southernyahoo Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 In Chilcut's defense, I do believe he has busted a hoax or two, where someone had used their finger to make the toes, and he identified them as human finger tip dermals. So I don't color him as biased. There was one track, not sure of it's name, where Jimmy felt he had found a healed scar. This causes the dermals to curl inward towards the cut. That would be one worth revisiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 I realize now it could be a few more months to years before anything is published. I hope you guys are mentally ready for that. According to Robert Lindsay Doctor Ketchum will eventually get it published somewhere even if the current journal refuses to publish it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 ^That bodes not well...if she can't get it to press soon, Sykes is going to scoop her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 I don't care who scoops who...I am just dying of curiosity to find out what the results are! I love learning new things and this subject is sooo interesting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Just think of it, the subject of who scoops whom is probably good for hundreds more forum pages. As always, hoping for the best but expecting less...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 I reckon we might have a huge pile of new data on this very subject once the Washington Trackway is properly analyzed. I mean, it was in mud, and there were, what, upwards of 70 consecutive tracks? I hope to see some very interesting results from that in terms of Track Analysis. I would think Dr. Meldrum is working on the London tracks by now. It will be interesting to see if there are any that have the same patterns. That seems to have been an excellent substrate, if they got to them before the rain... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 For the record, guys, I don't particularly care who scoops whom either...if Skyes' entry into the arena lights a fire under Ketchum to get her paper in order and out, then so much the better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tontar Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 (edited) Most of Mulder's recent posts are peppered with as many terms for logical fallacies as possible: question begging, ad hom and so on. Whatever, have at it. Dr. Meldrum is an expert in the study of an animal yet to be confirmed to exist, yet to have a single type specimen. He has casts of footprints to go on, primarily, and footprint study does not necessarily lead to a positive identification of an animal not yet classified. I hope the Ketchum study comes clean soon, so that there will be some closure to at least this thread. If there's DNA evidence, very cool, bring it on. I want to see bigfoot DNA, I want to see bigfoot specimens, I wang to see bigfoots wandering around in their natural environment, because all this waiting and arguing in the mean time gets old. Edited June 20, 2012 by Tontar .....minor adjustment to personal comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Hold on there, Sas...I missed this the first time. I deleted the rest of your post to save some BW. That apparently isn't all you missed. Context. You have a propensity for taking things completely out of context to forward your very own invalid appeal to/ argument from authority position. Let's review: First, JohnC said this: I am sure than can be faked, Dr Meldrum is qualified to tell a fake, or an artifact, from the real deal, or at least capable of giving an educated answer, the moon landing "could" have been faked, so it must have been huh? I did not have time to look right now, but I will later,and see if that Anthropologist is also a foot and locomotion expert, and if his credential exceed Dr Meldrums. In the mean time Drew, I am still waiting on hearing your credentials, I take it all with a grain of salt, I do not have the credentials to pass judgement on those that have. Then CG said this: Well, for one you might want to be able to examine the same casts. That makes the difference between assuming something to be true and having a reasonable argument for something being true. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying that in order to be sure of something you'd have to examine the same casts, and since you aren't an expert, perhaps even a bit of communication with Meldrum about why he considers the casting artifacts to be dermal ridges. Who knows, he may have a valid reason for it that you, not being an expert in primate locomotion, have overlooked. As far as PGF being a fake is concerned, I'm not sure where you are getting your information. I know at least one fellow, perhaps a number, have come out saying that they were the person in the suit, but I'm unaware if Patterson or Gimlin themselves ever said so. Then Saskeptic said this: In other words, because Meldrum makes public statements supporting their pet beliefs, it's perfectly okay to commit the argument from authority fallacy. Taken in the actual context the relevant statements were made, Saskeptic is simply pointing out that that JohnC and CG's "expertizing" of Doc Meldrum as a latent print and dematoglyphic guru is rather agenda driven and is indeed completely untenable as a relevant opinion. Wouldn't you agree? If not, maybe one of you three would like to take a shot at explaining to the forum what expertise Meldrum has when it comes to evaluating latent print evidence. It think it's fairly obvious that biomechanics and locomotion have no overlapping areas of study with latent print examination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 It think it's fairly obvious that biomechanics and locomotion have no overlapping areas of study with latent print examination. Which is why Dr. Meldrum worked with Chilcutt. This news article is an interesting review of their work together: http://extras.denverpost.com/news/news0114a.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 willinyc, and Saskeptic, perhaps you missed this line when discussing Meldrums credentials. Meldrum is an expert on foot morphology and locomotion in primates Saskeptic, I did not realize your education also included being an expert in this area,or are you trying to tell me it does not matter what science you pursue, it makes you an expert on everything? No offence, you have the right to your opinion, but it carries little weight, just like any other anonymous internet skeptic, who claims to know something. Besides, these are not giant bird tracks they are finding, if they where, I would be arguing in favor of your apparent credentials. The argument from authority fallacy does not come from Dr Meldrum, it comes from those who would have us believe they are enough of an authority to call Dr Meldrum stupid, or a profiteer, or Meldumb, and any other plethora of immature, unprofessional comments that one would not expect to hear from such upstanding pillars of science, and superior critical thinkers. We are still for realing here huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 In Dr Meldrum's defense, I have to say the man is very intelligent. My official academic credentials include degrees in psychology and while that doesn't incline or license me to bully my opinions on the science of primates, anthropology, or BF; it does afford me some introspection of the individual I'm conversing with. I can say, having had a 20 minute conversation with Jeff at the East coast convention last fall, the man is looking to gain nothing--except more knowledge. Like everyone, he has his own opinions but he has no problem changing them when/if evidence warrants it. I kinda wish everyone was a bit more like Dr Meldrum. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 (edited) Taken in the actual context the relevant statements were made, Saskeptic is simply pointing out that that JohnC and CG's "expertizing" of Doc Meldrum as a latent print and dematoglyphic guru is rather agenda driven and is indeed completely untenable as a relevant opinion. Wouldn't you agree? If not, maybe one of you three would like to take a shot at explaining to the forum what expertise Meldrum has when it comes to evaluating latent print evidence. It think it's fairly obvious that biomechanics and locomotion have no overlapping areas of study with latent print examination. No I would not. Even if Medrum is not a forensic print examiner (as Officer Chilcutt is), in his work with primate locomotion research he would be well acquainted with primate tracks and their characteristics, including dermatoglyphics. Now if it came to a dispute between Chilcutt and Meldrum over the topic, I'd give Chilcutt a (slightly) higher opinion rating, because that is his direct area of expertise. Based on what I've seen and heard about Dr Meldrum, I feel safe in saying he'd be the first to agree. Edited June 20, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crittergetter Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Taken in the actual context the relevant statements were made, Saskeptic is simply pointing out that that JohnC and CG's "expertizing" of Doc Meldrum as a latent print and dematoglyphic guru is rather agenda driven and is indeed completely untenable as a relevant opinion. Wouldn't you agree? If not, maybe one of you three would like to take a shot at explaining to the forum what expertise Meldrum has when it comes to evaluating latent print evidence. It think it's fairly obvious that biomechanics and locomotion have no overlapping areas of study with latent print examination. This is true. My statement would make the indication that I am assuming that Dr. Meldrum would be an expert in foot 'prints', so to speak. It was an assumption that I made without thinking, and I should have been more careful with my words. However, it is irrelevant if indeed Meldrum has had a person, Officer Chilcutt, who is an expert in prints examine them, as Mulder has stated. It is also rather interesting that this fellow, having examined said prints, came to the conclusion that there were some in Meldrum's collection that were legitimate. Precisely how many were fakes and how many were not was not mentioned in the article that I read, so I'm afraid I can't speak to that. Though that any were seen as a legitimate footprint from a real animal should be groundbreaking, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 ^ Perhaps you misunderstood the article's notation about Chilcutt finding a couple of casts with dermals. My reading of that section of the article noted that Chilcutt found two casts with dermals in Meldrum's collection. The article said nothing about how many casts in Meldrum's collection actually have any dermals, but did note that dermals in one other cast were from a human finger (likely from someone touching the bottom of the print). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts