Ironies," review of the anti-evolution game Evolution Vs. Intelligent Design, In Endeavour 32:3 (September 2008):81-82.
* "Amateur Versus Professional: The Search for Bigfoot," Endeavour 32:2 (June 2008):53-57.
* "New York and the Origins of the Evolution/Creation Controversy," Social Science Docket 7:1 (Winter-Spring 2007): 19. In the "Evolution, Intelligent Design, and Religion in the Social Studies Classroom" special edition.
* "Henry Fairfield Osborn," New Dictionary of Scientific Biography, vol 5 (2007):354-356.
* "Dem Ole Dry Bones," Fortean Times 202 (October, 2005): 57.
* "Maxwell Perkins and Madison Grant: Eugenics Publishing at Scribners," Princeton University Library
Chronicle LXV: 2 (Winter, 2004):317-341.
 
Last edited:
Yes, we did talk about that paper last year and it can be read here (PDF). Of course his new book will feature Krantz but I wonder if it will include much on Meldrum, Fahrenbach, Bindernagel, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom