Guest tracker Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 (edited) I ve spent some time recently in the media section pondering which new/old books i should buy. Most of the classic Bf books can't be found in public libraries anymore. Many helpfull members were suggesting their favs or were recommending books based on reviews. So okay i open another tab and pull up a couple titles and read the reviews. But it occured to me why should i trust some no name critic when talking about this subject? Who are these joe blows setting themselves up as experts? An unknown reviewing a credible authors or researchers who have they spent many years researching for their book? To me this seems wrong, like a commuter critiqing how a race car driver should drive? The other thing was are some of these people paid to do this? or is it political? That would seem like a conflict of interest to me if so. When is the last time anyone read a bad review on the back of a book cover? So where do these experts come from that they can critique anyones work let alone the real experts or pioneers? What they went to university and remembered the right answers on an exam from a book written by someone else? So okay they wrote a thesiss and now they are a beginner expert and can start critiqing others on any topic after getting their journalisim degree? And what about the ones who don't even have that or any field experience? (which is of higher value to me) So unless their name is Gimlin, Goodall or Meldrum even. Or they are best selling non fiction author or a scientist in a related field first. Then these people don't have the credentials to be a reviewer. So maybe they should stop bombarding the web sites with their POV? Who cares what joe blow has to say about Meldrums or Greens work for eg: Anyways I always find it funny how some people start believing they are an expert after reading everyones elses work on the subject. Even better when they show up on web sites, forums, conferences and in the field ready to show off their knowledge and abilities. Then fall back on someone elses work when in a debate or when trying to make point. I am not an expert I've only spent 25-30 years in the field, this is JMO. Maybe someday i'll earn the right to be a critic? Until that day comes i am just tracker Edited May 4, 2011 by tracker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterbarber Posted May 4, 2011 Admin Share Posted May 4, 2011 I understand where you're coming from with these book reviews. I pretty much look at them (now) as suggestions rather than expert opinions. Ultimately, it's still up to me whether I decide to buy the book(s) or not but in the big picture, the reviews can help me decide whether it's worth my time and money. To me, the excerpts sometimes available on google books are even better--if available. JMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Out of curiousity, what would make Gimlin's opinion valuable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CaptainMorgan Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Bob Gimlin = eye witness - Score 1 Critics = 0 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Out of curiousity, what would make Gimlin's opinion valuable? Research Bob Gimlin's name and you will have your answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Bob Gimlin = eye witness - Score 1 Critics = 0 . Bob Gimlin along with thousands and thousands of other "eye witnesses"...so why take his opinion, I get Jane Goodall and Meldrum, but a cowboy with a "supposed" sighting? Bob Gimlin = 0 proof - score 0 Research Bob Gimlin's name and you will have your answers. I have been following this field for awhile now and do not need any more background on the man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Bob Gimlin = eye witness - Score 1 Critics = 0 . Hey it's more like score 1000 for Bob and Rodger and 0 for the critics. Bob and Rodger after years of determined research contributed the holy Grail of films to this field. What have the critics contributed ? a big fat 0 IMO. Unless you count adding mud to the water. Bob Gimlin along with thousands and thousands of other "eye witnesses"...so why take his opinion, I get Jane Goodall and Meldrum, but a cowboy with a "supposed" sighting? Bob Gimlin = 0 proof - score 0 Yea those are good names to drop too, But where would Meldrum or anyones work be without a couple of hard working cowboys that paved the way. Maybe I missed Meldrums or Goodall film of a Sasquatch? Can you post their vids here for everyone to see. thanks. While your doing that i'll post the PGF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kane2002 Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 As far as the book thing, I have a lot of them. But then I am a book nut. It seems though that a lot of the books are just repeats of what other people saw and think. I do like Meldrum, Green and Thom Powell for starters. You won't be disapointed with any of them. To my knowledge Bob Gimlin has not written a book. If he does I will buy it. Several times. I know Bob quite well and have spent a lot of time with him. He is a true gentleman. Anyone who meets Bob and hears him in one of his presentations will be impressed. I certainly believe that he saw a Sasquatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 As far as the book thing, I have a lot of them. But then I am a book nut. It seems though that a lot of the books are just repeats of what other people saw and think. I do like Meldrum, Green and Thom Powell for starters. You won't be disapointed with any of them. To my knowledge Bob Gimlin has not written a book. If he does I will buy it. Several times. I know Bob quite well and have spent a lot of time with him. He is a true gentleman. Anyone who meets Bob and hears him in one of his presentations will be impressed. I certainly believe that he saw a Sasquatch. If Bob wrote a book it would be an instant best seller classic and a must own. I like the man and his film because he is a cowboy. "Anyone can follow after the trail is paved" me I caution those who would speak against these three legends on a Bf forum. Anyways a gift from tracker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 (edited) Bob Gimlin along with thousands and thousands of other "eye witnesses"...so why take his opinion, I get Jane Goodall and Meldrum, but a cowboy with a "supposed" sighting? Bob Gimlin = 0 proof - score 0 You use "cowboy" like a dirty word. Is that because they don't give Phd's in "Cowboying". So you are implying that people with college degrees are more trustworthy and reliable witnesses. Edit to add Come to think of it I can't think of any dishonest college grads Edited May 4, 2011 by indiefoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Ask SusiQ, she used to review books. She did not get paid for her reviews, but they do give you the books for free. As I understand it, it's strictly personal opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CaptainMorgan Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Bob Gimlin along with thousands and thousands of other "eye witnesses"...so why take his opinion, I get Jane Goodall and Meldrum, but a cowboy with a "supposed" sighting? Bob Gimlin = 0 proof - score 0 And that's why most of the skeptic banter is just a dog chasing it's tail. The defacto answers are "no it's not" and "I refuse to believe it". Like a Monty Python skit I recall, just not funny as the context is all wrong. An eyewitness testimony is an eye witness testimony, no matter if the person is a cowboy, a plummer or psychologist. I fully discount all of the skeptic posts, because most all of them carry little weight and are biased to such a degree as to not be credit worthy. And another thing . . . I don't believe in faeries and leprechauns, but I don't feel obliged to hang out in forums for such and spend my waking hours arguing with people I think are lunatics. So why are you skeptics here again? . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Blackdog Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 (edited) So because I believe that the Patterson film, the Minnesota Iceman and the BCM prints are hoaxes I shouldn't be a member here? Edited May 4, 2011 by Blackdog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CaptainMorgan Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 HA! You're gonna have to try harder than that to bait me. What you believe and don't is no concern of mine. (as in how little I care) I just can't take you (anyone) seriously if you have the constant position that bigfoot isn't real or that eye witness accounts and the sheer amount of anecdotal evidence is all staged and all wrong. If that's the case, Comcast cable has hundreds of hi def option are may be a better use of your time. Try to stay on topic K? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Blackdog Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 I was responding to YOUR off topic post. K? What I do with my free time is none of your concern. If you have a problem with who is a member here I suggest you take it up with the staff . Unless, of course you think it's your job to police the forum and not theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts