Guest DWA Posted May 13, 2013 Posted May 13, 2013 Bipto, Pardon if this has been asked and answered. Have you invited/taken Dr. Meldrum to Area X? Is he excited about your organization's prospects in Oklahoma? Has he offered any tangible support? To me, it would be odd if Dr. Meldrum gave a presentation at your convention, listened to the Area X talk and other excitements, and then took a flight back home. Given his long-time quest and professional interest, I would expect him to virtually demand an inclusion in the next operation. This is potentially an overnight game changer, he must be thinking, and he must ache to be part of the final denouement. But then I get visions of the fate of the late comer in The Treasure of the Sierra Madres and think the Dr. should probably stay home. OK, fine. Bipto and I agree on too much stuff. But this isn't so much a disagreement as: I'm interested in the Meldrum Question too. 'sup widdat, bipto? (Noting here that - as one skeptic takes pains to point out - Meldrum is a serious scientist with a serious academic workload. There might be no place harder to mesh research schedules than this field.)
Guest Posted May 13, 2013 Posted May 13, 2013 (edited) We have kept Meldrum abreast of developments from the previous operations and will continue to do so in the future. We've also invited him on-site, though we haven't yet coordinated a visit. He is interested and supportive of our work and often discusses the collection of a holotype using the same words we do. On that subject (and many others), we are in alignement. Edited May 13, 2013 by bipto
Guest zenmonkey Posted May 13, 2013 Posted May 13, 2013 We have kept Meldrum abreast of developments from the previous operations and will continue to do so in the future. We've also invited him on-site, though we haven't yet coordinated a visit. He is interested and supportive of our work and often discusses the collection of a holotype using the same words we do. On that subject (and many others), we are in alignement. Now that would make for a badass bigfoot show!!!!
Guest DWA Posted May 15, 2013 Posted May 15, 2013 And no, I don't know why it's never occurred to me to ask, and it might even already have been answered (a lot of pages up there), and if so I apologize. What do the game laws of the state of OK say about killing animals not specifically included in the regulations, for example this one?
Guest DWA Posted May 16, 2013 Posted May 16, 2013 I'm not sure that the answer to my central question has been answered. In fact, I am quite sure that a lot of people here that are some of the more rigid, fingers in ears, believers have never seen a Bigfoot nor have they looked at evidence beyond Finding Bigfoot. I don't understand why people like that would buy into the myth so strongly. It seems to me that anyone that has spent more than a passing moment truly examining this phenomenon would not arrive at that conclusion. To me %90 of the threads here should be in the Campfire tales section, because that is all BF is. So I read threads because watching Footers is kind of fascinating. My problem is in my lack of ability to not engage. Instead of yelling at the TV when Bobo says something ridiculous, I can now respond to similar things in this forum. But l agree with you, I'll happily stand down. Let this thread get back on topic, and I'll keep my pesky skepticism out of this thread and all others. OK, then I'll try. (And bigfoot being the topic of this thread, I'm not seeing it as off topic.) Some of us see the "rigid, fingers in ears" approach from some here - not naming any - who hold the opposite True Belief: this just ain't real and it's for sure it ain't and I couldn't tell you why. Some of us here are interested, and see much to be interested in. We want to see the mystery solved. I truly have no interest in either end of the True Belief seesaw, and wonder why anyone would want to "believe in" anything. I find that a very boring way to go about life, and a way that leaves one open to whatever soft soap is being sold by whoever, rabid profit-seeking "believer" and rabid profit-seeking "denier" alike. The only difference I see between Ben Radford, for example, and Tom Biscardi is the people they profit from. I hold no truck with either. I know how to tell when I'm dealing with that sort, and don't once I know. So. We know the rabid deniers are all wet. We know the True Believers ain't cuttin' it either. We come here to show people how much evidence there is, and how deep it is, and to encourage a truly intellectual approach to a true frontier of science. That's why we're here. "It seems to me that anyone that has spent more than a passing moment truly examining this phenomenon would not arrive at that conclusion." No. Just wrong. No shades of gray on that one. That is simply a false statement. "My problem is in my lack of ability to not engage." At least you admit to it. No one would see my name, ever, in any capacity, regarding any topic I view the way you view this one. I'd simply ignore. But actually, I view no topic the way you view this one. Here is how I view every phenomenon: Interesting. I await the proof. That, friend, is how a true scientist views it. Mistrust anyone calling himself a "scientist" who pooh-poohs anything. He's just showing the gaps in his knowledge.
Guest Posted May 16, 2013 Posted May 16, 2013 What do the game laws of the state of OK say about killing animals not specifically included in the regulations, for example this one? I'm not the group's expert on such things, but we've researched it and have taken steps to mitigate as much as possible any ramifications. Different people will interpret existing laws in their own way. This subject was discussed in the Echo Incident thread and the Operation Endurance discussion. Speaking for myself, I don't believe any local hunting ordinance would be enforced against someone who brings in an animal previously unknown to science.
Drew Posted May 16, 2013 Posted May 16, 2013 In Oklahoma you can shoot hogs as long as you have an accompanying license for the season you are hunting in. There may be restrictions on what kind of ammo you can have in the field during certain hunting seasons as well. There are specific regulations against hunting with visual aids such as lights, and night scopes. The one exception is while carrying a .22 during raccoon season you can have a handheld light.
Guest Posted May 17, 2013 Posted May 17, 2013 There are things about the Area X adventures that are a bafflement to me. Here is one. Bipto, Strain, and company are sure they are encountering anomalous apes in the hills of Oklahoma. If we look at the great apes, we find not a great deal of variation in hair color within each species. Gorillas are dark brown and chimps are basically black, while both show graying with age. Orangs are famously the gingers of the ape world. Of course, some color variation occurs with albinism, and at least one gorilla is known for its white hair and blue eyes. If we look at the native apes of Oklahoma, eyewitnesses have reported black, red (auburn), and gray. Does anyone have an explanation for this phenomena? I'm no geneticist, but why are these apes atypically possessing colors that are found in two different species of apes (chimps and orangs)? Would their low population levels and small gene pool mitigate against or initiate full body-hair color variation such as that claimed for the Oklahoma apes?
Guest Posted May 17, 2013 Posted May 17, 2013 Orangs come in a wide variety of colors, from reddish to brown to even very dark brown.
Guest DWA Posted May 17, 2013 Posted May 17, 2013 Yeah, and so do 'black bears,' and so do grizzlies, and so do... No point in getting all caught up in that. I had a problem with the multiple-color eyeshines being reported for sasquatch. I mean a major problem. I mean, every animal, including us, has one single eye color. Right...?
Guest Posted May 17, 2013 Posted May 17, 2013 You'd think, but perhaps not. I recall a situation in which I was personally involved where four of us were observing the same eye shine at the same time. I saw it as pure white while another person said it was greenish and the other two said reddish orange. We were all a few feet from one another and at different heights. I can't say what animal's eyes we were seeing, but it was surprising to me when writing up the notes that we all saw different colors.
Guest DWA Posted May 17, 2013 Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) Well, then you have people who are differentially "color-blind," or "color-sensitive" (for the sensitive), a common phenomenon that could account at least in part for that incident. Of course, humans uniformly have black hair and brown eyes. Except for Northern Europeans. Meet a person who has a different color scheme, and that person has Northern European blood in the lineage somewhere. But it happens. Red seems to be the eyeshine encountered most often, but a number of others are reported, and there's really nothing that unusual about it. And sometimes, for a number of reasons that, well, rainbows might also explain, different colors perceived from different angles for the same animal. Hey! 2,130 posts! The same as Lou Gehrig's consecutive-games record. Coincidence...or....? (Sorry. Baseball season does this.) Edited May 17, 2013 by DWA
dmaker Posted May 17, 2013 Posted May 17, 2013 I'm a bit confused. I don't really see an answer to the question. I see a complete dismissal of the question as " ...no point in getting all caught up in that..." I also see a comparison to orangs, a comparison to two bear species ( relevance of that escapes me), and then a drift into a discussion of eye shine. None of which, that I can see, really directly addresses the interesting question posed by jerrywayne. Unless Bipto is suggesting the Wood Apes are orangs..?
Recommended Posts