masterbarber

Has Bigfoot Science Stalled? (2)

49 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Not a professor. From the article:

 

"A new class at Centralia College taught by a part-time volunteer instructor "

 

"It will be taught on April 8, April 22, May 6 and May 20 from 10 a.m. to noon" (an 8hr workshop)

 

"The stone carvings still need to be examined in an academic environment"

 

 "he has not yet finished a scientific paper that adequately describes his newest findings" 

 

"To this day our research stands intact. Not one scientist has been able to refute our conclusions in any category. The integrated and mutually supporting nature of the evidence and analysis is clear, repeatable and microscopically impossible to fake or hoax."

 

Pretty much sums up the state of bigfoot science. Welcome to the forum, btw :)

 

 

Edited by Squatchy McSquatch
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Re: the Centralia college course: this course is taught by "Dr.Johnny Dagger". He is not a doctor. I have seen no confirmation of his claimed advanced degrees. He usually teaches courses on how to use Facebook and other social media.  

 

 

http://www.andywhiteanthropology.com/blog/mitchel-townsend-is-dr-johnny-dagger-bigfoot-tracker

It seems "Dr.Johnny Dagger" may have a graduate degree in Education. 

 

http://www.ancient-origins.net/users/mitchel-townsend

Edited by dmaker
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Squatchy McSquatch.  Great links you posted dmaker.I believe you about him not being a doctor. I'm also thinking that some of things that he claims is not true. I tried searching elsewhere to see if I found anything else saying he was in the US Army. Only link I found with that name is the link you had posted.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Townsend has a Masters degree.  I do not know in what, and from where.     As far as the Doctoral thing,   I my neighbor was a doctoral candidate too.    But he was turned down because the Department Head (Education) did not want  him investigating his proposed thesis,  which was critical of some aspects of higher education.    I suppose one can claim you are a doctoral candidate without ever finishing and defending your thesis.    Townsend is known for making assertions about the rocks that he cannot support with data. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Dr.Jonny Dagger has a masters degree in Education. I believe he also claims special forces. I'd be surprised if that was true. His rock claims are ridiculous. He seems to have no clue what he is talking about. How do you carbon date a rock? 

 

He is a wannabe youtuber. He managed to raise $1 of his $35,000 target to prove bigfoot. Frankly, he is an embarrassment. He is a pretend scientist that no one seems to take seriously. 

5 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

 I suppose one can claim you are a doctoral candidate without ever finishing and defending your thesis

Yes. Some people use the term ABD. All but dissertation. I find it a bit silly to do this. Mr.Mullis from bigootology uses this in his signature.

No scientists who are also bigfoot enthusiasts are actually doing any bigfoot science. Not in the traditional sense. Or at least they are not publishing their research in any known journals. Look at Meldrum, look at Bindernagle. Do they have anything (outside of RHI) submitted to peer review that is intended to support bigfoot? Nope. Look at Dr. Nekaris. Here is her publication list. Tell me how many of these deal with bigfoot? None. Why do none of these bigfoot enthusiasts who are professional scientists in directly relevant fields never submit anything at all to professional journals?

 

 

Publications: 
  • Rasmussen DT and Nekaris KAI. 1998. The Evolutionary History of the Lorisiform Primates. Folia Primatologica. 69 (sup. 1): 250-287.
  • Nekaris KAI. 2001. Activity budget and positional behavior of the Mysore slender loris: implications for slow climbing locomotion. Folia Primatologica. 72: 228-241
  • Nekaris KAI. Observations on mating, birthing and parental care in three subspecies of slender loris in India and Sri Lanka (Loris tardigradus and Loris lydekkerianus). Folia Primatologica, supp. (S. Gursky and KAI Nekaris, eds.). 74:312-336.
  • Gursky SG and Nekaris KAI. An Introduction to Mating, Birthing and Rearing systems of Nocturnal Prosimians. Folia Primatologica Supp 2003. 74:241-245. Edited Volumes
  • Primate Anti-Predator Strategies(with Gursky G and Nekaris KAI), Springer, 2007

Chapters

  • Nekaris KAI and Bearder SK. The strepsirrhine primates of Asia and Mainland Africa: diversity shrouded in darkness. in Primates in Perspective, SK Bearder, C. Campbell, A Fuentes, K MacKinnon, M Panger, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007
  • The strepsirrhine primates of Asia and Mainland Africa: diversity shrouded in darkness in Primates in Perspective, SK Bearder, C. Cawdell, A Fuentes, K MacKinnon, M Panger, Oxford University Press, 2006
  • Care of rescued South Indian lorises with guidlines for hand-rearing infants in Back to the Wild: Studies in Wildlife Rehabilitation, Menon, V., Ashraf, N. V. K.; Panda, P.; Mainkar, K. , Wildlife Trust of India, New Delhi, 2005
  • Bearder SK, Nekaris KAI and Lloyd J. Tips from the bush. In (D. Curtis and J. Setchell, eds.): Handbook of Primate Field Methods. Cambridge University Press. Pp. 309-323., 2003
  • Bearder SK, Nekaris KAI, and Buzzell CA. 2002. Dangers in the night: are some nocturnal primates afraid of the dark? In (L Miller, ed.):Eat or Be Eaten: Predator Sensitive Foraging in Primates, Cambridge University Press. Pp. 21-40., 2002

Journal Articles

  • All lorises are not slow: rapid arboreal locomotion in the newly recognised red slender loris (Loris tardigradus tardigradus) of southwestern Sri Lanka (with Stephens NJ), in American Journal of Primatology, 69, 2007
  • The social lives of Mysore slender lorises, in American Journal of Primatology, 68, 2006
  • Primates in peril: the world’s top 25 most endangered primates, 2004-2006: Horton Plains slender loris. , in Primate Conservation , 20, 2006
  • Survey of Hylobates albibarbis in peat swamp, Central Kalimantan, Borneo (with Buckley C, Husson S), in Primates, 4, 2006
  • A re-evaluation of the role of vision for the activity rhythms of nocturnal primates (with Bearder SK, Curtis D), in Folia Primatologica, 75, 2006
  • Foraging behaviour of the slender loris: implications for theories of primate origins. , in Journal of Human Evolution, 49, 2005
  • Relationship Between Forest Structure and Floristic Composition and Population Density of the Southwestern Ceylon Slender Loris (Loris tardigradus tardigradus) in Masmullah Forest, Sri Lanka (with Liyanage WKDD, Gamage S), in Mammalia, 69(2), 2005
  • Nekaris KAI. 2003. Spacing system of the Mysore slender loris (Loris lydekkerianus lydekkerianus). American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 121:86-96
  • Nekaris, KAI and Rasmussen DT. 2003. Diet of the Slender Loris. International Journal of Primatology. 24(1):33-46.
  • Nekaris KAI and Jayewardene J. Pilot study and conservation status of the slender loris (Loris tardigradus and Loris lydekkerianus) in Sri Lanka. Primate Conservation - Journal of the IUCN Primates Specialist Group. 19: 83-90., 2003
  • Nekaris KAI. Rediscovery of the slender loris in Horton Plains National Park, Sri Lanka. Asian Primates 8(03):1-7., 2003
Edited by dmaker
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just ask Bindernagel.....there is a scientific bias to the subject. :)

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is true that there are no credentialed scientists doing BF research these days.

 

Does that means BF doesn't exist?

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course it does not mean that bigfoot does not exist. There are plenty of other reasons to arrive at that conclusion. What it does seem to indicate, however, is that there is not much of a scientific case for bigfoot if none of the enthusiast scientists are doing any actual bigfoot research. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dmaker said:

Of course it does not mean that bigfoot does not exist. There are plenty of other reasons to arrive at that conclusion. What it does seem to indicate, however, is that there is not much of a scientific case for bigfoot if none of the enthusiast scientists are doing any actual bigfoot research. 

Hummm.       Arriving at conclusions sounds like what main stream science was doing when that patent clerk Einstein came along with his rediculus Theory of Relativity challenging Newton, the bedrock of physics.      How can you say that enthusiastic scientists are not doing research?    Just because they are not publishing only means they are not ready to publish, not that they are not doing research.    Throwing out a paper on theoretical physics may be commonplace but one on existence of a unknown species better have some good evidence.      They know full well that anything they publish has to hold up during peer review.     

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats because we have no physical evidence of an extant creature in north America.

 

Sure we can point to Gigantopethicus fossils...... that only proves that large primates once roamed Asia.

 

A supporting fossil here would help a little, but look at the debate surrounding the Tasmanian Tiger. Is it really extinct? Or are people seeing things? This is a very small leap when compared to Bigfoot or other crypto hominids worldwide.

 

I do hold out some hope that we are not the only ones left.... but we need real tangible evidence. Like the hobbit.....

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SWWASAS said:

Just because they are not publishing only means they are not ready to publish, not that they are not doing research.    Throwing out a paper on theoretical physics may be commonplace but one on existence of a unknown species better have some good evidence.      They know full well that anything they publish has to hold up during peer review.     

It's good that you recognize that the current state of evidence would not stand up to peer review. 

 

I hear all the time of incredible advances in the colleciton of biological evidence. We can now, literally, pluck DNA from the environment and confirm the presence of a species. Bigfoot science seems stuck at analyzing horse hairs while looking for bigfoot.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, norseman said:

 

Thats because we have no physical evidence of an extant creature in north America.

 

Correct.

 

2 hours ago, norseman said:

that only proves that large primates once roamed Asia.

Correct.

 

2 hours ago, norseman said:

Sure we can point to Gigantopethicus fossils

But why would we? We have none in North America. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites