Leaderboard

This is my first posting here though I have lurked for many years. I'm not much of a "poster" but one of my other diversions is interest in what could be termed "alternate history." Many over the years, many people, to include Sir Isaac Newton, have subscribed to the belief that the accepted chronology of mankind has been severely miscalculated by ignoring inconvenient archeological evidence. The belief being that mainstream science has most definitely twisted and perverted fact for a variety of reasons to include power, political influence, and money. Archeologists and scientists who possess(ed) knowledge which didn't jive with accepted dogma were, and are, ostracized, not given opportunities for career advancement, ridiculed, and in some cases no doubt threatened to "keep quiet." As a matter of self preservation, many have done just that. I would be willing to bet that Dr. Meldrum has experienced a certain degree of this in his own career. To take it out of that context though, imagine the results if some staffer or department head at the Smithsonian came out and admitted to spotting a bigfoot and became a convert. Does anyone honestly believe that they wouldn't suffer some sort of shunning, ridicule, reprimand, or outright retribution? Does anyone really think that the head of Anthropology would say "Bob, you've made a really remarkable discovery. Why don't you take a couple of months to form up an expedition to explore this further."? To get back to the matter at hand though, and speaking of the Smithsonian...I fully understand the reluctance of skeptics to flat accept newspaper accounts, but do you accept the word of the Smithsonian Institution? One of the unfortunate cats that got out of the bag before damage control and denial became the first reactions to inexplicable artifacts was the discovery of giant skeletal remains that were carted off to Washington, D.C. and reported in the Smithsonians own reports. It would appear to me that based on the deafening silence since the initial discoveries and reports, that at some point they made a conscious decision to sweep the matter under the rug and never discuss it again so far as I can tell. I know for sure you can't walk in there today and look at one on display, and I'd be willing to bet you can call anyone you want over there and you'll either get hung up on, or mocked as a crank. You can find some of the documentation here: http://www.xpedition.../holocaust.html Before anyone tears into me about the author's credibility, or veracity of the website it is on, I will say I know absolutely nothing about that, nor do I care. All I was looking for was some quotes and leads to actual printed sources from the 19th Century which document the discovery of giants in that era to contribute to the discussion.

I dunno, I look forward to seeing what the Bigfoot Times November Issue says about the issue. I wonder if there will be a retraction. That is who provided the evidence. In journalism, it is usually a good idea to have a reliable source prior to publishing. Sources are very difficult to make a journalist divulge. However, if there is a problem with it. My guess is we'll see a small retraction in the next issue. @ Transformer - by Bob G not participating in a Q&A - what does that imply? That he is innocent but just doesn't 'feel' like humoring the skeptics? Is that what you get out of that? If not, what does that say about our current situation with our member? Or, guilty or not, we should not be asking those types of questions to members? Or just skeptical members, b/c I've seen a TON of accusations put forth toward Bill Munn's and don't recall certain folks ever taking issue with it. Please clarify.

Total BS, if things came down like any high average IQ person can figure, certain members should be dinged and tossed. That is for all to see and few to confront with their faithful, yet selective "reality testing". The forum is nothing less and certainly a whole lot more for permitting all to see the hypocrisy inherent in those defending it.