Now there's a thought! :new_lmaosmiley:

Interesting point here. Sasquatchery appears to have more heat under the grease than the average pan of science.



If you have Penn & Teller examine the cast, show them a phony.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander...............

As if TV lends some otherwise unobtainable level of legitimacy ?

Thanks for that DDA.

Pardon...

Wasn't managing to organize my question very well.. Maybe later..

I'm not sure if legitamacy is what was being questioned....more like conviction. Your right though...it wouldn't lend any more "legitamacy" on either side, but it would have been interesting to see both sides discussing methodology and position.

Does it lend any less legitimacy than a written opinion?

Can't a TV (filmed) opinion in addition to a written opinion strengthen that opinion, especially since an opposed opinion was filmed?

That depends on how it's edited. :wink:

Yup.

Just like publications. :wink:

Strengthen it for whom?


The same people who are glued to the tube for " Psychic Detectives " and " Good Morning America " ?

He/she who opines as well as he/she who is interested in the opinion.



Yup. Them, too.

If they're interested in the subject.

How about an updated version of LMS , or a revised edition of Meldrum's book; with an addendum covering DY's proposal ?

That was the offer.

How about a wrasslin' match??? You know a cage match.....winner takes all!!!

Now thats a scientific method I'de pay to see!

Ohh a cage match -- it should be a mud floor though (it should be as realistic as possible) :laugh:

Mike your a genius my friend :new_thumbsupsmileyanim:

Exactly. That's why no matter how good Meldrum's science may be in his book, it will most likely not impress anyone but those who already believe. Anyone can publish a book. I have a friend who wrote a novel that never should have been published, but he went the self-publishing route. He is officially a published novelist. It isn't just being published that matters, but where you get published. It sucks, but it's the truth.

Actually, I think it's quite the converse. It might impress many who have been sitting on fences, or who never paid the subject much attention.

What it will not do is impress those who presently scoff at the phenomenon.



Yup.

Do you think you'd rather buy a sasquatch scientific analysis written by The Huntster of the North, or Dr. Meldrum's?

If you'll buy mine, let me know. I'll start typing immediately.

The fact is, no matter who writes the Bigfoot book, it will always be perceived as just a Bigfoot book. Grover Krantz wrote a helluva book, too. It gained him respect in the bf community, but what about his scientific peers? If someone hasn't been paying attention to the subject to begin with, why would they now? Why haven't the works of Green, Krantz, Bindernagel, etc, impressed these fence-sitters?

Those who truly want the information will find it. The key being the "want the information" part.

It will also not impress the scientific community. If your only desire is to impress non-scientists, then publishing in a book is a great.



Neither if it's not in a scientific journal. If it is, it will have been peer-reviewed and undergone at least some scientific analysis. If it comes out in a book it's an opinion, and I'll take a look when my local library gets a copy. Maybe.

RayG

He earned distain from his peers. That is 90% of the problem with this phenomenon.

You know that old saying?:



Well, the people who are supposed to be giving a damn aren't.



They won't.



I believe they have impressed some fence sitters.

They have not impressed the scoftics. Nothing will except absolute proof.



Yup.

And for "those who truly want the information";

write it, film it, disseminate it, and they will come.

I've put together this picture that I think clearly illustrates DY's conclusion that the Skookum subject was an elk.

This is a picture of the male and female version of the cast which I think clearly shows the outline of the rear quarter of an elk or any ungulate of your choosing.

Click to view attachment

Sasquatch my ass...call me a skeptic..but with a reason.

Well dang, I missed that completely.


Still, unless one has rights to final edit (is executive producer in other words) offering up one's professional work to a television program with an expectation of 100% accuracy in the way it is portrayed, especially when it inherently does not lend itself well to the visual media, is a real roll of the dice no matter how well intentioned any of the production crew might be. Plus, when one signs the necessary video release it covers what, a 5-10 year time period? That's a lot of opportunity for clips to be sold, re-edited, re-programmed, or whatever.

I personally wish DY had gotten access to the original cast as I think that is a stigma that will attach itself, rightly or wrongly, to his work. In hushed tones, and out of the sides of their mouths, some will always say "well you know, he never even looked at the original..."

I'll add my two cents here....

As you know, I work in forensics, and take my work seriously - there is absolutely no way on this planet I would agree to working under the gaze of a tv camera, unless I had some editorial control. In fact I have turned down more than one offer to work under a TV camera before now for exactly this reason.

I think the precondition offerred DesertYeti is too harsh, and should be re-thought if DDA is serious about giving DY access to the cast.

Some things should be done for science - others should be done for TV - they don't always meet in the middle.

I can understand where you're coming from Paul. I hate ANYONE looking over my shoulder while working let alone a camera (read millions).

If you feel you are capable of rendering an expert opinion on anything, should it matter if you give that opinion in a Publication, on a Television Show, or in a book? I would think that regardless of the forum, how you perform your evaluation and reach your conclusions shouldnt be any different.

What DDA is talking about is not "LIVE" television - Im sure there will be hours of discussion and observation, probably the things boring to most of the country - but, I think its a good idea to show how serious about the truth we all are - I dont care who does the evaluation.

DY said, the first time I asked him this question, he had no desire to examine the Original, I didnt expect him to change his mind, although I wish he would reconsider. If he is certain of his opinion, I do not see the issue.

JMO

With a cast of the imprints taken afterward.

Never thought of it this way before... but now I wonder what happened with Bigfoot Expossed and The Making of Bigfoot. Seems like some didn't understand your point because it didn't take the media a scientific peer-reviewed paper to latch on and expand these sorry ass stories.

What media made a big deal out of either book? I neither own, nor have I read them, and I certainly wouldn't consider them scientific in nature. Not exactly sure I get your point. That they aren't scientific? No argument from me on that point. Some may find them entertaining, but I'm guessing they're about as scientific as the one Dr. Krantz put out.

RayG

Hey guys... you would not even entertain the thought about calling on DY to re-evaluate his stance for publication. TV isn't that scary, especially if your doing something that you love, believe (ooops sorry, two out of three taint bad though) in and are good at. It would be consumer proof that the story is on the up and up... or not. I would not pull any thing over on DY. I have dealt with many skeptics before and get along with them until they start to posture. He would look good on there. He would get to really examine the cast. He would get to meet Owen, myself and Daris Swindler.

I am serious about the subject, photography and telling the story in documentary style. I can not reconsider because I could really use a counterpoint to the other side that would be on the show. Also I am through handing out freebies with this. DY stands to gain by publication and so should I. I want him, his technique, methodology and conclusions on video right along side other people so viewers can make up their own minds. I don't want the viewer to look at anything I do and say "man, that was staged worse than WWE".

You see I would have asked Todd Disitoll to shave off the Mohawk because he should look as serious about this subject as possible... course NatGeo didn't see it that way. They wanted every kooky angle they could come up with without being obvious about it.

George Schaller understands, with every scientific piece of work he does he writes a technical and a layman book. Sometimes he has others write the layman book for him. Everything has its purpose and more could be gained by going on TV with the theory than not. Just what kind of science is DY going to present that would not come across better on TV? He doesn't have all the information yet, is basing what he does have off of painted plastic copies... we are not talking arm length mathematical formulas more of the ability to not be interupted and to gloss over issues. Give time between statement and questions.

Sorry but no, I can't change the requirement, I could use the interview to balance the program.

EDITED fro a misspelled word. LOL

That is certainly true DDA, but in my opinion, we should be better than that.

The media latches onto whatever sells.. We just tend to notice it more when they
latch onto the other side, or ignore ours..


Where did Long's book get any persistent main stream media coverage?

He got more free publicity here than anywhere else...


Where is the hard hitting rebuttal to Long's sorry assed story ? ( Roger Knight's excellent Amazon.com review, notwithstanding.. )

DDA, just curious, but have all the other scientists who've examined the cast been subjected to the same conditions, and filmed in a similar manner?

RayG

No... not all... not with video. Tis new.

I don't know... he refusses to be interviewed by anybody but people who are skeptical of the Bigfoot phenomena.

Being better than what? That kind of makes it sound like I am doing something underhanded. I am not. It is all on the up and up. I need intelligent counterpoints. That is all. Korf and crew didn't need that... NatGeo didn't need that... but I do. In my opinion, that is being better... giving both sides an equal amount of air time on the same subject... apples to apples.

The trip up could easily be done in a weekend so I don't imagine much impact with work schedules unless he works in some remote area like an oil rig or foreighn country. The only problem I see is that he has agreed in theory of being published of nondisclosure... he cannot partake in disseminating the gist of his submitted paper through other media means. This is probably the case but I would think the magazine would love for him to supplement the paper with a national TV appearance... oh well.

Come on Ray... Wallace, BH and Long have gotten huge amounts of publicity with the editors to those pieces upping the ante but refussing to tell us where the card table is. Even Greg Long's politically incorrect farse was reviewed negatively in Skeptical inquirer. Was Krantz? I missed that if it was.

Yin and Yang.

What does interviewing Long have to do with countering his book ..

It's a matter of presenting evidence to counter what he presents as fact..

Any chance this special video request would be applied to all the examiners, and not just DY?

Speaking of video, I just had visions of the video scene from Spaceballs, so without further ado, and apologies to Mel Brooks:

damndirtyape: I have an idea. Cameraman, get me a video of Desertyeti Examines Skookum Cast: the Video. [Cameraman goes off to Mr. Rental]
Desertyeti: damndirtyape, how can there be a video of the video? We're still in the middle of making it!
damndirtyape: Yes, but there's been a new breakthrough in video technology.
Desertyeti: There has?
damndirtyape: Yes. Instant videos. They're out in stores before the video is finished.
Desertyeti (in disbelief): Nah.
Cameraman: Here it is! Desertyeti Examines Skookum Cast: the Video!
damndirtyape: Very good, now put it in the machine. (FBI Warning is on TV screen) Much too early, prepare to fast forward.
Cameraman: Preparing to fast forward.
damndirtyape: Fast forward!
Cameraman: Fast forwarding!
(Early parts of video run by at accelerated pace.)
damndirtyape: Try here. Stop.
(Video plays to current moment in time. damndirtyape and Desertyeti alternate between watching the screen and watching the camera, with Desertyeti waving his hand slowly.
Desertyeti: What the hell am I looking at? When does this happen in the video?
damndirtyape: Now, you're looking at now, DY. Everything that's happening now is happening now. (points to screen)
Desertyeti: What happened to then?
damndirtyape: We missed it.
Desertyeti: When?
damndirtyape: Just now. You're at now now.
Desertyeti: Go back to then.
damndirtyape: We can't.
Desertyeti: Why not?
damndirtyape: We missed it.
Desertyeti: When?
damndirtyape: Just now.
Desertyeti: When will then be now?
damndirtyape: Soon.
Desertyeti: How soon?........

:laugh:



Yes. Looks like the Yin and Yang got equally negative reviews. :wink:

RayG

Wow. I don't know where to start. I'm frankly surprised about the direction this has all taken over the past many pages.

Let me see if I have this straight. DY is welcomed, ney - is encouraged, to come and work with the cast as long as he agrees to be video taped during the entire process, plus be interviewed on the spot about his work and findings, plus sign a "standard video release" that I am 100% positive gives him NO rights at all to how the resulting footage is used for proably at least 5 years.

And, DDA will then use that footage to "balance" the program? Given that DDA has made it abundently clear through these pages what he thinks of DY's work, does anyone really believe that DY would think he would get a fair presentation?

This is nothing personal DDA, I realize you feel you are being dumped on. But now the impression (pardon the Freudian slip) I get is that you are using your Big Time Television hammer to either beat DY into submission (he's a chicken or worse, "TV is not that scary" et. al.), or to get him to agree to a situation where you have hours of footage that you can go through at your leisure to give YOUR agenda "balance", while he has not an iota of the same opportunity. Come on Rick, there is no 'balance' from the getgo with a deal like that and I'm pretty sure you know it.



Melissa, that's not the point. Yes, it can be said that video footage presents reality as well as any recording media can - but it does so only in the unedited version. So, if the unedited footage is Objective, then quite obviously the edited footage is Subjective. And if DDA is doing the editing, as he implies, then as a nomal Human I don't think anyone could expect him to completely set aside his personal bias and point of view and the resulting cut will indeed reflect his point of view in some shape or form. And that's not a pile on, that's a statement of fact.

In any event, if dealing with the History Channel, I doubt that even Rick has rights to final edit. So... more hands, and more points of view, are involved. I would be amazed and astounded if DY got 10 minutes of airtime, and only surprised if he got even 5 minutes. (However, I do acknowledge I have no idea what the program is really about, other than I think Rick recently implied it was a remake of LMS. If it is indeed a documentary on the Skookum Cast itself, then perhaps DY's "other side of the story" might well get 10 or more minutes.)

Look, I don't mean to be disrepectful to anyone here, but I was once a member of the Church of the Skookum Cast myself. Without pointing any fingers, I'll take full responsibility for choosing to believe when I did. I can't recall exactly when or why I began to question my faith, but is was at least several years prior to quitting the BFRO last year. All I want is the truth, and it seems to me the search for the truth has gotten sidetracked in this thread.

And... heh, it always happens when I discuss beliefs... I just had an epiphany.

Since there is no particular indication that DY is going to take DDA up on his offer, how about this - I'll produce a one hour documentary on the Skookum Cast. A full hour, with no pre-agenda to market it to the entertainment industry. Just a straight, one hour documentary, with no edit points for commercials. Just pure education, hell, we can make it an hour and a half or two hours if we need to so to do it justice.

All Rick has to do is agree to provide work access to DY for whatever time he says he needs to spend with the cast. And, for further Balance, we would find one other appropriately credentialed scientist to do a study of the original as well. For even more Balance, I'd even give each participant substantial rights to the final edit on their individual segments so that they can be assured that their point of view is accurately reflected.

And Rick should be paid for access, and everyone involved should get their appropriate professional fees and expenses as well. And, the only release I would have anyone sign would be to simply allow the production various marketing opportunities to cover it's costs with an appropriate margin of profit for investors.

... of course, this project will need production funding - not handing out freebies is certainly one thing Rick and I both agree on. Those with entrepreneurial attitudes and a quest for science should PM me at your earliest convenience.

hmmm... maybe this would never work... it's too simple and too science oriented...

DDA, I'm confused here. First you say this:






Then you say this:





So does this mean that you've changed your mind about DY being someone you "didn't or shouldn't be around"?

Yeah right! I am not interested in faith healing. The offer stands as is. Wouldn't you like to look at the video tape documentation made of cold fusion? Why should this be any different?

I am not trying to be-little DY here. I have offered for him to examine the original and talk with Daris, Owen and myself while being video taped. If you have a video camera, I bet you'd try and do the same thing with eyewitnesses claiming to have seen one of these animals... or a scientist talking about the subject.

I have laid my cards on the table. I still don't agree with the tactic some take on when they are nice to your face and then whip out a knife when you turn your back... but knowing the enemy is half the battle. This is not a court room interrogation of every stinking word I have said. I ask you not to water this offer down... it only appears to others as protection, backpedalling and misdirection.

I won't comment any further here on the subject in fear of others messing up what might be something good to come of this offer.

I have a pretty good video camera. I could video tape the hole thing and not do any editing After the show aired we could do a webcast of it and everyone here could make up their own mind if the TV version was fair or not. After all. The only people who will really take notice are already interested in the subject.

Then agian. It wouldn't make one bit of difference anyway. Nothing is going to change anyone's mind on the subject.

Since a scientist's work is typically peer-reviewed before being published, which scientists would be peer-reviewing the video?

Personally, I'm not in favor of the videotaping because it seems the scientific process is being subverted in the pursuit for entertainment.

I'm certainly not against DY looking at the original cast, nor even making a scientific pronouncement about it, but as a scientist, he should not be forced to play by non-scientific rules.

RayG

No offense to anyone but it doesn't matter either way at this point....whether it is video taped, audio taped, peer reviewed, web reviewed, written in a paper, or written on a rock; DY already turned down the offer many moons ago:

"QUOTE(DesertYeti)
First off, thank you for your generous offer, but if I thought the cast genuinely of potential BF-related significance, I'd foot the bill myself (I really do "want to believe"). Better to bring in someone else, since my opinion on the matter would likely be viewed as biased, dismissive, and probably not worth any more than it is now. While I absolutely agree that the original is important, and would like very much to see it some time, the critical points of identification (i.e., the overall surficial morphology, topography, and textures) of the cast are of enough size and clarity to demonstrate to me, and also others familiar with ungulate lays with whom I've spoken, that the cast is in fact the resting trace of the large cervid also represented by the hoof prints at the site (Cervus elaphus). Comparing the photos of the original that Noll's posted online, with those I've taken of the cast in San Antonio fails to reveal to me any significant differences that would actually disprove this interpretation. But again, I would strongly encourage someone else to be brought in, perhaps Dr. James Halfpenny (who wrote a blurb on Grover Krantz's book jacket and is a recognized authority on animal traces and who I have never corresponded with or "biased"). Again, thank you for the offer and I'll hoist a Pabst in your honour!"

He's not going. His choice. Personally, I think we are picking too many nits and all it is successfully doing is causing tempers to flare, which is fun if your watching the WWE, but....

Well, I agree this is always a potential issue - but I am sure DY is smart enough to realize when and if he is being lead (and where) in the questioning, and he seems bright enough to formulate responses that wont make him sound like a fool. I dont think some are giving DY enough credit for being quick on his feet and able to make his opinion sound authoritative under pressure.

The only problems I see for DY is if after examination of the cast - he has doubt about his own findings, or if his methods are questionable. I think DY is tough enough to back up his work and his arguement, and both sides should be heard fairly on this issue.

If DY examines the cast - and his opinion does not change -- there should not be any issues. If his past opinions are changed somehow during this examination - he may have an issue.. But, if thats the case, he should be ok with discussing any changes in his opinion.

Just my two cents.

So, after 40 pages, what are the conclusions and what is the consensus?
When can we expect the final report?

It's a Mexican Standoff. :new_tiredsmiley:

And, I think everyone has put their toys in their pockets and have gone home. At least I hope so. I'm tired and have to go home soon too, but I got permission to stay out and play just a little bit longer. People were posting faster than I could read for a while there, sheesh, and I don't even move my lips.

I guess nobody liked my idea about producing my own documentary, sniff. I'd be fair and balanced too, I promise. Really. I've got shoulder time under an XL-1 and editing time with Final Cut Pro and can do 3 point lighting and chroma keys and know where to plug the mics in at... I mean, it's just a documentary for gawds sake, it ain't Star Wars.

... don't forget to turn the lights off, I don't know if anyone else will be back to play or not.

Which one?

RayG