Comments on: Anthropoidipes ameriborealis

By: ithilien

ithilien — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 21:04:40 +0000

i don’t think the basis for the name change…just a belief system (even if based on what the researcher feels is compelling evidence)…is adequate. don’t you usually make the discovery and THEN name the newly discovered species? It’s not going to give bigfoot researchers any more credibility..but it’s had so many names thru the years and native cultures one more won’t hurt i guess. jeff Meldrum is such a plus for the field…well spoken, intelligent and CUTE.

By: Cryptid Hunt

Cryptid Hunt — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 21:01:04 +0000

Meldrum is one of the best researchers in the field of cryptozoology that I think. Keep up the good work!

By: Bob K.

Bob K. — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 20:41:50 +0000

I think that this approach is sensible. Since there exists quite an extensive number of track casts, providing such a body of evidence with a Latin scientific name is proper-thank you, Dr. Meldrum. Of course, since we lack the physical evidence which would justify naming the animal itself, this should wait until such evidence becomes available. The horse first-THEN the cart.

By: americanprimate

americanprimate — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:36:27 +0000

I look forward to seeing the actual peer reviews…Game on!

By: americanprimate

americanprimate — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:32:50 +0000

Kudos to Dr Meldrum for advancing the study of Bigfoot/sasquatch to a higher level (at great risk to his academic reputation). It is refreshing to see someone of Jeff’s credentials who views biology/crytozoology as a living science. Someone who still sees science as a pursuit of discovery…not simply a process of exponding on already “established knowledge.” It’s people like Jeff and Loren who give us hope that our collective quest is a worthy cause. Keep up the good work!

Todd Neiss
Independent Bigfoot Researcher
Sandy, Oregon

By: mystery_man

mystery_man — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:52:35 +0000

I finally read through the paper in its entirety, (even though the small print on my computer hurt my eyes a bit!), and in my opinion it is very well done. I recommend everybody here reads it in full. It is good to see a serious, solid published scientific paper like this on a cryptozoological subject that is out there making the rounds. I think Meldrum is truly doing a great deal towards making the pursuit of sasquatch a more acceptable scientific endeavor and I am thrilled to see that this is an actual peer reviewed, published paper. I really would like to see more work like this done on all fronts of cryptozoology and see this field come to be regarded as an honest scientific venture rather than being categorized as some sort of fringe pseudo science by the general public. Kudos to Meldrum for approaching the subject matter in a thorough, thoughtful, and scientific way.

By: bill green

bill green — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:18:37 +0000

this is a wonderful article about dr. jeff meldrum & sasquatch. it realy helped me with my research. thanks bill green

By: KenMD

KenMD — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 17:01:01 +0000

I think everyone should be aware that Dr. Meldrum is not attempting to put a genus species name to sasquatch, but only a name to the tracks, so that they can be discussed in a scientific forum. Isn’t that right Dr. Meldrum?

I think he states that clearly in his paper as quoted here:

“Furthermore, a precedent for naming the preserved tracks of an extant taxon has been established by Kim et al. (in press) in the naming of fossil Homo sapiens tracks. Since faltering steps and
equivocations have been directed towards the matter of naming the footprints,it seems appropriate to complete that objective properly and formally by acknowledging the ichnological evidence that bears on the question of the existence of an unrecognized bipedal ape in the forest habitats of North America. It should be noted that naming the tracks neither establishes the identity of the trackmaker, nor does it resolve the controversy over the existence of sasquatch. Properly naming the tracks is intended to facilitate objective discussion and comparison of the tracks within an ichnological context.

I think it best to preserve an official taxonomic designation until the time comes when a Sas can be properly documented and studied. We need some bones!

However, whether when that time comes someone will choose to use the name Meldrum has designated is uncertain.

Surely any name first chosen will be argued, changed, and argued about again.

By: SOCALcryptid

SOCALcryptid — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 16:30:12 +0000

Good going Dr. Meldrum, You are one of my scientific heros. Keep up the good work. It is good to know that Dr. Meldrum is still very involved with scientific study of sasquatch.
Loren, what do you think about his new name for Bigfoot?