Phil Poling Comments Dr. Meldrum's "Todd Standing Blinking Bigfoot" Response Paper
Back in August, Daniel Falconer and Phil Poling co-authored the paper "A Critical Examination of the Todd Standing Sylvanic Bigfoot Videos". In great detail, the two guys examined the "blinking Bigfoot" footage. The paper posed serious blow to most of Standing's claim that he filmed a live Bigfoot. On Tuesday, Dr. Jeff Meldrum published his own critical examination and blasted the Falconer/Poling paper, saying he's "not convinced by their arguments that these are definitely hoaxed". This morning, Poling offered this update on the matter:
In regards to our Sylvanic investigation paper; Date when our report was sent to Dr. Meldrum asking his input (AugustJuly 1st). No reply was forthcoming. Date of our publication (August 11th). Date of Dr. Meldrum's public response, (November 25th). I continue to be dismayed by the tenuous defense and lack of concern to question the evidence and ignore the pretext under which it was obtained. I will no longer be publicly offering up any further comments or debate in this matter. - Phil Poling
Fast
ReplyDeletelike them rioters in ferguson, THAT FAST!!!!
DeleteAs far as Phil Poling saying there was no reason for Dr. Meldrum to respond and noting the dates of his paper and the date Meldrum responded like that's somehow absurd, when Poling injects himself into the debate he shouldn't object to someone responding.
DeleteI wrote an evaluation of Falconer and Poling's paper that was even more critical than Meldrum's reply due to all the inaccurate data and bad assumptions that it entailed. And it was posted here about a month or so ago. You can copy and paste the following link to an address bar or search engine to view my evaluation.
http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.in/2014/10/not-everyone-agrees-on-todd-standing.html
Incredible folks are still debating 'blinky' and the rest of the muppets show.
DeleteThis stuff was laughed off years ago. No one offers this up as critical BF evidence for a reason.
As with Dyer you have all kinds of devotees and followers happy to go against the grain and reap the attention that provides.
The truth will out It always does.
MMG
A difference with Rick Dyre is no one has definitively proved Standing hoaxed his stuff. There are opinions he did, but it's highly subjective.
DeleteThe paper Poling co-authored is poorly written, mainly because its so biased they fail to objectively examine the evidence.
That's why Meldrum critiqued it, and it's why I wrote an evaluation of it exposing its inaccurate data and bad assumptions.
if it is a hoax its a good one i think todd stated it was a young one he noticed from the corner of hes eye while tryn to get of the moutain
DeleteThe fact the Todd Standing deleted the audio from the video, is quite suspicious.
ReplyDelete"I will no longer be publicly offering up any further comments or debate in this matter.- Phil Poling" Seems reasonable since no one ever asked your opinion on this or anything else in the first place. Remember Phil, YOU inject yourself into these dramas. And spare us the official announcement like your refusing to run for a fifth term in Congress. You're a wanna be youtube star. Nothing more. Like 99% of the morons in this field. Ever think he didn't reply because he has know idea who you are?
ReplyDeleteActually he doesn't interject himself in drama hardly at all. If you'll notice he rarely mentions other Bigfooters. So this time he happens to mention a high profile hoaxer (or at least the visible majority of the community does) who is getting a lot of attention from the few academics in the field. I would prefer he did it, actually.
DeleteIf you want to look at attention whores there are plenty out there (including his "team leader" who just can't seem to let the past go). I get that you don't like his videos or him apparently. I don't much like his videos either. But if you are going to label him be accurate about it. The fact that he makes debunking videos hardly qualifies as interjecting himself in dramas.
1:19 Said it perfectly. We all agree with you. Phil Poling has zero credentials that are actually verifiable. He's a fat, greasy, hairy little man, that has an obvious bias. His opinion and analysis means zero, nada, zilch.
Delete1:20 i mean
DeleteObvious bias, compared to who? lol. Half of Canadian footers who love Fraud Standing because he is Canadian? The gullible footers who still think the "Bigfoot of the Sequoias" is real? I don't know what credentials are even applicable here. I do know people in the Bigfoot world do puff themselves up though. "Biologist" Michael Merchant, "Lawyer" Matt Moneymaker and PI Steve Kulls. Not saying that these aren't technically true, but people certainly play them up. I'll listen to what people have to say, not what they claim to be.
DeleteButthurt footers pwned buy Poling.
DeletePoling believes in Bigfoot dipshit.
Deletewhat the ... another tit for tat and its over bigfoot.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Until someone can produce a replica of those supposed masks..."
DeleteIt doesn't work that way. So any suspected hoax video must be replicated? I think it's sufficient to explain the reasons for it to be a hoax. You may not agree with the arguments-that's fine, but expecting a critic to show how it's done through examples is not a requirement. Robert Lindsay has pulled that card when saying that the Bigfoots in Shooting BF have to be proven fakes to discount them.
The earth will remain flat until someone proves otherwise. Not that it has been proven to be flat either, but it is assumed because it always has been.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHow about Standing produce on his promises once? He talks a big game, but never comes through. How about he produce some video or photos that don't have tons of question marks? I'd say the joke is Todd Standing. The funny part most everyone agrees aside from some posters in forums and the "expert" in question. Hmmm
DeletePhil Poling is a hoaxed bigfoot.
ReplyDeletephart.
Phil poling and matt k have a love nest on brokeback mountain
ReplyDeleteMany Bigfoot have been seen up on Brokeback Mountian.
DeleteNo more than Todd Standing with Les Stroud, or Todd Standing with Jeff Meldrum. Hell maybe it was a threeway if we want to throw out rumors.
DeleteThat's just wrong lol
DeleteI understand Phils point. Typically Cops and Rockford PIs dont want to get into evidence matches with a PhD.
ReplyDeleteIf Phil had bothered to read the whole thing, he would have read that Dr. Meldrum only said there is STILL room for discussion on many of the topics and showed WHY Rockford isnt the end all be all on scientific evidence.
When the educated person says there is still room to examine the issue and the Police Academy grad says closed case, its in Polices interest to not continue.
If you just LOOK at the morphing example, look at Todds lip to nose distance and then the creatures upper lip to nose distance and they arent close.
The point is we dont know
I would say we have a pretty good idea. Most of us anyway. The PhD and DNA training of Dr. Melba Ketchum didn't do much for her. Then again there are some delusional people out who think she sequenced Sasquatch DNA. I'll listen to all the arguments rather than position slot two participants. Thanks, though.
DeleteOf course Meldrum will always state there is room for discussion. That's exactly how the man gets paid.
DeletePhil Poling has "been everywhere but the electric chair and seen everything but the wind" according to him. This guy is the biggest joke of all. he needs to hang out with the lard bottom who sets on his recliner and rants while making it obvious that he never leaves his house. Poling's monotone, arrogant, uneducated "analysis" of videos have absolutely no merit or scientific basis. Only his lopsided, biased opinion.
ReplyDeleteI will take his analysis over someone like Thinker Thunker any day. They thought enough of him to have him talk at the same get together as Stroud, Meldrum, and Fraud Standing. Go figure.
Delete3:13...hahaha, good one!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete"lopsided, biased opinion"
DeleteLike Kelly Shaw, Thinker Thunker, Sasquatch Ontario, TimberGiantBigfoot, Tim Fasano...Remember folks, Poling actually believe in Bigfoot. Todd Disotell is one of the few experts who give footers the time of day, and he is considered Satan by most of them. Apparently, lack of skepticism above all is the badge of a Bigfooter.
Poling doesn't believe in Bigfoot, he just plays the role of skeptic verifying his buddies evidence. He's the musky allen of Bigfoot Evidence
DeleteJust because you don't buy into BS doesn't mean you aren't a believer or open to the possibility. Musky Allen was Rick Dyer's conspirator as an FU to Bigfooters. Most saw right through it.
DeleteIt is not as issue as to whether Poling "believes" or not. His analysis of videos are always the same. He will give an opinion w/o any scientific merit. He will make outlandish claims of "A bigfoot wouldn't be here, or clearly a bigfoot wouldn't be in the woods next to a road," blah, blah, blah and then claims the video is a hoax. He is a goof ball.
DeleteI CANNOT believe/understand why there is ongoing debate as the whether this video/photo are fake/hoaxed,obliviously these are one hundred percent faked.........
ReplyDeleteBut people will go on and on about how "you can't prove that" or the verdict is "still open". I can understand not wanting to label someone a hoaxer, but you have to look at the evidence honestly. I think most Bigfooters do get this.
DeleteAll anyone wants is the truthe. It's driving me crazy to be so close especially with both Dr.s involved yet Standing is a questionable character. No one can deny his passion but his photos leave more questions then answers. Why can't we just get some results enough with all the secrecy.
ReplyDeleteAre you all serious? Honestly? Christ, what a bunch of clowns.
ReplyDeleteHow could anyone with a brain compare Thinker Thunker to Phil Poling? Atleast TT uses computer overlays, size analysis, etc. and he will state that he doesn't know what the video shows but he will demonstrate that it is outside the parameters of a normal sized human. Poling just makes monotone claims based solely on his biased opinion.
ReplyDeleteNo comparison. Thinker Thunker is BY FAR more thorough in his analysis and he uses non biased measurements, etc. to prove his points. Poling uses arrogance.
Thinker Thunker makes better quality videos, yes. For all the supposed ratios and measurements, his analysis doesn't work. He is simply wrong. Beyond that, he has a large confirmation bias. I can think of three videos offhand he claims to be authentic which are fake. He does have a nice voice, though.
DeleteI don't know about bias but it seems that his videos are well thought out. The Siberian bigfoot photos are questionable but he openly admits that it is. His use of overlays and known objects to compare sizes, etc. seems logical and sound. Poling usually just criticizes and makes claims without giving any reasoning other than opinion.
DeleteIf Meldrum can't figure out that Standings videos are hoaxed then he's one gullible S.O.B., period and I have lost the rest of the respect I had in him. Pathetic that he could believe this garbage, just pathetic and sad.
ReplyDeleteMeldrum +100. Tim,U.K.
ReplyDeleteI was at the Summit, talked with Poling for twenty minutes or so, also met Todd Standing and spoke with him. I did the Olympic Project with Meldrum and Randles last march and I think the best way to approach the questions of fraud and of bf existence is to GET OUT IN THE FIELD and research this for yourselves. I've spent a few nights in the woods for my own research but it doesn't compare with the work that Dr. M, Derek Randles, and even Standing has done. This armchair analysis is not enough.
ReplyDeleteMichael Kors Outlet Online
ReplyDeleteKate Spade Outlet
MCM Backpack Outlet
MCM Backpack
UGG Boot Clearance
Oakley Sunglasses Outlet
North Face Outlet Online
Marc by Marc Jacobs
Great post. Thank you for this useful information.
ReplyDelete