Wired.com article slams RadioWest producer for being too easy on Dr. Jeff Meldrum
In the Bigfoot community, Dr. Jeff Meldrum is bonafide hero. He has worked very hard in bringing Bigfoot from the fringes of science into the mainstream of society. According to RadioWest producer Doug Fabrizio, cryptozoologist Jeff Meldrum catches a lot of flak from his academic colleagues for his field of research. The critics disdain his ongoing study of Sasquatch. But Meldrum, an expert in bipedal locomotion, is convinced by the evidence that Bigfoot exists. Meldrum believes that by discrediting the study of creatures whose existence is unproven countermands the scientific commitment to explore the unknown.
In an article for Wired.com, Brian Switek took offense to the fact that during his interview with Dr. Meldrum, Fabrizio refused to ask any tough questions. "In both the Science Friday and RadioWest interviews, I think the hosts did a disservice to listeners and fellow science communicators by putting on kid gloves and not doing the thing that is essential to good journalism – critically and carefully questioning your sources," wrote Switek.
While listening to the radio interview, Switek was hoping the host would ask more critical questions, instead he claimed that some questions that were asked sounded "sympathetic to Meldrum's exceptional claims."
"Almost all of Fabrizio’s questions were uncritical. Some, such as when Fabrizio asked when the search for Sasquatch supposedly became academically taboo, were even sympathetic to Meldrum’s exceptional claims. When Meldrum retells the story of how he saw tracks that convinced him that Bigfoot was real, Fabrizio doesn’t ask about how Meldrum could tell that the tracks were from a real animal and could not have been hoaxed."
Here's what Switek wrote in the article regarding the RadioWest interview with Dr. Meldrum:
For the November 11th show, RadioWest producer Doug Fabrizio interviewed Idaho State University anthropologist and Sasquatch devotee Jeff Meldrum. The stated point of the interview was to see how Meldrum applied scientific reasoning to the search for a creature that, at best, exists on the fringes of scientific investigation. That’s not what actually transpired.
Even though Fabrizio kept qualifying statements about the ever-elusive Bigfoot with “if”s, he was clearly sympathetic to Meldrum’s efforts to give the mythical North American forest ape an air of respectability. The show was more about how Meldrum became attracted to the cryptozoological celebrity and his feelings as someone trying to prove the existence of a creature that, as far as I am concerned, probably doesn’t exist and has been a persistent focus of interest due to cultural phenomena rather than actual evidence. (As I wrote in a story for WIRED Science, there comes a time in searches for missing or presumably extinct mammal species that returns rapidly diminish and that species is more likely absent than simply elusive. So many have searched for Bigfoot for so long without finding any unambiguous evidence that I don’t see any reason to think such an animal exists.)
Almost all of Fabrizio’s questions were uncritical. Some, such as when Fabrizio asked when the search for Sasquatch supposedly became academically taboo, were even sympathetic to Meldrum’s exceptional claims. When Meldrum retells the story of how he saw tracks that convinced him that Bigfoot was real, Fabrizio doesn’t ask about how Meldrum could tell that the tracks were from a real animal and could not have been hoaxed. When Meldrum goes off about how he has brought Bigfoot into the scientific mainstream through papers, talks at conferences, and the like, Fabrizio doesn’t ask “Well, which journals and conferences? What did you say? How was your work received by your colleagues?” Likewise, Fabrizio lets Meldrum state that there is a lot of photo evidence – albeit poor quality – of Bigfoot as well as hair and scat without digging into the details of those assertions and why those lines of evidence have not done more to confirm the supposed ape’s existence. I didn’t want Fabrizio to be actively hostile to Meldrum’s ideas, but the radio host did not seem prepared to challenge his guest on any point.
The interview was mostly about feelings. What Meldrum felt about this or that aspect of Bigfoot arcana was more important than the veracity of what he was actually saying. I don’t take issue with RadioWest having cryptozoologists or other people who make exceptional claims on the show, but, for FSM’s sake, hold them to account and push them to explain why they believe what they do. If someone keeps saying there’s really good evidence for Bigfoot, Triassic Krakens, ancient aliens, or whatever, we shouldn’t be afraid of pressing them on how good that evidence actually is. To say that evidence is good is one thing. To demonstrate the same is not as easy.
In both the Science Friday and RadioWest interviews, I think the hosts did a disservice to listeners and fellow science communicators by putting on kid gloves and not doing the thing that is essential to good journalism – critically and carefully questioning your sources. That is not to say that Flatow and Fabrizio should now carry the black spot of bad science reporting. I have heard both of them conduct good interviews before. In part, that’s what bugged me. I kept waiting for them to ask the kind of questions that I know they could ask to get behind some of the sensational hypotheses.
Click here to download the RadioWest interview with Dr. Jeff Meldrum in MP3 format.
[via www.wired.com]
I do not know who Brian Switek is, or his credential to comment on Jeff Meldrum. My guess is he just another academian sitting at a chair commenting on a subject he knows nothing about.
ReplyDeleteChuck in Ohio
What I find puzzling is that he seems to take issue with the fact Meldrum was not asked questions he has answered 100 times before.
ReplyDeleteDr. Meldrum has answered the questions that were "not asked" 100 times and has given the same answers. How many times must he say "mid torsel break which is like a hinge in the foot humans do not have and dermal ridges.
Brian Switek is one of these people who does not want Bigfoot to exist and he will do anything to interefere and ridicule those intelligent enough to understand the world is extremely complex. He wants everything in the world to fit neatly into organized boxes that can be stacked evenly and is bothered by the fact this is not how the world works. Certain people can't deal with the fact that unanswered questions exist about everything and there are things that will never be explained. In this world everything can change on a dime in an instant and people like Switek want to always feel in control.
I would like to ask him these questions. If parts of Natural forrest have never been explored how do you know what is and is not in these areas. If much of British Columbia has not been explored how do you know what is and is not in these areas. Why do world renown Chinese scientists, highly respected people by all in their fields throughout the world plainly state they cannot speak about the studies of the Yaren. If people just see hairy men in the woods and its part of our psychology why have I never seen one. Why have many experienced hunters and Rangers never seen one. A massive number of sightings have been had throughout the world- there are alot of people who have lived throughout history and alot of people in the world now. At most 25% of people claim to have sightings- how is something ingrained in the human psych when 75% of people show no signs of this.
Teddy Roosevelt, Davey Crockett, Daniel Boone, Lewis and Clarke the early spanish explorers and many others we revere as being anything but crazy people all reported science. Look at the reverence we give to what these others say.
I do not say this lightly but every problem in the world is the result of people like Switik. People who are ignorant and closed minded and who don't only have their opinions but make it a part of their life to ridicule those with a different opinion so as to feel secure in their ignorance. This is a large problem that is illustrated by this topic very well. People are scared to talk about this because they know people like Switik will lie and do whatever to ridicule these people and label them crazy because what they say does not comport with how they see the world. The biggest reason why the existence of the creature has not been established is because of all the evidence that exists but we dont know about because those with this knowledge are afraid to speak out.
I also want to say the following: Switik represents this thought process that has evolved the last 50 years that defines ignorance. They refuse to acknowledge that mistakes could have been made and that information we think is accurate is not. These people act like past generations could not possibly ever make mistakes- is this world one where we can positively say that mistakes are never made and we always get the right answers? Switik is one of those who believes we now have all the answers and rather than self reflect and accept this is just wrong every action he takes is to try and prove this world view is correct. Think of it this way- if this view prevailed in the past would we have ever traveled to space. If Switik were around in 1900 he would likely be calling for the Wright brothers to be locked up because man does not have wings so he will never fly.
ReplyDeleteI doubt he will read this but if he does he is right about one things Meldrum is criticized by his colleagues- not because they do not believe in Bigfoot but because their are other questions in science they believe more important and that all efforts and resourced should be spent on those. I have spoken with those in this field about this and that is what the consensus is. Deal with Bigfoot in "due course" after we determine the answers to many other questions that are more important.
I once had a guy like this argue me that I was not being "open minded" because I stated that I had an encouter with a sasquatch and I was confident of their existence. The same person truly believed that I was closed minded and they were being "Open minded." I had to laugh. In their opinion, if I refused to simply say that I was imagining things or I was mistaken, I was not open minded.
ReplyDeleteSwitik would have argued that the world was flat too.
This guy needs to read Sasquatch Legend Meet Science. Meldrum answers (very thorougly) every question posed to him and gives numerous amounts of scientific data to back his findings. Further, he takes to task other naysayers who blurt out things such as Switik. Meldrum does so with evidence, not opinion.
If you have not read this book, you are missing out.
I will probably (maybe) listen to the interview..but what I find compelling is this: wired.com...mainstream relative to most BF venues. The attitude of the writer probably more in line with mainstream - and what they want to know and view as credible evidence. Yes, most of us who have looked deeply know what that evidence is, but it is mostly tucked away on tabloid websites or in private hands. And a few great books.
ReplyDeleteAll of which mainstream has no motivation to wade through. The BF community has done a great job of ensuring through amateur and competitive and often unethical efforts that PhD's like Meldrum are burdened by that history. He has to put on a lab coat and speak in an overly controlled manner to persuade the viewer he is not a BF looney..
This will all change...it is already, actually.
who ever that prick is who questioned the good dr's verasity needs to direct those ? to his academic detractors
ReplyDeleteI would also like to point out something Switick does not understand that being the concept of having class.
ReplyDeleteDr. Meldrum was kind enough to appear on this show when he could have been doing other things. The host in return was respectful and did not challenge Dr. Meldrum. Switick finds fault with the host not returning Dr. Meldrum's courtesy with an unprovoked attack under circumstances where Dr. Meldrum is likely denied an ample opportunity to respond.
Taking class and civility out of the analysis shows just how stupid and ignorant Switick actually is. If the host were to attack dr. Meldrum then word would get out to other potential guests and then nobody would agree to be on his show. This is not "Larry King Live" where just being on is considered an honor and form of compensation in and of itself. Switick is angry this guy did not do things that would result in his show being negatively impacted.
As the poster above noted Dr. Meldrum wrote a book where he answers these questions. Switick likely cant read but could get the audio version. It is understood that Meldrum will not be asked these questions because if he answers them then nobody will buy his book. Why would Meldrum just give this away when the point of writing the book was and is for people to buy it. Not one author of any book written for sale is asked or expected to answer questions answered or addressed in the book.
Why would an author ever give an interview when they know doing so will cost them money.
Bigfoot has nothing to do with this. The interview was conducted in the normal manner and was handled like interviews with all authors. Switick only wants to hear himself talk and does not care it makes him look like buffoon- as long as they know his name.
Being critical of someone being civil and respectful what a jerk.
The most pertinent point Dr. Meldrum has ever made with regards to bigfoot research, in my opinion, is that science has not performed due diligence on the bigfoot phenomena.
ReplyDeleteAt the heart of science, in my view, is the attempt to explain the unknown.
The bigfoot phenomena, with thousands of witness reports, sound recordings, video, footprints and a long cultural history of existence is a definite example of an unknown phenomena. Scientists should therefore be attracted to this topic, not repelled.
But to clarify to some of you reading this thinking I am acting like sasquatch already exists, scientists should be open to the possibility that it does not exist and that it does exist. I have never seen one face to face snd I can not say 100% that it does exist.
People who automatically discredit every film, picture, eyewitness account, or shred of evidence are just as much a zealot as the people who see blobsquatches everywhere and believe everything coming down the pipeline.
I believe one should keep a skeptical, but open mind, and its ok to admit the data is inconclusive at this point.
Here's an idea... Switick should schedule an interview and perform the journalistic due diligence he feels lacks in this one. He had better do his homework first, though. He is obviously unfamiliar with Dr. Meldrum's work. Unfortunately, this feels more like a case of the unwavering skeptic to me. I'd be interested to hear it...
ReplyDelete