Thursday, July 21, 2016

Want An Autographed Copy Of Dr. Jeff Meldrum's NEW Sasquatch Field Guide?


If you haven't already picked up the new Sasquatch Field Guide from Dr. Jeff Meldrum, here's how you can get one, and even have it autographed by the man himself!

A number of people have asked about getting autographed copies of the new field guide to relict hominoids. I have some on hand now and would be happy to fill requests for $12 (includes S&H). Easiest to make purchase with PayPal (meldd@isu.edu), otherwise check or M.O. to:

Jeff Meldrum, PhD
Professor of Anatomy & Anthropology
Dept. of Biological Sciences
Idaho State University
921 S. 8th Ave., Stop 8007
Pocatello, ID 83209-8007
208-282-4379

Hope you find it informative and discussion-provoking!


148 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. About as credible as having George Schaller putting forewords in Meldrum's book.

      George Schaller is an International science director for the Wildlife Conservation Society. His pioneering field studies of mountain gorillas setthe research standard later adopted by Goodall and gorilla researcher Dian Fosse. Schaller’s 1963 book, “The Year of the Gorilla,” debunked popular perceptions of the great ape and reintroduced “King Kong” as a shy, social vegetarian. Schaller’s studies of tigers, lions, snow leopards and pandas also advanced the knowledge of those endangered mammals. In 1973, he won the National Book Award for “The Serengeti Lion: A Study of Predator-Prey Relations,” and in 1980 was awarded the World Wildlife Fund Gold Medal for his contributions to the understanding and conservation of endangered species. During the past decade, he has focused on the little-known wildlife of Mongolia, Laos and the Tibetan Plateau.

      Delete
    2. I love all those real animals in that list. Makes the irony oh so sweet.

      Delete
    3. Imaginary animals don't make conservationists like the one up top put forewords in literature alluding to their evidence.

      Try harder.

      Delete
    4. Actually it would appear they do as evidenced above

      Delete
    5. How so? Its objectively true

      Delete
    6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

      Delete
  2. You will not be able to find a quote where meldrum states bigfoot exists. He simply does not believe it. He uses words like "could", "possibly", "suggests", "leads us to believe" etc. You will not find a definitive statement from him on the matter. He has found a nice niche for himself in a fringe subculture with comfortable earnings through appearance fees and merchandise selling. Does he actually believe there are 9 foot apes running around undetected. Of course not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Given the scientific evidence that I have examined, I'm convinced there's a creature out there that is yet to be identified," said Jeff Meldrum, a professor of anatomy and anthropology at Idaho State University in Pocatello.

      http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/10/1023_031023_bigfoot.html

      Delete
    2. Oh... And if the track impressions Meldrum has studied are consistent with casts over a period of 50 years (after examining hundreds of alleged Sasquatch footprints), then this is repeatable scientific evidence that the creature in question is far from undetected.

      Delete
    3. That quote is a prime example of what that guy said. No mention of bigfoot just "theres something out there". Very little conviction.

      Track impressions are ridiculous. The wide variety of shapes and sizes does not point to a single species. It points to different people hoax creations and misidentified tracks of other creatures. One example is a double stepped bear print which was proven to be a legitimate candidate for some sasquatch tracks on sykes' documentary.

      Delete
    4. There was a YouTube link posted here a couple of years back that had Meldrum saying to camera, plain as day that he's convinced that Sasquatch exists. I'm pretty sure it was posted at you then and you run off witn your tail between your legs, but it's trolling you want, hoping that people might forget about your rhetorical arguments. I copied and pasted it into YouTube and the channel does not exist anymore. Anyone with a brain can see that he fully endorses the creature's existence, you are really in strawman mode if you think anyone should even stoop so low at to respond. Oh, and let's pretend for a minute that Meldrum doesn't believe in the existence of "Bigfoot"... Would you like to tell me what other bipedal human-primate, that is twice the size of normal human primates, is leaving the physical evidence that he endorses as legitimate?

      (Sigh)

      The dermatoglyphics in track impressions, that account for casts found States and decades apart; are unique, repeatable species traits. To the uneducated eye, someone might think that the various foot sizes and shapes go against the evidence's authenticity.

      Delete
    5. So you cherry pick the casts that fit together then?

      Delete
    6. No, you better educate yourself on the morphology of Sasquatch feet and stop special pleading, then you're better equipped to spout what you think.

      Delete
    7. I would love to. Where can i examine a sasquatch foot? There are lots of casts sure but with such a wide variety of shapes sizes and toe numbers these simply can not be used to make any claims of what a sasquatch foot morphology is. So got sasquatch foot?

      Delete
    8. Would you like to show examples of these drastic diffferences in foot shapes? Size can be attributed to (cough, cough) age?

      (Cringe)

      "The Vadoma tribe lives deep within the confines of western Zimbabwe. Derogatorily referred to as the “ostrich people," the Vadoma suffer from a rare genetic condition called ectrodactyly, which affects one in four children within the population. Ectrodactyly, or “lobster claw syndrome,” can affect either the hands or feet. In the case of the Vadoma, the middle three toes are absent and the two outer ones are turned inward.

      Ectrodactyly is an inherited dominant genetic mutation. Some have theorized that the mutation may have adaptive benefit if it aids in tree climbing. It's more likely, however, that the defect remains prevalent in the Vadoma because of a small genetic pool among the Vadoma. It is against tribal law for members to marry outside the group."
      http://www.atlasobscura.com/places/ostrich-people-zimbabwe

      Delete
    9. "Where can i examine a sasquatch foot?"

      Um... But I thought you have? How else would you know about all these complex, contradictory foot shapes? Or is this an admission that you really haven't the first clue of that which you blither about?

      Delete
    10. 2:53 - you sound jealous . Could you possibly be one of these failed backwoods bigfoot researchers who couldn't even tie his shoelaces ?
      Here's an idea - get an education and then be as knowing as Meldrum and then you can start putting out books and making appearances collecting fees and be as esteemed as him and then maybe you could make an argument but until that please shut your gob

      Joe

      Delete
    11. Hey Iktomi !
      Keep up the good fight !

      Joe

      Delete
    12. The guy was simply asking where he can examine an actual sasquatch foot. No need to have a meltdown because you are unable to provide that evidence.

      Delete
    13. 2:53

      Just need somebody to listen ?

      Need validation ?

      MMC

      Delete
    14. 7:24... He was being rhetorical and had no idea about what he was trying to be clever about. If watching someone getting a b-slap hurts, go find something else to do.

      Delete
    15. So do you have a sasquatch foot to examine or not? Why do you get so aggressive?

      Delete
    16. Aggressive? Go and look for yourself. Here's a start;
      http://woodape.org/index.php/about-bigfoot/articles/90-anatomy-and-dermatoglyphics-of-three-sasquatch-footprints

      Delete
    17. No. That is someones interpretation of cast traits. Other people have other interpretations. Either way it is not proof. What was asked for was a sasquatch foot as that is required to study the foot morphology. Do you have one?

      Delete
    18. Someone's "interpretation"? What type of rhetorical bull sh*t is that?

      "Krantz (1983: 71-72) writes: "Thus far, every specialist who has examined these casts [Mill Creek] agrees that their detailed anatomy has all the characteristics and appearance of being derived from an imprint of primate skin. These include thirty police fingerprint workers, ... six physical anthropologists ... four pathologists and two zoologists."

      It appears that it's an "interpretation" with a consensus. As for morphology... Did you even read the sodding thing? Go and look for yourself, I'm not your dancing monkey!

      Delete
    19. Good grief Joerg is having a meltdown today.

      Delete
    20. That's odd, these "meltdowns" I'm having all the time appear to coincide with you getting a dry slap? I think I'd better log that word as a bit of a white flag on your part.

      Delete
    21. I'd prefer a wet slap from you against my arse !

      Joe

      Delete
  3. Does this guide mention their ability to cloak and mindspeak and does it mention portals?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You should be focussing on what CAN be measured by science. Everything else afterwards is irrelevant when the creature you're trying to sensationalise is by scienific methods being shown to be leaving its sign on the environment.

      Delete
    2. Apparently he doesn't own that record. Or he has a limited playlist I can't decide which one it is. Good morning my friend!

      Delete
  4. Everyday you come here everyday you beat your little drum every day you sing your little song it's the same broken record over and over again trying to prove to everyone here that Sasquatch does not exist. But unfortunately if Meldrum write his book and makes his money with his thoughts that Bigfoot does exist then what does it matter to you? it has no effect on your broken record because it still plays the same song over and over in your mind correct? Get over it move on go find somewhere else to make a new record and a new claim because the people here are tired love you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol joe bringing in the big guns. Damage control.

      Delete
    2. The only damage you've caused is to Subway's stock in meatballs.

      Delete
    3. Khan

      Logic won't work with the troll.

      But ignoring her will

      MMC

      Delete
    4. I meant Khat

      Darn auto correct

      MMC

      Delete
    5. MMC is spot on about it being a female. I found where it started up a couple of years ago. It was posting with a name and chummy with another troll. I saw what they were saying to harry and it was EXACTLY the same style of writing.

      An ignore button option would be the kiss of death to this lonely crazy she-beast.

      Delete
    6. Meet Chanty Binx (Big Red) Feminist and hypocrite: http://youtu.be/GVuK44kWgxk

      Example of a shebeast

      Delete
    7. That is interesting. Here is a pic of our BFE she-beast:

      http://cryptomundo.com/wp-content/uploads/almas3.jpg

      Her boozoos keep getting in the way of the keyboard though so she just flings them over her shoulder.

      Delete
    8. Cringe Compilation #11 triggered feminist edition: http://youtu.be/4fAvm15ThV4

      Delete
    9. So what if Khat got caught lying and stealing profile pics when posting as Abholi. IF anyone says anything bad about her I will find you and beat you up. Don't unleash my inner side.

      DEEBS

      Delete
    10. ^^^^^^^

      TRIGGERED

      L O L. !!!

      Delete
    11. 9:54... Stuey... This is you perfectly...

      "Some trolls think that spending your time posting condolence messages on Facebook to someone you've never met is weird, and grounds for being trolled. They think they're teaching people a lesson, teaching people how to behave online.

      If anonymity is one factor, psychological and emotional issues are another, according to Suler, who says many trolls likely have problems with depression, low self-esteem, and anger.

      They want to inject their own emotional turmoil into other people by luring them into negativity. It's a way for them to feel some kind of control or power over their own disruptive emotions, at other people's expense."

      http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/11/world/internet-trolling/

      Delete
  5. Hi iktomi

    How you going mate?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pretty good man. Just wanted to let you know that I think you should drink some pee.

      Delete
  6. Yeh Good.

    Seems a little quieter at the moment since the, should I say it the DMaker meltdown. i wonder how long that will last?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. By dmaker meltdown, you must mean when dmaker handed joergs butt to him on a silver platter. It was rather entertaining to watch Joerg get put in his place.

      Delete
    2. dmaker ran with his tail between his legs . it was a pure joy to witness

      Joe

      Delete
    3. but it's pure bliss to see the thing between a sexy blokes legs!

      Joe

      Delete
  7. Well I would love an autographed copy. it would fit very nicely in my ever growing bigfoot museum nook in my places right next to a replica foot casting !
    What a special buy this will be !

    Joe

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would also love to receive a sexy bloke! What an even better treat that will be!

      Joe

      Delete
    2. I'd like a copy too.Please Dr Meldrum can you sign mine "The Taterhole Kid"? ;) xx

      Delete
    3. ^ keep on dreaming fake joe. the blow up doll is still enroute to your flat but don't be surprised if the mailman gets a hold of it before it arrives. sorry for the future loss matey but you don't deserve any loving as far as anyone can see- even from a plastic doll

      Joe

      Delete
    4. I fancy sexy mailmen! They can lick my "stamp" anytime!

      Joe

      Delete
    5. the only stamp you get fake Joe is "return to sender"
      Sorry kiddo, you're just an odd package no one wants

      Joe

      Delete
    6. But but but she's waiting for love!

      http://boingboing.net/images/_kalapaintings_awaken.jpg

      Delete
    7. I love sexy blokes with big packages!

      Joe

      Delete
    8. Oh there she goes!!^


      http://boingboing.net/images/_kalapaintings_awaken.jpg

      Delete
  8. So what is the deal with this "Tri Diver"? Seems to think he can do a breakdown like Phil Poling?

    I can sort of get where Phil takes his views but TD is just another Troll using video interaction with no real breakdown, just says "its a suite".

    ReplyDelete
  9. Mmm..not too sure about him either. Seem to recall a Tridiver who was a member on site who was a non believer. Maybe the same guy? Who knows.

    ReplyDelete
  10. A field guide from someone who's never been in the field...Uh, ok.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wouldn't consider the green areas around your town (with the big box stores and fast food restaurants in the background)the "field" either, so don't start tooting your own horn.

      Delete
    2. You lack serious RESEARCH!!

      I have hundreds of pics that prove you BEYOND WRONG!

      URBAN BIGFOOT...100%

      Delete
    3. DS, if your photos are so good and you have so many why aren't you getting any real attention?

      In this day and age even a questionable video can often get hundreds of thousands of views and be the object of speculation in the community. If they are really that good many people should be noticing.

      Delete
    4. People are, 300,000 hits in a little over a year, and over 1,000 subscribers.....At that pace, i will pass everyone up!

      All i need is ONE tv appearance, and it will all go viral!

      Look at this site, when good evidence is featured, there will be like 3 views....when something "Iffy" is featured, hundreds of hits.

      Delete
    5. Sorry if your work was that good you would be getting that many views per video.

      Delete
    6. If I put out ONE video a month of a pic, ok, but I put up like 10/day.

      If my stuff is so bad/fake, why hasn't anyone proved it?? I beg people to prove me wrong. ....I will go down in history. ...just a matter of time..and when it is fully proven, I will have every species already categorized!

      Like me or not, the skeptics jacked the wrong person!

      Delete
    7. DR. Squatch, I for one would love nothing better than to see you on national TV showing the whole world your evidence. I'm sure you will make quite an impression!

      Delete
    8. You say that there's something (Bigfoot) in your videos. Another person disagrees and says it's just leaves or bushes. How can that person prove that it isn't there? Do you see the dilemma?

      It's up to you to prove it but until you can it's just comes down to one person's perception versus another.

      Delete
    9. Dr.Squatch, you will never get on TV the way you conduct yourself. You are the lesser Todd Standing. Your language is abusive, your personality is repellent, and you lie like a rug. Come to think of it, maybe you should run for president?

      Delete
    10. 3:12, YOU'RE THE LIAR...SHOW ME WHERE I LIED???

      I DON'T SWEAR, SO IT'S NOT ABUSIVE, IT'S 100% TRUTH!

      WHEN GOD WANTS ME ON TV, I WILL BE ON TV.

      Delete
    11. Todd Standing Rules,So does Dr.Johnson

      Delete
    12. ANON 1:39, ABOUT 98% OF THE TIME, I HAVE THEM BLINKING WHEN I GO FRAME BY FRAME, SO I KNOW 110% I'M FILMING A CREATURE, NOT A BUSH! SEVERAL OTHER FACTOR ALSO CONFIRM WHAT I FILM.....THAT'S WHY I CHALLENGE IDIOTS LIKE DMAKER, TO FIND A PIC THEY THINK IS NOT A CREATURE, I SIT BACK AND WAIT TO FURTHER BURY THE SKEPTIC!

      Delete
    13. ^SHOTS OF JOES BARKING SPIDER

      Delete
    14. Ha Ha Ha Ha, WINKER STINKER ALERT!!! , LOL. :-))

      Delete
  11. Replies
    1. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/mag-portals.html

      Delete
  12. Got peer review conspiracy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, just academics calling the process out, and a requirement from the painfully dim for a peer review on something that hasn't been investigated properly yet.

      Delete
    2. Which bigfoot papers have been rejected by peer review that you feel have been intentionally held back?

      If you can not cite any examples of this then why are you claiming a conspiracy?

      Delete
    3. Sorry kid, I've never claimed that there is a peer review conspiracy, nor to the best of my knowledge has there been any papers on the current evidence rejected by peer review (with the exception of Melba Ketchum's work).

      What I'm saying is there has not been adequate efforts to investiagte the subject, let alone peer review it, and the whole process is crud and open to manipulation anyway.

      Delete
    4. What he's saying is that the current crop of Bigfoot researchers (including himself) are too stupid and incompetent to properly investigate the subject and they need real scientists to take over for them.

      Delete
    5. Actually... For what's generally been left to amateur researchers, they can account for footage, audio, biological and forensic evidence for their time spent. All that without one single consorted effort from the mainstream scientific community.

      Just think what those real scientists might discover if they put in the effort, eh?

      Delete
    6. Oh, I see. It's Bigfoot researchers who are brilliant and resourceful and real scientists are too stupid and incompetent to recognize the overwhelming evidence for Bigfoot!

      Delete
    7. The extraordinary nature of what this evidence entails is in fact what's holding back the requirement of subsequent mainstream investigative measures. It means that until extraordinary evidence surfaces (a body), the subject isn't going to draw the attention of a majority of mainstream scientists who would only THEN be in a position to become aware of the many evidences that preceded it. Without this, few will see beyond the hoaxing and pop culture. It's a very detrimental circle that can be simplified as the requirement of extraordinary evidence without the extraordinary effort it would require to source it.

      Delete
    8. Evidence for Bigfoot that consists of "footage, audio, biological, and forensic" sounds pretty extraordinary to me!

      Delete
    9. Maybe if researchers would stop spending their time hocking autographed pamphlets to rubes, they might make some more progress.

      Delete
  13. I see Alaskabushpilot's little lady "Drewbot" is still pretending to be a skeptic. He just claimed on the ISF that he knew Bigfoot was nonsense since he was a little kid but he failed to remember the sighting he claimed as an adult was mentioned on the BFF and JREF...lol This is why this is true.
    When you're an ISF'er you lie, you pretend, you sock puppet. It's what you do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, he's an odd character. If I recall sightings run in his family too. The person who investigated his sighting also mentioned his kin's sighting. I wouldn't trust that clown as far as I could throw him.

      Delete
  14. I see the looney toons are out in force today.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Say bigfoot were real a conservative estimate may be 1000 creatures in the US. This is an extremely low end estimate for a viable breeding species.

    That gives you 1000 entities 9 foot tall 500-1000lb that ALWAYS have to be somewhere.

    So where are they exactly and why are we unable to track, photograph or capture or kill just 1 of these entities?

    Psychological phenomenom is the only rational explanation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^^^^^^^^^^^ kray kray ^^^^^

      Delete
    2. 70% of the country is wilderness... Where are they? We would simply go and have a look. And not a weekend trek, I'm talking a year long expedition like the Bili Ape acquired. Chimps are able to hide their tracks and do so very well, think what something that can think like a human could achieve? Plenty of missing hunters remember, and even more who look down the barrel and can't shoot something either they can't fully identity, or looks so human-like. And photographs account for ranging from those of decades ago to the most modern technology (Patty, Browns Thermal being notable examples).

      Delete
    3. 11:14, who besides me is looking for them on a consistent basis??
      Research like me, and you WILL find them!

      Delete
    4. You mean throw your footage up on youtube and let the viewers fill in the blanks, even if it's not on the original.

      Delete
    5. You are right 11:14.

      At this point it is either a powerful psychological phenomena or it is completely real.

      I have been collecting imagery for months that is difficult to believe. I wake up every single morning saying "nope... not possible" and have to try to re-convince myself.

      So I've set the bar for myself. I am not going to release any footage no matter how compelling until I have a "naked eye" sighting, no camera involved. I have footage that will freak people out but until I see bigfoot with my eyeball (through binoculars or a telescope is ok just no camera) I'm not going release. Binoculars have great magnification and great control over focal length but they are too shaky to leave me convinced. I've ordered an inexpensive telescope and a decent eyepiece and collimator (costs more than the telescope) and will try that.

      The cameras say that bigfoot exists. But until I get a naked eyeball on it I'm going to regard this whole thing as a complex interaction between high definition camera artifacts and the human visual cortex. That sounds physiological but the visual cortex results are subsequently processed and interpreted through our personality and so it becomes a psychological phenomena.

      Hope to break the pattern of going to bed a bigfoot believer and waking up a complete skeptic daily. Its eyeballs or it don't exist and I will drag my entire folder of imagery to the recycle bin if that is the case.

      Delete
    6. If they ALLOW you to see them!

      If they're spotted, it's a threat to their survival...you're not going to see one.

      Delete
    7. I've got it nailed down at 250 yards with my 16x telephoto Doc, they can't really see what I'm up to and they don't understand optical magnification lol. If its there I will be able to see it through the telescope.

      Delete
    8. If I can see it without a camera I'll offer some imagery. If I cannot see it without a camera then it does not exist.

      Are you able to process that?

      Delete
    9. His silent farting is proof fool

      Delete
  16. he really is conceited getting a bust of himself...i mean the nerve..really

    ReplyDelete
  17. Dr. Jeff Meldrum...

    I thought he might be the guy that could redeem the scientific field of Anthropology which has clearly become a failed discipline.
    Its bad enough that they missed the parallel archaic human species living among us for eons but Meldrum compounds this folly by rejecting and diminishing clear evidence. He is not interested in the science.

    Recent interaction with him regarding some imagery demonstrated for me plainly that Dr. Meldrum is *not* interested in finding, characterizing or studying Bigfoot. He will gladly accept fees for television appearances and paid speaking engagements but he does absolutely nothing to advance the field and in fact is suppressing evidence.

    So he is getting left behind. No validation by academicians is needed. A tsunami of clear imagery is on the way and it will gradually shift the public perception until the public begins to realize that the archeologists and anthropologists have failed.

    We appreciate that they dug up and catalogued bones and other artifacts but nearly every word they have said about those bones and artifacts is nonsense and that will become clearer and clearer over the next few months.

    Dr. Meldrum, I gave you a chance. A chance to do the right thing for science, a chance to do the right thing for humanity, a chance to be involved in the greatest discovery of modern human history, the existence of vast numbers of archaic humans around the world. Instead you've chosen to write a few books and suppress every shred of evidence that did not originate with you or your friends.

    So now you are out. You can watch from afar as others solve the central mystery of mankind. I will not be kind to your field. You and the field of anthropology are going to be savaged. You've earned it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. His next book is gonna be "Blue Bags of Bigfoot" in collaboration with Dr. Squatch. You telling me that ain't good science?

      Delete
    2. It sounds like him in certain ways, but it's too calmly written.

      Delete
    3. I DON'T POST AS ANON!

      BUT THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO TELL EVERYONE!

      Delete
    4. Mark Zaskey is responsible in large part for my views but that post is mine. He frankly doesn't give a shit what anyone thinks which probably ends up being the best long term policy. lol

      Delete
    5. Dear anon@ 12:06: what on earth makes you think Meldrum is reading your comment? Also, instead of talking about the tsunami of clear images, why not present them? If the evidence is good, there is no need to put anyone else down, the images will speak for themselves. Of course it is understood that you have no such images, or if you do they are vague, indistinct, blurry, shaky, or open to interpretation. However I do commend you, as you have the right presentation to get people interested in your hoax.

      Delete
    6. That's what DS presents, why not others

      Delete
    7. Dear Anon@ 3:21,

      Why should I respond to your hostile comments or otherwise acknowledge your existence? You've made up your narrow little mind without seeing anything so what is the point? Go away.

      Delete
    8. ^ nothing hostile about it. It's the truth. You are a liar in a field packed with them. I enjoy your efforts to be insulting about my narrow little mind, water off a ducks back as they say. You are never going to back up what you say, you know it, I know it. Calling out a fraud is the right thing to do.

      Delete
    9. Also, I'm open to the Sasquatch question, just not the baloney you're trying sell. We've had decade after decade of your kind, it's gotten tiresome.

      Delete
    10. No actually you are a narrow-minded hostile person for which there is no reason for me to interact with. Perhaps you are a failed researcher as you certainly sound like one. You couldn't find it. I doubt you could find you own ass if it had bells on it.

      Delete
    11. You should understand the value I put in your opinion of me: absolute zero. Call me anything you like.

      I can assure you I have no interest in field work, I have a busy life already. And I will certainly celebrate on the day the species is discovered. But you won't be making that discovery. You show no evidence because you are not in possession of any. You are just another Adrian Erickson, another Tom Biscardi, the list goes on for decades. What you offer is anonymous claims on blog.

      Carny,phony,counterfeit,huckster,mountebank...take your pick. The hat fits you.

      Delete
  18. Oh great, another massive ego in the bigfoot community.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There aren't many humble characters there, that's for sure.

      Delete
  19. I've always wondered what happened to the World Conference on Relic Hominoids that was to be chaired by Dr. Meldrum. It was first scheduled for March 17-24 2015 than said to be postponed for later that year because of the Ebola scare. The next thing I read was it was scheduled for May of this year but that came and went and I've heard nothing more. I always thought a conference in Africa was a rather expensive choice if you wanted to get people to attend. Perhaps they found that out the hard way.

    I had a copy of his Sasquatch - Legend Meets Science (no more - a friend "borrowed" it and I never got it back) and it seemed to be a serious attempt at the subject of Sasquatch. Although I do not have it, from what I have see this new endeavor looks to be a less than scholarly attempt and in my opinion will do little to promote the existence of such creatures. Yes, I believe it's a money grab and that's fine with me but let's call it for what it is.

    ReplyDelete
  20. For the record -- Schaller describes himself as a Bigfoot skeptic.

    From Cryptomundo: Dr. Schaller is one of the few prominent scientists who strongly believe that reports of the sightings of the Bigfoot or the Yeti are worthy of further study. “There are so many human-like creatures in different places. But after all these years there is not a single bone, a single hair. There is no physical evidence other than tracks. There is one film, taken in 1960, and it has been played endlessly for years analysed, but they can’t say it is fake. A hard-eyed look is absolutely essential. The best thing to do would be to set up camera traps that automatically take pictures of the animals. If this is monitored for a year you may get nothing, but may end up with some interesting wildlife pictures,” he says with a hearty laugh.

    In other words -- he does not believe Bigfoot exists, but he believes the subject is worth studying.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, but we have had many scientifically conducted camera trap projects. Some of them even in the heart of alleged bigfoot country. The Cascades Carnivores project comes to mind. I believe it was over about 8 years and they got every large mammal in the area, including a wolverine, but no bigfoot. This is in the PNW, in an area with lots of reported encounters. When asked directly, the scientists involved replied that they had never seen any evidence of bigfoot.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Sorry -- Haints -- You do you realise that George Schaller is an honorary board member of Meldrum's online journal, whilst his stance on the current state of evidence is no different to that of 90% of enthusiasts. You also didn't cite a direct quote that he's a "Bigfoot sceptic".

      "I have a sense of accomplishment that my attention to the evidence for the existence of Sasquatch has kept this matter before the gaze of the scientific community and engendered meaningful dialogue about it. To have these efforts recognized and encouraged by the likes of George Schaller, Jane Goodall, and Russell Mittermeier has been very gratifying."
      - Jeff Meldrum

      In the foreword to my book, George Schaller wrote: “Jeff is a scientist, an expert in human locomotor adaptations. In Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science he examines all evidence critically, not to force a conclusion, but to establish a baseline of facts upon which further research can depend. His science is not submerged by opinion and dogmatic assumption…He disentangles fact from anecdote, supposition and wishful thinking, and concludes that the search for Yeti and Sasquatch is a valid scientific endeavor. By offering a critical scrutiny, Sasquatch does more for this field of investigation than all the past arguments and polemics of contesting experts.”
      ... So he is in position to agree Meldrum has FACTS in favour of evidence for the subject of Bigfoot... And then he turns up as an honorary board member to this;
      http://www.isu.edu/rhi/index.shtml

      Let's compare the Cascade Carnivore Study to the size of the PNW... Then, let's compare how long that study had gone on for, to that of the evidence accumulation for Sasquatch during the same length of time. It's an old argument and there have been trail cams erected all over the country for many years... Bigfoot ain't a wolverine, a wolf, a grizzly, a lynx... It's a type of human that has evaded people and in particular; technology for this long. Why? Because it is a a big pink flag in a see of green... It is an intrusion in a home where they know the slightest bit of detail to stay one step ahead of all other apex predators, and us to survive.

      Doesn't mean the Sasquatch didn't see them.

      Delete
    4. Iktomi for the win with the facts !
      As much as they try they will never get the best of him.

      joe

      Delete
  21. They exist in your mind....really or really?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Bigfoot:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiQjamFBHMI

    ReplyDelete
  23. Given the high comment count, it looks like a CODE RED was called for this article among the paid disinformation agents in the U.S. Somebody is sweating bullets.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Boy I tell you what, that's goodern heyell. There he go.

    ReplyDelete