Matt Crowley shoots down Bigfoot dermal ridges?

[LAL]

The Skookum cast has been available to scientists for years now.. They don't seem to be interested..


Chirp, chirp...

Seems to be the story for the last half century, doesn't it?

Swindler and Sarmiento were interested enough to examine it, anyway.

 

[LTC8K6]

I'd be surprised if the 16mm zoomed copy used in LMS was made after 1992.

I am glad I didn't purchase LMS before I found out that the original PGF is not on it.

 

[LAL]

What are the two horizontal lines on the foot? Is that supposed to be the midtarsal break?

RayG

Casting artifacts, more likely.

 

[LAL]

Yeah, the little toe is a mile long, and the toes are nearly straight. Certainly not this one from the Bluff Creek film site.

This one's from Maine, 1998. Gonna try to match that to a Wallace foot too?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Seems to be the story for the last half century, doesn't it?

Swindler and Sarmiento were interested enough to examine it, anyway.

I's my understanding that Sarmiento has now distanced himself from the Bigfoot question.. Embarrased, perhaps ?

 

[LTC8K6]

This one's from Maine, 1998. Gonna try to match that to a Wallace foot too?

No need, no midtarsal break, not bigfoot.....

Since respected scientists agree that bigfoot has midtarsal breaks, any cast without one should be suspect unless it was taken from a very hard surface. We have a very heavy biped here, supposedly. If the footprint has any depth at all, the break should be obvious.

If you believe Meldrum and Krantz, then you should dismiss most casts without a midtarsal break.

Bigfoot either has the break, or he doesn't. He can't have it on one footprint in a series, and not the others. He can't have it one year, and not the next. He can't have it in WA and not have it in CA.

Half prints should be more common also, and those half prints should be considerably deeper than full prints.

That cast doesn't look even remotely like a Wallace foot, anyway.

I am curious as to how the footprint could have such a rough texture, though. Was it cast in gravel or something?

 

[LAL]

Originally posted by Thurkon
He is a half-wit.

He spent a large chunk of time chasing Matt Moneymaker through the forest to find the ass tracks of an epileptic Bigfoot.

What on earth are you talking about? Meldrum wasn't on the Skookum Expedition.

His brilliant idea of gathering evidence of said Bigfoot consisted of leaving a pile of fruit in a mud pit.

That wasn't Meldrum's idea as far as I know. It worked, in any event.

To entice the Bigfoot they played sound clips of screeches which they have no evidence whatsoever even come from a Bigfoot.

Brilliant.

That worked too. Did you miss my posts about call analysis at Texas A&M? They at least don't match any known mammal, although they seem to be primate.

He has Wallace sandal prints on his website. You can keep denying it, but punch it up...and there they are, in all their double-balled glory. Solid evidence of Wallace clown shoes.

It's not his website and I've already posted which cast that probably is. It has nothing to do with Wallace.

Lu...every field, every college, has a few scattered professors and scholars and researchers that are not mentally sound. They have crackpot theories. The UFO abduction group has quite a few more for them than Bigfoot even...a few Harvard professors and so forth.

Guilt by association? Have you seen any interviews with Meldrum? He's about as far from a raving lunatic as it's possible to get.

It's unimportant. What D. Jeffrey rambles on about is unimportant.

What is important is what the majority of scientists, scholars and researchers conclude.

The consensus used to be we descended from Australopithecus afarensis. Before Dart was found to be right, the consensus was that Dart was wrong. The consensus now is that Dart was wrong. If you don't like the consensus in anthropology, wait five minutes.

Science is built upon the tried and true method of gathering knowledge, testing it, and retesting it. Checks and balances.

Despite what a few wackjobs like D. Jeffrey say, the field of anthropology is not about to accept the reality of a new North American primate based on a collection of damn footprints.

So come back to reality, already.

Dr. Meldrum continues the effort and he is no "wackjob". You didn't learn much in your 16 minutes of research, did you?

Your efforts to portray people who take this seriously as somehow mental aren't helping your case, IMO.

What Thurkon rambles on about is unimportant.

 

[LTC8K6]

Shoot, Lu!

Not a Loren Coleman cast photo.

The guy who can't ID an orangutan?

Sheesh!

Why do I keep expecting better from you?

 

[LTC8K6]

Benson was paid by Whitewolf entertainment, wasn't he Lu?

Even then he couldn't help your cause. He concluded that the sounds could have been human.

A tape of the supposed sasquatch was also subjected to rigorous auditory research and review by Dr. Robert Benson, a leading acoustics expert throughout the world. His conclusion was inconclusive — that the sound definitely was not that of any known and existing primate or other animal known to science but that it could have been produced by a human.

http://www.rfthomas.clara.net/news/lms.html

 

[LAL]

Shoot, Lu!

Not a Loren Coleman cast photo.

The guy who can't ID an orangutan?

Sheesh!

Why do I keep expecting better from you?

I found it by checking properties on the image you got from Coleman's Curiousity Cabinet. Funny you didn't post the link.

Did you see the "mermen"?

What's this about an Orangutan?

 

[LAL]

No need, no midtarsal break, not bigfoot.....

Since respected scientists agree that bigfoot has midtarsal breaks, any cast without one should be suspect unless it was taken from a very hard surface. We have a very heavy biped here, supposedly. If the footprint has any depth at all, the break should be obvious.

If you believe Meldrum and Krantz, then you should dismiss most casts without a midtarsal break.

Bigfoot either has the break, or he doesn't. He can't have it on one footprint in a series, and not the others. He can't have it one year, and not the next. He can't have it in WA and not have it in CA.

Half prints should be more common also, and those half prints should be considerably deeper than full prints.

That cast doesn't look even remotely like a Wallace foot, anyway.

I am curious as to how the footprint could have such a rough texture, though. Was it cast in gravel or something?

Looks like the detrius is still on it.

A foot that bends is going to leave some tracks that are flat and some that show a bend. Even human tracks do that. You arguments above are.........well, let's just say they sprained my brain. Give it a rest for a minute, will you? I'm still trying to get to one of Thurkon's more libelous posts.

 

[RayG]

I found it a month ago. The late Mark Chovinsky also wrote an article that was nothing more than repeats of Chambers rumors started by Landis. He evidently believed Wallace, but Long believed Heironimus and anyone who had anything bad to say about Patterson. None of this proves hoaxes.

So years later, this teller of tall tales (who'd written some to Green in 1965) claims some credit. Patterson evidently talked to quite a few people in the area. Wallace would be a logical one because it was his operation that had the multiple track events in 1958. Al Hodgson found tracks also.

The Wallace carved feet do not match any trackway, and my understanding is he did his fakery for his souvenier business in Washington. Carved wooden feet don't have midtarsal breaks and articulating toes. Titmus was an expert tracker; I don't think he'd have been fooled for two seconds by anything Wallace may have done at Bluff Creek.

This tidbit is pretty hard to explain away: "We know that Patterson visited Wallace--Patterson writes about it in his own book Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist? (Yakima, Washington: Franklin Press, Inc., 1966, pp. 63-64.)"

A newstory about the opinions of several scientists who actually examined the cast was unconvincing? Media bias. They made a big deal about unsubstantiated stories by Heironimus and the Wallace family, but AP didn't consider Dr. Swindler news.

It does seem rather unfair that one unsubstantiated report gets better press than another. That seems to be the way it goes, no matter what the topic. Bringing in a bodypart would end that cycle pretty quickly though.

RayG

 

[LTC8K6]

A foot that bends is going to leave some tracks that are flat and some that show a bend.

Some and some, eh?

99.9% and .1%, I guess.....

 

[LAL]

This tidbit is pretty hard to explain away: "We know that Patterson visited Wallace--Patterson writes about it in his own book Do Abominable Snowmen of America Really Exist? (Yakima, Washington: Franklin Press, Inc., 1966, pp. 63-64.)"

And it proves what? Had Wallace been accused of hoaxing yet? Had he done any? Did Patterson know about the letters he was sending to Green and the Klam-ity Kourier? Seems they were written after Patterson's book was published.

http://www.rfthomas.clara.net/papers/wallace.html

Just when did he visit?

Patterson's interest evidently began with a story in True Magazine on the Crew tracks. It would be natural to want to talk to the owner of the operation, wouldn't it?

Green has said Wallace wouldn't have known exactly where those 1958 tracks were found. Convenient that the family waited until he was dead before they confessed for him, wasn't it?

It does seem rather unfair that one unsubstantiated report gets better press than another. That seems to be the way it goes, no matter what the topic. Bringing in a bodypart would end that cycle pretty quickly though.

RayG

Yep. Of course Swindler examined the cast four times before delivering his conclusion.

More from the Denver Post:

"Rather than simply an enlarged human foot, Meldrum said, the Sasquatch foot displays a unique combination of recognizably different anatomic features to solve the problem of two-footed locomotion. The result is a proportionally wider, flatter appendage with long, flexible toes and a spring-loaded, ape-like hinge in place of our stiff arch.

"This animal's little toe is about the same length as my little finger," he said, holding his hand up against the side of one of his casts. "This toe probably has the same grasping ability as my finger, too."

So far, Meldrum's theories have failed to gain even a toehold of acceptance with the anthropological establishment, which regards talk of Bigfoot as heresy. A reporter's question about Bigfoot so upset one prominent academic that he sputtered into a rage and quickly ended the conversation. Others politely decline interview requests. But a few of Meldrum's peers admire his work and his pluck. Forensic anthropologist George W. Gill, a professor at the University of Wyoming, studied the Bigfoot phenomenon in the 1970s. A former director of the American Board of Forensic Anthropologists, Gill said the argument is simple: Either the most sophisticated hoax in the history of anthropology has gone undiscovered for centuries, or the big ape exists.

Another is Hartwig, who vouches for Meldrum's "rigorous" methods even as he questions his conclusions.

"Jeff has executed the model approach," said Hartwig, who is editing a book on human evolution to which Meldrum is contributing a chapter. "He's weeded out what he believes might be hoaxes or misidentifications. And for the ones he can't exclude, he's devised a theory for what those footprints represent. In a sense, it's beautiful and well-controlled, inductive science. You may think it's far out, but methodologically speaking, he has toed the line very strictly. And he's bold enough not to allow any outside pressure to direct his science."

What Meldrum and other researchers, professional and amateur, suggest is bold by any standard. They believe a few thousand of these powerful and intelligent creatures live widely dispersed in mountainous forest from the Pacif ic Coast to the Colorado Rockies and beyond. They believe the big apes are opportunistic omnivores, eating roots and berries when available, preying on deer and elk whenever possible. And they think Bigfoot are curious apes, often sneaking into the camps of people who have intruded in their territory, even stealing camp food when they can. So where's the body? Bigfoot advocates say the main reason no one's found a body is that a dead animal decomposes quickly and completely. The carcass of a rare animal with no known predators would be almost impossible to find. By way of example, Colorado Division of Wildlife bear biologist Tom Beck says he's never found the remains of a bear that died a natural death. Most anthropologists argue no Bigfoot corpse has ever been found because the animal doesn't exist.

Convincing his peers to look at his collection of more than 100 footprints, knuckle prints and other trace evidence has been "without question the biggest obstacle," Meldrum said. "If someone takes the time to visit the lab, they are almost uniformly overwhelmed by the amount of data. Usually, they have no concept of the amount of evidence that's been collected."

Gill, the Wyoming professor, chides his colleagues for not taking a close look at research like Meldrum's. 'Even if there's only a remote chance this animal is alive today, to think that anthropology is basically blowing off this stuff is disheartening.' "

http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/stein2.htm

 

[LTC8K6]

[QUOTE"Rather than simply an enlarged human foot, Meldrum said, the Sasquatch foot displays a unique combination of recognizably different anatomic features to solve the problem of two-footed locomotion. The result is a proportionally wider, flatter appendage with long, flexible toes and a spring-loaded, ape-like hinge in place of our stiff arch.

"This animal's little toe is about the same length as my little finger," he said, holding his hand up against the side of one of his casts. "This toe probably has the same grasping ability as my finger, too."
[/QUOTE]

This is utterly ridiculous. He has no evidence whatsoever to support any of these claims.

Spring loaded ape-like hinge? For crying out loud!!!

This is nothing but pure fantasy of the wildest sort.

Of course they are blowing it off..... what else can they do?

 

[LAL]

Benson was paid by Whitewolf entertainment, wasn't he Lu?

And? He was a sceptic and was finally pursuaded to do the testing.

Even then he couldn't help your cause. He concluded that the sounds could have been human.


http://www.rfthomas.clara.net/news/lms.html

You really need to see LMS. He compared the calls to human sounds to establish they were primate. His assistant suggests resemblance to a siren. He concludes they match no known mammal and that further testing is needed. I'll believe Benson saying what Benson said over what Jones says he said. I'll get his exact words for you next time I view it.

 

[LAL]

[QUOTE"Rather than simply an enlarged human foot, Meldrum said, the Sasquatch foot displays a unique combination of recognizably different anatomic features to solve the problem of two-footed locomotion. The result is a proportionally wider, flatter appendage with long, flexible toes and a spring-loaded, ape-like hinge in place of our stiff arch.

"This animal's little toe is about the same length as my little finger," he said, holding his hand up against the side of one of his casts. "This toe probably has the same grasping ability as my finger, too."

This is utterly ridiculous. He has no evidence whatsoever to support any of these claims.

Spring loaded ape-like hinge? For crying out loud!!!

This is nothing but pure fantasy of the wildest sort.

Of course they are blowing it off..... what else can they do? [/QUOTE]

Do you even understand a word of what he's saying?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

You really need to see LMS.

No you don't. It's a joke...

 

[LTC8K6]

Do you even understand a word of what he's saying?

Why don't you explain it to me?

Explain Meldrum's drawings of Bigfoot feet too, if you can.

 

[LTC8K6]

Lu, the BFRO was using a man to make the bigfoot calls on one expedition, wasn't it?