Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
gigantor

Modern Researchers Are Bypassing Traditional Academia

Recommended Posts

gigantor

It seems that researchers today are successfully avoiding the "Ivory Towers" (i.e. universities and academia) by using commercial enterprises to fund research. Witness all of the BF shows paid for by the History channel, the Discovery channel, the National Geographic channel, etc.

All of these companies are vying to produce the best documentary about BF (which draw great ratings) every year. I offer "Paranormal BF" as the latest. They funded a state of the art, science based documentary with plenty of qualified scientists (who want/need the exposure) to spend considerable time and effort on the subject.

No way traditional academia would provide funds for such a lavish examination of the matter. Competition is a great thing.

Edited by gigantor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest TooRisky

I have come to realize that traditional acadmia either research, discovery, or investigation have and always will go to the remote places with exotic peoples, foods, customs and yes animals... Why spend a good part of your life in class to just go out in your own back yard, when you can travel on someones elses dime to the far reaches of the planet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor

I see your point. The question is: will those who bypass academia succeed?

I don't know, but they are reaching a much wider audience and the competition will only intensify. They seem to have more financial resources.

Mostly good I think.

Edited by gigantor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
southernyahoo

I see your point. The question is: will those who bypass academia succeed?

Succeed at what? Funding more research that avoids academia which goes nowhere? What is their stated mission? Resolution of the BF phenomenon? Seems to me the BF community embraces academia getting involved. In fact it takes academia to verify some of the evidence. It's the naysayers that have the issue with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest watch1

It seems that researchers today are successfully avoiding the "Ivory Towers" (i.e. universities and academia) by using commercial enterprises to fund research. Witness all of the BF shows paid for by the History channel, the Discovery channel, the National Geographic channel, etc.

All of these companies are vying to produce the best documentary about BF (which draw great ratings) every year. I offer "Paranormal BF" as the latest. They funded a state of the art, science based documentary with plenty of qualified scientists (who want/need the exposure) to spend considerable time and effort on the subject.

No way traditional academia would provide funds for such a lavish examination of the matter. Competition is a great thing.

I have discussed this with a few and I have a few questions about this.

Are we getting the latest facts and findings from those like Dr. Meldrum? Are they being controlled by these "backers" and giving us a timed released version with the hope of something new and historic discovery in the next show?

As many comments over on Cryptomundo seemed to say the same thing, a rerun of past events and only a new face from time to time and a little of something new.

Is Discovery running the show and controlling what is being released?

Mike (watch1)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor

Succeed at what? Funding more research that avoids academia which goes nowhere?

Success at advancing the study of the subject matter. Academia does not take the subject seriously, so waiting for the Ivory Towers to fund such research means no progress at all and also goes nowhere.

What was the greatest academia sponsored BF research project? Nothing, nada, zilch, nonexistent.

See?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor

Are we getting the latest facts and findings from those like Dr. Meldrum? Are they being controlled by these "backers" and giving us a timed released version with the hope of something new and historic discovery in the next show?

I admit it is not perfect. Yet, it is better than what we are getting from academia, which is exactly ZERO. No?

Even academicians themselves have realized this and are lining up to contribute to these commercial efforts.

Edited by gigantor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
southernyahoo

IC but what other choice does Meldrum have? Is he avoiding the ivory towers or are they avoiding him? His best shot is to give the subject as much exposure as possible and use what little funding he can get to find physical evidence. He's trying to get a snowball effect where small funding brings a little evidence which brings bigger & better funding, more comprehensive study, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor

I'm not criticizing Meldrum, I'm applauding him. He's found a way around the glass ceiling and it is lifting many others with him.

This will eventually shake the Ivory Towers and they'll realize there's good money to be made from the subject, I think it has started happening already. I can't help to draw a parallel to global warming, a few rouge scientists questioned the orthodoxy and now there's all kinds of research being done which contradicts the dogma of AGW. It will happen in this case also.

That's the beauty of science.

Edited by gigantor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Success at advancing the study of the subject matter. Academia does not take the subject seriously, so waiting for the Ivory Towers to fund such research means no progress at all and also goes nowhere.

What was the greatest academia sponsored BF research project? Nothing, nada, zilch, nonexistent.

See?

The catch in all that is that no matter how much data, evidence, etc is collected, analyzed, collated and presented, in the end in order for it to mean much of anything they will still have to go crawling back like beggars to the Ivory Towers Crowd for approbation before bf will be accepted.

The ITC has a monopoly on what is admitted to the secular canon of "science".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor

The ITC has a monopoly on what is admitted to the secular canon of "science".

Most of the time this is true. However, there are historical and modern precedents which show that the glass ceiling can and has been broken many times by scientists. I offer the geocentric theory historically (Galileo) and global warming (Anthony Watts) as a recent example.

Edited by gigantor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ajciani

I fully expect that the ground breaking discoveries in the field will come from private individuals and the Green ($$$$) Tower. Ketchum is probably the closest thing to academia that will be involved in the discovery, and she is working in the private sector.

Additionally, the lack of support from the ITC has hurt bigfootery. The halls of academia are where people learn about logic and the scientific method: how to collect good evidence and present it properly, and how to think critically. If the hobbyists knew 20 years ago what they are learning today (about methodology), then bigfoot may well already have been discovered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Most of the time this is true. However, there are historical and modern precedents which show that the glass ceiling can and has been broken many times by scientists. I offer the geocentric theory historically (Galileo) and global warming (Anthony Watts) as a recent example.

Galileo was not a problem of science, he was a problem of religious interpretation. Galileo's science was never in question. Anyone with the appropriate background could double check his work. It was the Church of the day that dumped on him like a landslide for contradicting then-canon interpretation of Scripture.

Watts I haven't heard of, but last I checked, the "orthodoxy" in the science community remains the AGW theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ajciani

Actually, AGW was never orthodox in the "scientific community". Not only is the basic theory hard to swallow, but the evidence that the Earth has even warmed (on average) over the last 100 years is scant, at best. I met quite a few people who did climate research, and they never presented anything that looked like GW, let alone AGW. In fact, a couple of those seminars presented evidence which invalidated AGW, and in one case, GW. One of my neighbors used to work on those federally funded "burning Earth" calculations as a government employee. Basically, they were all BS, and they knew it, but their funds came from Congressmen with agendas, so they "tweaked" the calculations and made BS doomsday predictions.

I even met people who got into climatology because they wanted to "save the world", but found out that the world wasn't even in danger. Then again, I know a lot of people like that in environmental science. They entered the field to save the world, and found out that most of what they thought they knew was BS.

The illusion of the "orthodoxy" of AGW within the "scientific community" is promoted and claimed by people with political agendas. In fact, the concept of the "scientific community" was itself created by political people pushing agenda-based science. More generally, environmental activism pushes out a LOT of BS which is unsupported by environmental science, and pushed for reasons that have nothing at all to do with the environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Patron

Academia and private efforts and funding BF research I hope will become the hot topic of this forum some day. I see limited private foundation involvement in funding and if someone equates popular "entertainment" as some form of science I think the boat has been missed. Doesn't mean the entertainment industry can't learn to turn over evidence to those that are highly qualified it just means the documentation needs to be there (chain of evidence et al). Does the topic of BF when presented on popular entertainment media spur further interest in scientists, I would certainly think there is some impact. Tell me that 75% of the one hundred fifty people searching in the Uwharrie National Forest on Sat. and I'd be more open to those prospects.

I believe either side has it right on GW and it(climate)'s impact on BF is fodder for other thread(s). It is however scary to think about the possibility of science ignoring BF if Ketchum brings back positive findings that get published. Might be even scarier to see how many rich, retired fence-sitters suddenly become BF researcher's too. Maybe even go back and get their Ph.D.'s. If something like that happens it could help the discovery process but elbow room might get a little tight. In the mean-time maybe academic needs some "stiff" competition to get them off their duff. JMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...