Leaderboard

Dr. Meldrum's obituary: https://www.wilksfuneralhomes.com/obituaries/don-meldrum

Yes, "not as simple", but much more revealing and irrefutable than any other evidence presented to date. And the best is yet to come.

When it comes to efforts around a cause I always say this: Is what they are doing helpful or harmful to the cause. Let's talk Bigfoot. Obviously, a show like Survivorman or whatever live and die by ratings. They are not doing it for free. TV has Shark Week. They never seem to have Garden Slug Week or Worm Week as the ratings would be pretty bad. Like any business so long as Survivorman or Running Wild with Bear is not fraudulent or harming people more power to them. I see Surviroman or whatever as a useful vehicle to help promote the discussion of bigfoot. The bigfoot issue gets to ride on coat tails of all the fans of these shows. It is only a problem if the person doing the promoting engages in fraud or other things which harm the public. Apart from that, it is useful to the Bigfoot subject. It would be no different than them promoting a brand of hiking shoe. When it comes to Survivorman his shows make the viewer feel what it is like to really be out there in the middle of nowhere. Once this is achieved a viewer is more likely to consider there could be all kinds of things out there yet to be discovered. If Les wants to promote Bigfoot, Bigfoot gains credibility. Where I see a problem: To me the subject of Bigfoot is in a trail in the court of Public Opinion. To make your case you want to have the best people out there doing it. In this way you want Meldrum, Munns, and so on. Sorry to say it but shows like Finding Bigfoot come across as Goofy. In this way the Goofy factor far outweighs the benefit of having some Bigfoot dialog. The Bigfoot issue won't get total acceptance until there is body. But any acceptance it will ever get will only be by representatives and experts the public can be comfortable with. I'll take Survivorman. I'll take any of these people who want to loan us their credibility to show the discussion of Bigfoot can be an adult, reasonable, scientific discussion. The final danger comes when Les or whomever studies the subject of bigfoot but those they are involved with might be a fraud or a hoaxer. Is what they are doing helpful or harmful to the cause.? The answer seems to be its helpful until it becomes harmful.

To rest your head, check out the eDNA work that has been carried out in Greenland by Danish researchers. They have eDNA older than 2 million years. The article is a good read , with pictures. PBS has a video production on same but I do not have a link. No human ancestors were harmed during the eDNA procedures because there were no sapiens in Greenland at those times. The article is open access = free. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05453-y