Bigfoot Research--Still No Evidence (Continued)

[Guest DWA]

And about this.

 

Seems to me that Meldrum is the sole expert who could do this who has claimed the prints to be real evidence of real bigfoots, yet he hasn't legitimately published his analysis of them.  Why not?  Editorial conspiracy or he knows the evidence isn't really strong enough to make that case? 

 

Let me try:

 

Seems to me that there are lots of people who love to argue about this, yet they haven't, in any wise, way or particular, legitimately addressed the claims of the scientific proponents.  Why not?  Benign negligence, or they know their scientific chops aren't nearly strong enough to make their case? 

 

 

(BTW, Meldrum uses the Bluff Creek prints as his holotype for Anthropoidipes ameriborealis, and the reason he does so is because he thinks the monkey suit is the strongest sauce he's got for a bigfoot print anywhere being the real deal.  Ouch . . . )

 

Here, let me try.

 

(BTW, Meldrum uses the Bluff Creek prints as his holotype for Anthropoidipes ameriborealis, and the reason he does so is because he knows that not a scrap of evidence of a hoax has surfaced in over 45 years, and every finding made by experts reviewing the film backs an undocumented primate.  Were I a bigfoot skeptic my reaction would be:  Ouch . . . .  As I am not, my reaction is simply wondering:   Seems to me that there are lots of people who love to argue about this, yet they haven't, in any wise, way or particular, legitimately addressed the claims of the scientific proponents.  Why not?  Benign negligence, or they know their scientific chops aren't nearly strong enough to make their case? )

 

 

I consider the matter unresolved.  But I note that the faith of some is very strong.

 

[norseman]

 

Saskeptic wrote:

Next, you comment on the "ROH" as if the psychology of hoaxing has been well studied, you understand in full the motivations of all hoaxers, and that the perpetrators of pranks never deviate from the script.  If you were going to hoax some bigfoot prints, where would you do it?  I certainly wouldn't do it at some busy state park.  I'd go off trail somewhere really out of the way. 

 

 

Can you give a logical explanation as to why you would do that? Where I live your time would be wasted. And I would assume based on logic that a hoaxer is motivated by observers finding their track way. Without the observer? No hoax.

 

Seems to me that Meldrum is the sole expert who could do this who has claimed the prints to be real evidence of real bigfoots, yet he hasn't legitimately published his analysis of them.  Why not?  Editorial conspiracy or he knows the evidence isn't really strong enough to make that case?  (BTW, Meldrum uses the Bluff Creek prints as his holotype for Anthropoidipes ameriborealis, and the reason he does so is because he thinks the monkey suit is the strongest sauce he's got for a bigfoot print anywhere being the real deal.  Ouch . . . )

 

While I certainly think we are way premature to be classifying a species based off of a foot cast? I like Munn's analysis, I find it compelling and I think a lot of other people do as well. Obviously this isn't a popularity contest, and the film is inconclusive. As you know I feel all films will be inconclusive because of the possibility of a hoax (same as the casts). With that said, I don't think the skeptics have proven it's a man in a monkey suit either...... So absolutely I can see Meldrum's logic that he has not only a track way, but the film at the second it was being made by the creature.

 

If we were talking about a new species of Ungulate, I would certainly understand if only film and foot casts were the only evidence of it's existence? Why a PGF like film would be used in conjunction with hoof casts to push for scientific recognition.

[Drew]

 

You are making the same kind of assumptions I am; only a different kind, requiring faith to simply accept.  (I call it LOTOH - The Legend Of The Omnipotent Hoaxer.)  If you are just assuming the country is packed with really competent people who consider this the best use of their time...well, prove it and we're done here.  Until then, I consider the matter unresolved.

 

 

 

Here's one guy's work, on a blog devoted to hoaxing people.

 

 

Reportedly placed on a hiking trail deep in the Oleta River in Aventura, Florida by a park employee.

 

http://pumpkinrot.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-wooded-clown.html

 

________________________________________________________________________________

And of course who doesn't like to tell ghost stories?  Oooh this one sounds familiar.

http://www.yourghoststories.com/real-ghost-story.php?story=10580

I continued walking along and soon became distracted with cracking twigs and leaves in the woods. My heart started to race but I was frozen in fear. I just couldn't move. I looked to my right and there was an old dead tree and I swore that I saw movement behind the trunk. I stared, waiting for it to move again. I saw the dark, tall figure lean its head around the trunk of the tree. I could not see any features in detail because it was night time but I could make out the dark solid figure. It was standing upright. This told me it was time to leave!

[norseman]

^^^^^^

 

I could see putting down a track way ON a park or forest service trail, sure.

[Guest DWA]

^^^^^^

Particularly on a trail absolutely pounded to hell and gone by untold multitudes, as that one obviously was.  That's not "deep" into anything.

 

And what does one ghost story have to do with what we are talking about?  Is NAWAC encountering ghosts in OK pretty much as we speak?

Edited July 1, 2013 by DWA
To Remove Quoted Content Directly Above

[Drew]

Evidently.

[norseman]

^^^^^^

 

Drew, if you where hoaxing people would you go off trail and get as remote as you could? Or would you lay a track way close to where you felt people would habituate?

[Guest Stan Norton]

Seems to me that, yet again, the issue of prints is going off on a wonk. Surely the issue is not the philosophy of hoaxing but the very appearance of prints which no-one has yet been able to show are not genuine. That's the question I would like an answer to. HOW did someone do it? These are the ONLY evidence available that allow repeated scientific scrutiny.

 

And Norse you are so right - why on Earth would Meldrum not use the Bluff Creek prints? As you say, we have the alleged print maker there on film, alongside the prints in question. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

[Drew]

It would have to be a midpoint.

 

I would not want to do it in too-convenient an area, because the key is getting people to say "It was too remote for hoaxing", so I would pick a spot that I am used to going, like, a spot that I know a back ATV trail that runs close to a sparsely used Hiking trail, and lay them down there.

 

Many times super remote places are still accessible to some people that know other routes.  Like Salt Fork State Park, that is not real hoaxers, that is Bigfooters getting bored and making random tracks.  But in Oklahoma, in the Ouachitas, check this trail network out:

 

Someone walking the Blue Bouncer loop, might not know that FR6025A intersects it at one point, it is an easy access for someone wanting to drop a set of prints across the trail.  http://www.ouachitamaps.com/picture_library/Beech%20Creek/Beech%20Creek%20Map.jpg

 

From this website http://www.ouachitamaps.com/Beech%20Creek.html

Edited July 1, 2013 by Drew

[Guest]

Re: hoaxes -  Plenty of footprints have been found, on trails, along roads, etc. 

 

If I really had insights into what motivates dedicated pranksters I might have been better cut out for fraternity life.  As it was, I went GDI all the way, in large part because I didn't appreciate the doing of mindless pranks that can typify some fraternities. 

 

I don't assume that hoaxers intend any more than a tiny fraction of their prints to be found.  I envision folks who just enjoy a good long hike and have a bit of fun along the way by laying down some prints.  That's one brand of hoaxer.  These folks might not care one whit if they ever hear back that anyone ever came across one of their creations. 

 

Another brand of hoaxer might care very much if his prints are found.  They might be intentionally made to attract the attention of the very people who might be in position to make a big deal out of them.  One might make such prints at Bluff Creek or Paul Freeman's house, for example.  Why? Here are some potential examples:

*scare people away from someplace for some reason (e.g. Scooby-Doo effect)

*attract people to someplace (e.g., to promote bigfoot tourism or lure a dedicated television show to featuring "your" bigfoot)

*convince an "expert" that the prints are legit

*dupe a rival bigfooter

*establish oneself as a superior bigfooter

*simply perpetuate the myth with a bit of field "folk art"

 

We've had entire threads about the motivations to perpetrate bigfoot hoaxes.  In my experience in those threads, people often underestimate the lengths to which others will go simply to pull a prank. 

[Guest DWA]

And these guys are fooling scientists?

 

I might have a lot of fun making paper airplanes too, and just kinda gin up an X-15 along the way, send it a few miles into the stratosphere, and then go back to paper planes.  But....naaaah.

[Drew]

 No. They are not fooling scientists.  They are fooling Bigfooters.

Edited July 1, 2013 by Drew

[BobbyO]

These last few posts have reminded me of people who fantasise about killings ( for example ) and who have been given their first chance to actually talk about how they'd actually do it, and they're getting really excited about doing so.

[Guest DWA]

 No. They are not fooling scientists.  They are fooling Bigfooters.

Right.  I'll put you in touch with Meldrum and Bindernagel.

 

It's more like:  bigfoot is fooling you guys.  Not too bad for an ape.

[norseman]

Saskeptic wrote:

I don't assume that hoaxers intend any more than a tiny fraction of their prints to be found.  I envision folks who just enjoy a good long hike and have a bit of fun along the way by laying down some prints.  That's one brand of hoaxer.  These folks might not care one whit if they ever hear back that anyone ever came across one of their creations. 

 

So if people are simply hiking around the mountains for many hours/days with stompers on? Do we have any accounts of people actually encountering these people? 

 

I personally do not see this hypothesis as very realistic, for a multitude of reasons. Mainly for the fact that hiking many miles over difficult terrain with giant stompers on your feet? WOULD SUCK.