Guest Particle Noun Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Wow. Now we're going after James Randi. Bigfoot, and the BFF, is aparently part of the demon haunted world. Perhaps we can ask Sylvia Browne and Uri Geller to tell us where a Sasquatch is so we can take a good picture of it. Without science, reason, and logic, there will never be an answer to this mystery. This thread seems to be veering into some dangerous ground, but I want to respond to this. I think it's very appropriate that you bring up Sylvia Browne and Uri Geller into this discussion, as for me Randi is the equivalent to folks of that caliber, but over on the Scoftics side of the fence (Randi is to me the epitome of Scoftic rather than skeptic). You are right that without Science, reason and logic, there will never be an answer to this mystery. However, if it were up to Randi, no scientific eye or mind would EVER be turned toward this mystery, except to cast childish ridicule and derision at it. One doesn't have to have embrace the fringe of Pseudo-science to have distaste toward James Randi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Tontar, don't forget that many "insiders" in bigfootery are alleged to have seen much better video that we have, and better than the PGF. If anyone has seen such film, then I'm assuming that Dr Meldrum has.......and I guess that he therefore may have more evidence for some of his theories than he is currently allowed to say publicly. Pure speculation on my account, I promise. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 (edited) Wow. Now we're going after James Randi. Bigfoot, and the BFF, is aparently part of the demon haunted world. Perhaps we can ask Sylvia Browne and Uri Geller to tell us where a Sasquatch is so we can take a good picture of it. Without science, reason, and logic, there will never be an answer to this mystery. Did you even bother to read the information in the links? The "demon haunted world" has nothing to do with it. Randi sets a challenge, then sets the rules to make it unwinnable. Yet here you are defending him as using "science, reason, and logic"? Exactly how are rigged challenges "scientific", "reasonable" or "logical"? This is the sort of psuedo-skeptical nonsense that honest investigators of a wide variety of subjects have to put up with. ETA: Particle, I'd give you an entire week's worth of plusses for that last post if I could.... Edited June 20, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Yes! And I also wonder how dermal ridges could be imprinted in, and then casts taken from, such rugged soils. I would be interested to see if there are any ape casts taken in the wild that also have dermal ridges. Then you would be interested in the archeological findings at Pendejo cave in southern New Mexico. Human friction skin imprints were found in clay that were baked near a fire and preserved. This wouldn't be rugged soil, but as far as I know, the tracks with dermals haven't been associated with rugged soil per se'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tontar Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Ah, Mike, you're teasing again! Seems like there's always some secret video, or secret something that we mere mortals are never going to be privy to. The Erickson videos are more of the same, right? One frame from that video released thats hows next to nothing of a supposed sleeping female sasquatch, flat out on the ground, behind a tree. But there's supposedly full face shots too, but we have not seen those, and the eyes supposedly don't blink in that one. When will that set of videos see the light of day? One of the worst things about bigfootery is the wait and see deal that is so rampant in it. Just wait, you'll see. And we never do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spurfoot Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 (edited) Bigfootnis, while I appreciate and understand the general tenor of what you are saying about witness credibility, and have using similar criteria myself, I don't think it always applies to scientists such Meldrum and Ketchum, both of whom have seen Bigfoot up close. Further Ketchum has the DNA evidence which she and her coauthors alone have seen. Either seeing a BF or knowing and understanding the DNA would lead to complete conviction about the reality of such. Therefore I think you are incorrect in discrediting Ketchum based upon her obvious conviction. As for Meldrum, he is surely as convinced but only took care to state it cautiously because of the long-term skepticism from his fellow faculty. In a certain sense then, it is actually Ketchum who is therefore being more straightforward. Not that I blame Meldrum. He is being cagey for obvious reasons. Indeed, my own convictions arise for cause that I choose not to reveal until Ketchum's paper is actually published. I don't want to do anything that jeopardizes her publication due to a journal's arcane rules. I expect it to be a fine and convincing paper. As an aside, I once invited a local judge to deliver a lecture on witness credibility evaluation. There is an entire legal journal devoted to the subject but I don't recall the name of it. The judge chose to talk about his own techniques for evaluation instead of using the scholarly corpus of knowledge. It was an interesting lecture. Edited June 20, 2012 by spurfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuyInIndiana Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 Bigfootnis, while I appreciate and understand the general tenor of what you are saying about witness credibility, and have using similar criteria myself, I don't think it always applies to scientists such Meldrum and Ketchum, both of whom have seen Bigfoot up close. Uuuuhhhmmm.... Meldrum has seen one up close? Since when? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 (edited) Can anyone explain why she suddenly removed the Facebook page? Uuuuhhhmmm.... Meldrum has seen one up close? Since when? According to Robert Lindsay Dr. Meldrum has, but he refuses to acknowledge it. Edited June 20, 2012 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 HR Puff N Stuff has a video that is better than the PGF. It has 2 sasquatches grooming eachother. Sometimes you just gotta have juice to be able to see this stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tontar Posted June 20, 2012 Share Posted June 20, 2012 HR Puff N Stuff has a video that is better than the PGF. It has 2 sasquatches grooming eachother. Sometimes you just gotta have juice to be able to see this stuff. Oh yeah? where? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Bigfootnis, while I appreciate and understand the general tenor of what you are saying about witness credibility, and have using similar criteria myself, I don't think it always applies to scientists such Meldrum and Ketchum, both of whom have seen Bigfoot up close. ................ No offense but as I read it this statement, according to what Bigfootnis said, could give you a -1 for credibility. It is an absolute statement that you have no way of knowing for sure. I am now braced for a blast of "righteous indignation". Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spurfoot Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 No righteous indignation from me Martin. As with anyone on this forum, I take refuge in the simple fact that email (or the forum equivalent) seldom conveys the full intent or qualifications intended in a statement. Sure I could have added all kinds of qualifications to that statement. Maybe some day I will do so. An abbreviated form of communication almost always omits all proper qualifications due to the abbreviated nature of these communications. Basically I make no apologies, and neither should you. It is the nature of forum and email communications that they are seldom a scholarly treatise fully qualified. If you, the receiver of such abbreviation communication take exception to it, I don't blame you, but only state the obvious limitations of casual "conversation". I will let Meldrum speak for himself on whether he wants to talk about any alleged sighting. Suffice it to say, I have some cause for the my previous statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Can anyone explain why she suddenly removed the Facebook page? From her personal FB page: "I decided to unpub for awhile as I have no time to answer people plus we continue to have problems with posers. It will go back up in the future but until I catch up, wouldn't you all prefer that I am working on things to forward this research?" Oh yeah? where? Beginning with post #42 in this thread: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 (edited) According to Robert Lindsay Dr. Meldrum has, but he refuses to acknowledge it. Given the crapstorm that gets flung at anyone in research who even voices an open-minded opinion, let alone who claims a sighting, can you blame him? Edited June 21, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronD Posted June 21, 2012 Share Posted June 21, 2012 Tontar, don't forget that many "insiders" in bigfootery are alleged to have seen much better video that we have, and better than the PGF. If anyone has seen such film, then I'm assuming that Dr Meldrum has.......and I guess that he therefore may have more evidence for some of his theories than he is currently allowed to say publicly. Pure speculation on my account, I promise. Mike Oh no, MikeG--it's a fact, and you don't have to be polite about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts