How Many Normal (Relatively) Intelligent, Adult, Witnesses Without A Prior Agenda Does It Take To Have Any Provative Weight Towards The Unknown?

[Guest DWA]

I want to be careful not to derail too badly, so I'll make this my last Meldrum post in the thread.

 . . . Saskeptic,  . . . would you agree  it was not exactly the path of least resistance for Mssr. Meldrum to get where he is now?   And if it is such a wide-open career path to full professorship, why is he, as far as I know, the only guy who has taken it? In how many years?  You might consider there is a reason for that. 

Oh I've considered the reason for that for quite some time.  Why do you assume that the reason is that scientists are frightened of criticism from faculty colleagues instead of the far more parsimonious explanation: the vast majority of scientists don't think there's a bigfoot out there to find?

 

Most folks here think that Meldrum is right about bigfoot because he is actively working on bigfoot. They don't seem to get that he has failed to make the scientific case for bigfoot.  This is why the closest thing to a peer-reviewed paper he published on the subject was his ichnotaxon manuscript in the New Mexico Museum of Natural History and Science Bulletin 42.  (This doesn't include the papers he's recently published in the journal he founded and he edits, The Relict Hominoid Inquiry.) That's it, for his entire bigfoot career.  Everything else has been done in public appearances, on television, and in popular books.  I'd argue that no one on earth (now or since, because I think Meldrum is more advanced than Krantz on the subject) is in a better position to make the case for bigfoot using the existing evidence we have, and yet Meldrum has (to the best of my knowledge) not even attempted to publish real scholarly publications on that evidence that would open his analysis to critical peer review.  Why?  Meldrum's a smart cookie, and he knows the evidence isn't strong enough to make that case.

Umm humm.

 

So, what are the reactions from other scientists to those things he's put out there?

 

(Oh, wait.  You haven't read them.  I think we just nailed it.)

 

Silence means they're right?

 

No it doesn't.  In science, we all know by now that silence means there's no thinking going on.

 

(If there has been a response, send it to me so I can show you how it doesn't take a scientist to shoot it up.)

[WSA]

Seven DWA, don't forget seven.....

[Guest]

I'm sorry, what?  Are you gentlemen suggesting that I'm unfamiliar with the arguments Dr. Meldrum has made for the existence of bigfoot?  I might be - if there is a description of a bigfoot carcass in The Relict Hominoid Inquiry.

[Guest DWA]

Well, if you can't be interested in something unless it's left you a body, what are you bringing extinct birds around here for?

 

THEY'RE EXTINCT.  The mistaken sighters all saw pileateds.  Glad I could clear that up.  Slam dunk is sometimes slam dunk.

[Guest]

^^^^As is running around yelling, "Weak!"

 

So.

 

We don't think eyewitness testimony is important, huh?  Really?

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/faces-of-the-future-human-facial-features-photos_n_3391747.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D327205#slide=more301619

 

weaker! As in the evidence for BF is somewhere between weak and non existent. Eye witness accounts are nice for campfire stories, but a whole lot of people make things up. And most stories change drastically from the original version almost immediately. I wish BF were real, then I could justify all the years I spent looking into it and looking like a clown to all my friends and family when I brought the topic up. But, unfortunately, BF is a mythical creature, it just doesn't exist. There is no way a breeding population of large bipedal primate is looming on the edges of civilization and is still, in this day, unknown to science...and other than a few fringe scientists, not even on the radar! 

Edited June 12, 2013 by summitwalker

[Guest DWA]

NO!  NO!  NO IT'S NOT!

 

Now that we're on the same discourse level...anything to add....? 

[Guest]

From Meldrum's CV:

 

Meldrum DJ. 2012. Are other hominins (hominoids) alive today? The Relict Hominoid Inquiry 1:67-71.

Meldrum DJ. 2012, Adaptive radiations, bushy evolutionary trees, and relict hominoids, The Relict Hominoid Inquiry 1:51-56.

Meldrum DJ and Zhou Guoxing. 2012. Footprint evidence of the Chinese yeren. The Relict Hominoid Inquiry 1:57-66.

 

Nope, no bigfoots yet.

[Guest DWA]

Well, I don't have a train to catch so no big.

 

He's getting warmer than all those (0) people who are gonna tell me how P/G was faked or all this evidence can get to 100% false positives.  When I see one of those on a slab we're done.  Not until.

[Guest DWA]

 

^^^^As is running around yelling, "Weak!"

 

So.

 

We don't think eyewitness testimony is important, huh?  Really?

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/faces-of-the-future-human-facial-features-photos_n_3391747.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D327205#slide=more301619

 

weaker! As in the evidence for BF is somewhere between weak and non existent. Eye witness accounts are nice for campfire stories, but a whole lot of people make things up. And most stories change drastically from the original version almost immediately. I wish BF were real, then I could justify all the years I spent looking into it and looking like a clown to all my friends and family when I brought the topic up. But, unfortunately, BF is a mythical creature, it just doesn't exist. There is no way a breeding population of large bipedal primate is looming on the edges of civilization and is still, in this day, unknown to science...and other than a few fringe scientists, not even on the radar! 

 

Prove it. 

[Drew]

Well, I don't have a train to catch so no big.

 

He's getting warmer than all those (0) people who are gonna tell me how P/G was faked or all this evidence can get to 100% false positives.  When I see one of those on a slab we're done.  Not until.

 

OK just so we are arguing in good faith, you will stop arguing for the existence of Bigfoot when there is one on the table, and other than that you will keep on arguing for the existence of Bigfoot no matter what?

[Guest DWA]

I'm arguing for the case to be closed.

 

Which it isn't when all these false positives are being alleged; none of them proven; and much more reason to believe the witnesses than not to.

 

(Much more than there is to believe, say, ivorybill witnesses, driven hard by multiple incentives to mistake a common species for a similar extinct one.  What similar, known species are bigfoot sighters seeing, hmmmm?  if you have read reports you know:  None.)

[Cotter]

 

 

^^^^As is running around yelling, "Weak!"

 

So.

 

We don't think eyewitness testimony is important, huh?  Really?

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/faces-of-the-future-human-facial-features-photos_n_3391747.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D327205#slide=more301619

 

weaker! As in the evidence for BF is somewhere between weak and non existent. Eye witness accounts are nice for campfire stories, but a whole lot of people make things up. And most stories change drastically from the original version almost immediately. I wish BF were real, then I could justify all the years I spent looking into it and looking like a clown to all my friends and family when I brought the topic up. But, unfortunately, BF is a mythical creature, it just doesn't exist. There is no way a breeding population of large bipedal primate is looming on the edges of civilization and is still, in this day, unknown to science...and other than a few fringe scientists, not even on the radar! 

 

Prove it. 

 

I can go out on a golf course and hit a ball 10,000 times and not get a hole in one.

 

I can then positively conclude that holes in one are impossible.

 

*shakes head*

[Guest DWA]

I've seen one mink in the wild.

 

After decades of walking mink habitat, I saw one ...from the window of a house I was staying in, about fifty yards or so away, for a few seconds.

 

I would have been justified, long before that, in thinking mink were somebody's idea of a joke.

[Guest]

Not exactly on topic but I thought I might add here.. didn't want to start a thread and yet it seems some what relevant too

 

http://www.fws.gov/home/newsroom/chimpanzeerecovery0610013.html

[Guest UPs]

...maybe there really isn't such a thing as a hole in one, after all, we just have either eyewitness accounts or a video that is easy to hoax. So the obvious question is, if a golfer saw a bf and reported it, would everyone believe him or her?

......just practicing my " critical thinking ".