Is The Skookum Cast Still Considered To Be A Potential Bigfoot Lay?

[CMBigfoot]

 

Science and bigfoot sometimes don't go together. This is a perfect example in my opinion. Do you (or anyone) think Dr Meldrum is confident in his findings with this impression? How should this effect my confidence in future findings when things like this stick out like a sore thumb and nothing is addressed or revised? It gives me confidence that the scientists involved are not above confirmation bias, and not above reproach. In my opinion when it degrades to that point - it is no longer science. It is laughable. That is exactly what things like this bring to the table for bigfoot enthusiasts. Bigfooters say that they want this subject to be taken more serious. The scientists involved say they want the subject taken more serious. Yet- things like this are not addressed and requests for revision + opposing evidence ignored. As long as "we" collectively consume it - it's going to keep happening. When "we" as a whole stand up and say BS things can change. I'm hoping that may be the case with this skookum cast.

The evidence is overwhelming - yet it remains officially a bigfoot impression to Dr Meldrum.

Bigfoot:

no tracks leading up to or away from said impression

no hairs

nothing identifiable as bigfoot there.

to believe this scenario you must believe and have faith in the words of bigfoot enthusiasts - because that is the only evidence of any bigfoot there is words. You also must believe that the bigfoot performed some neat gymnastics and that it left no hairs in the mud despite leaving excellent hair impressions that had elk hairs in it.

Elk:

tracks present leading up to and away from impression.

hairs present.

the impression is identifiable as an elk impression.

to believe this scenario you can rely on facts and physical evidence.

 

 

I agree with this.

[yowiie]

I have to agree with CMBigfoots last post and the images they have presented. How anyone in there right mind can justify there argument that its a BF impression, they couldn't be further from the truth

[Martin]

Yes....to what cmbigfoot linked.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

I've learned that one shouldn't always accept something simply because some guy with a PhD beside his name said it. Just look at how many times Dr. Meldrum has fallen for hoaxes. If Dr. Swindler is right or wrong about something, then that should be the basis for accepting or not accepting what he's saying. Age, reputation, history ect. shouldn't be factors.

[Guest Crowlogic]

 

 

Science and bigfoot sometimes don't go together. This is a perfect example in my opinion. Do you (or anyone) think Dr Meldrum is confident in his findings with this impression? How should this effect my confidence in future findings when things like this stick out like a sore thumb and nothing is addressed or revised? It gives me confidence that the scientists involved are not above confirmation bias, and not above reproach. In my opinion when it degrades to that point - it is no longer science. It is laughable. That is exactly what things like this bring to the table for bigfoot enthusiasts. Bigfooters say that they want this subject to be taken more serious. The scientists involved say they want the subject taken more serious. Yet- things like this are not addressed and requests for revision + opposing evidence ignored. As long as "we" collectively consume it - it's going to keep happening. When "we" as a whole stand up and say BS things can change. I'm hoping that may be the case with this skookum cast.

The evidence is overwhelming - yet it remains officially a bigfoot impression to Dr Meldrum.

Bigfoot:

no tracks leading up to or away from said impression

no hairs

nothing identifiable as bigfoot there.

to believe this scenario you must believe and have faith in the words of bigfoot enthusiasts - because that is the only evidence of any bigfoot there is words. You also must believe that the bigfoot performed some neat gymnastics and that it left no hairs in the mud despite leaving excellent hair impressions that had elk hairs in it.

Elk:

tracks present leading up to and away from impression.

hairs present.

the impression is identifiable as an elk impression.

to believe this scenario you can rely on facts and physical evidence.

 

 

I agree with this.

 

Odds botkins man any fool can see a bigfoot made that impression!  

 

Edited August 13, 2015 by Crowlogic

[Guest DWA]

I've learned that one shouldn't always accept something simply because some guy with a PhD beside his name said it. Just look at how many times Dr. Meldrum has fallen for hoaxes. If Dr. Swindler is right or wrong about something, then that should be the basis for accepting or not accepting what he's saying. Age, reputation, history ect. shouldn't be factors.

One never accepts something because credentials.  That's why bigfoot skepticism gets it all wrong; it's a fail on every count, but the most telling is the argument from authority.  When you tell me you are right because of somebody's opinion who doesn't know half what I do about something, I know to apply sniff test to everything you say.  (And that you are gonna probably flunk it.)

 

Swindler's assertion comes from long experience in the field; he is one of the few in the field who can be said to have made any assessment at all of sasquatch on any basis other than denial of all outside of canon.  For that reason and that one alone, his assertion stands until debunked.

 

Period.

[Faenor]

I've learned that one shouldn't always accept something simply because some guy with a PhD beside his name said it. Just look at how many times Dr. Meldrum has fallen for hoaxes. If Dr. Swindler is right or wrong about something, then that should be the basis for accepting or not accepting what he's saying. Age, reputation, history ect. shouldn't be factors.

One never accepts something because credentials.  That's why bigfoot skepticism gets it all wrong; it's a fail on every count, but the most telling is the argument from authority.  When you tell me you are right because of somebody's opinion who doesn't know half what I do about something, I know to apply sniff test to everything you say.  (And that you are gonna probably flunk it.)

 

Swindler's assertion comes from long experience in the field; he is one of the few in the field who can be said to have made any assessment at all of sasquatch on any basis other than denial of all outside of canon.  For that reason and that one alone, his assertion stands until debunked.

 

Period.

It appears to have been debunked at this point so his assertion falls. A black mark on an otherwise successful career.

Chalk up another victory for the scofftics.

[Guest]

 

Swindler's assertion comes from long experience in the field; he is one of the few in the field who can be said to have made any assessment at all of sasquatch on any basis other than denial of all outside of canon.  For that reason and that one alone, his assertion stands until debunked.

 

Period.

 

I'll take the opinion of an excellent professional who spent time working on some the USA's most infamous crime cases ever........over somebody who didn't show much professionalism and spent time messing about on internet forums arguing against bigfoot under a silly pseudonym and calling other scientists names. If you Google the old JREF posts of his you can still see his "woo" insults.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Neanderfoot

[Guest]

It appears to have been debunked at this point so his assertion falls. A black mark on an otherwise successful career.

Chalk up another victory for the scofftics.

 

 

Nothing has been debunked and there is no victory. Swindler's reputation and standing remains as it was.

Chalk up yet another failure for the scoftics. 

[yowiie]

Neander

This is not a failure, it's fact, you need to get your head around it

You want to believe that this is a cast of a bigfoot impression and your taking the word of a guy that's studied teeth

The image in the above pist says it all, and yet you continue to back swindlers assessment. Really

I know BF exist and no way is this an impression of a BF,

Edited August 14, 2015 by yowiie

[Faenor]

If your talking about me I've never been a member of the jref. If you think so im curious to see what you think I've posted. Cmon post them for everyone to see this should be funny.

Never the less if you took the time to pay attention to the thread you would notice the skookum cast has been debunked and at this point its incredibly bizarre that anyone would still think it was a bigfoot. Swindler was a depends clad senior citizen well past his prime at his skookum viewing and an internet forum about bigfoot is no place for professionalism. Its a forum about a silly but fun subject matter. Even the great bill munns spends some time down in the mud hurling cheap insults at his detractors.

Skookum debate scoreboard

Scofftics:1. Believers/ knowers:0

Game over

[Guest DWA]

 

It appears to have been debunked at this point so his assertion falls. A black mark on an otherwise successful career.

Chalk up another victory for the scofftics.

 

 

Nothing has been debunked and there is no victory. Swindler's reputation and standing remains as it was.

Chalk up yet another failure for the scoftics. 

 

I am not at all sure how anyone could consider denial a victory of any kind.  It represents a window on the world that hasn't been washed.  In centuries.

 

Wonder is always on the side of science.  Those who fail to understand this...don't get the first thing about science.

 

 

Swindler's assertion comes from long experience in the field; he is one of the few in the field who can be said to have made any assessment at all of sasquatch on any basis other than denial of all outside of canon.  For that reason and that one alone, his assertion stands until debunked.

 

Period.

 

I'll take the opinion of an excellent professional who spent time working on some the USA's most infamous crime cases ever........over somebody who didn't show much professionalism and spent time messing about on internet forums arguing against bigfoot under a silly pseudonym and calling other scientists names. If you Google the old JREF posts of his you can still see his "woo" insults.

 

The most astonishing thing about bigfoot skepticism is "I don't know what I am talking about, here, watch...but I surely know more than this guy anyone who reads English at high-school level knows did his homework, while I did not."

I have to agree with CMBigfoots last post and the images they have presented. How anyone in there right mind can justify there argument that its a BF impression, they couldn't be further from the truth

Swindler's right mind is justified by evidence that is right there in the cast, evidence that stands unaddressed other than by someone who knows what that is.

 

Besides elk don't levitate, I mean.  Let's allow all the woo on sasquatch to pass unexamined, if we're just gonna conclude that elk levitate.

[Guest Crowlogic]

 

 

It appears to have been debunked at this point so his assertion falls. A black mark on an otherwise successful career.

Chalk up another victory for the scofftics.

 

 

Nothing has been debunked and there is no victory. Swindler's reputation and standing remains as it was.

Chalk up yet another failure for the scoftics. 

 

I am not at all sure how anyone could consider denial a victory of any kind.  It represents a window on the world that hasn't been washed.  In centuries.

 

Wonder is always on the side of science.  Those who fail to understand this...don't get the first thing about science.

 

 

Swindler's assertion comes from long experience in the field; he is one of the few in the field who can be said to have made any assessment at all of sasquatch on any basis other than denial of all outside of canon.  For that reason and that one alone, his assertion stands until debunked.

 

Period.

 

I'll take the opinion of an excellent professional who spent time working on some the USA's most infamous crime cases ever........over somebody who didn't show much professionalism and spent time messing about on internet forums arguing against bigfoot under a silly pseudonym and calling other scientists names. If you Google the old JREF posts of his you can still see his "woo" insults.

 

The most astonishing thing about bigfoot skepticism is "I don't know what I am talking about, here, watch...but I surely know more than this guy anyone who reads English at high-school level knows did his homework, while I did not."

I have to agree with CMBigfoots last post and the images they have presented. How anyone in there right mind can justify there argument that its a BF impression, they couldn't be further from the truth

Swindler's right mind is justified by evidence that is right there in the cast, evidence that stands unaddressed other than by someone who knows what that is.

 

Besides elk don't levitate, I mean.  Let's allow all the woo on sasquatch to pass unexamined, if we're just gonna conclude that elk levitate.

 

I was going to say bigfoot don't levitate either but then again bigfoot can do anything and have reported to having done just about everything.  Skookum Cast= bigfootism self deception at it's finest.

[Guest]

DWA,

Where did you aquire your expertise regarding elk behaviour? No doubt, out in the field spending countless hours watching elk. Have you seen all of the different ways an elk might stand up?

Just because you don't understand the impression doesn't mean a Bigfoot made it. Your conclusion that the only way an elk could have made that impression is with levitation is just smoke and mirrors trying to make the logical sound absurd.

There's no Bigfoot tracks either, do Bigfoot fly in your world? There was elk hair found in the impression but no Bigfoot hair, did the Bigfoot collect all his hair, then pluck an elk and sprinkle the hair around as a diversion?

I'm sorry but this has been solved. Maybe next time it will be a Bigfoot.

[SWWASAS]

From my footprint find experience with how fussy BF are about avoiding even stepping in mud, it would surprise me greatly if BF would lay down in mud to get an apple. They are even more fussy about stepping in mud than humans are while wearing boots. When BF can avoid mud at all they do. I just don't think it likely that the skookum cast is a BF for that and other reasons others have mentioned.

Edited August 15, 2015 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT