An evening with Daniel Peterson

[_LifeOnaPlate]

I've been asking for a link to the bigfoot stuff to see what it says. No one has provided it. (Has anyone read it?)

Further, I've asked for any cogent response to the actual arguments set forth in the DNA article. None are forthcoming. I suspect literally no one participating in this thread with the exception of Dan Peterson and I have even read it.

[_Pokatator]

Jeff Meldrum is a prof in my hometown. He is a running joke here.

In what circles, I wonder? Among ex- and anti-Mormons? In cabarets and nightclubs? Among the population of Pocatello generally?

Anyway, that's neither here nor there. Here's some information about him:

http://www.isu.edu/bios/Professors_Staf ... um_j.shtml

His bigfoot antics doesn't build him or his partner Stephens any credibility with their DNA arguments.

Probably not.

But, strictly speaking, his writing about Bigfoot is irrelevant to what he and Professor Stephens have written about the Book of Mormon and DNA.

On Professor Stephens, see

http://www.isu.edu/bios/Professors_Staf ... ns_t.shtml

Incidentally, has anybody here actually read what Dr. Meldrum has written about Bigfoot? I haven't.

I'm assuming, though, that Pokatator has, since Dr. Meldrum is apparently a topic of universal comment and amusement on the streets and boulevards of Pocatello, and since Pokatator knows his work on the subject well enough to characterize it as "his bigfoot antics."

I would be interested in hearing more about the details of it.

My basis on Meldrum is reading everything that he has published and what has been published about him in the local paper and also all of the associated letters to the editor printed after his articles. He is considered a nut case in most of those letters.

I also agreed in my post that Bigfoot and the DNA information were two different subjects but the "nut" part has blended into both categories per letters to the paper/editor.

I am sure that in the seedy sides of Pocatello Meldrum is a bigger joke than just in the paper.

Personally I couldn't care less about his reputation but Stephens probably should.

[_Daniel Peterson]

My basis on Meldrum is reading everything that he has published and what has been published about him in the local paper and also all of the associated letters to the editor printed after his articles. He is considered a nut case in most of those letters.

It seems that your take on Professor Meldrum is based, not on his book Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science (New York, 2006) or his published scientific articles, but on newspaper pieces by and about him and on letters to the editor in the various Pocatello newspapers.

Has anybody actually read his book?

[_Dwight Frye]

I've been asking for a link to the bigfoot stuff to see what it says. No one has provided it.

Google is your friend:

EVALUATION OF ALLEGED SASQUATCH FOOTPRINTS AND THEIR INFERRED FUNCTIONAL MORPHOLOGY by Meldrum

Bigfoot Rendezvous here seeks to inform, entertain public by Meldrum

preview of Meldrum's book, "Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science"

Meldrum's book on Amazon (4.5 stars, 36 customer reviews)

YouTube Video: Local news piece with Meldrum on Bigfoot

YouTube Video: Meldrum on footprint evidence

YouTube Video: Discovery Channel piece with Meldrum on Bigfoot

More Meldrum YouTube videos here.

A couple of interesting articles about Meldrum, titled "Idaho Professor Criticized Over Bigfoot Study" and "Bigfoot Research Makes Professor a Campus Outcast," are available here.

There's much more by and about him online, but this should get the interested reader started.

[_Pokatator]

My basis on Meldrum is reading everything that he has published and what has been published about him in the local paper and also all of the associated letters to the editor printed after his articles. He is considered a nut case in most of those letters.

It seems that your take on Professor Meldrum is based, not on his book Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science (New York, 2006) or his published scientific articles, but on newspaper pieces by and about him and on letters to the editor in the various Pocatello newspapers.

Has anybody actually read his book?

It doesn't just "seem" that is my take on it, it is what I said. It is the general perception from what has been written in the paper that he is a nutcase. Is that fair? Most likely not but it is the local perception and it doesn't help his credibility with Stephens and DNA at least in this location which is basically a suburb of SLC.

[_Daniel Peterson]

EVALUATION OF ALLEGED SASQUATCH FOOTPRINTS AND THEIR INFERRED FUNCTIONAL MORPHOLOGY by Meldrum

I skimmed through this one quite hastily. It didn't seem obviously insane.

I notice, by the way, that Meldrum's book Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science features a cover endorsement from Dr. Jane Goodall, the legendary primatologist.

On Dame Goodall, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Goodall

[_LifeOnaPlate]

It doesn't just "seem" that is my take on it, it is what I said. It is the general perception from what has been written in the paper that he is a nutcase. Is that fair? Most likely not but it is the local perception and it doesn't help his credibility with Stephens and DNA at least in this location which is basically a suburb of SLC.

I'm no big fan of writings on Bigfoot. (Tip of the cap to Dwight for links). I've not read any of them.

Now that we have that out of the way, what exactly is incorrect about the DNA article?


"You may embed only 2 quotes within each other."

Can we get this adjusted?

[_LifeOnaPlate]

I've been asking for a link to the bigfoot stuff to see what it says. No one has provided it.

Google is your friend:

I prefer this way ;)

http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=stop+being+lazy

[_Trevor]

I refer you to Brant Gardner's excellent Second Witness. His commentary is also available in an earlier format online for free.

Two comments:

1) I have had numerous online conversations with Brant Gardner, some on this very topic, and I have never read anything that would convince me that he has identified Christianity in ancient America.

2) I get the apologists' frustration with critics not reading, LOaP, but I think I have demonstrated an exceptional (for this board) tendency to comment after having read things, and being one of the first to do so. So your failure to make any more specific citations appears to me to be rather rude.

I refer you to Bill Hamblin's recent article on metal plates and writing.
http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... cat_id=474
Nothing in the Book of Mormon indicates that writing on metal was widespread among anyone but the Nephites (and Jaredites). The fact is people used to mock the very concept of writing on metal plates. They can no longer do so.

I didn't just arrive on the scene of this ongoing argument yesterday, LOaP. I think my response sufficiently demonstrated that. You may, however, have inadvertently skipped over the part where I wrote "New World." I can also forgive you for not knowing a whole lot about the field of ancient history.

You got it. ;)

Then you can also be forgiven for not understanding much about the field of archaeology. I will say, however, that if you are going to argue historical claims concerning the ancient world, both the fields of ancient history and archaeology would be useful tools for you.

[_The Dude]

I started the comment about Meldrum's bigfoot fetish because I heard him interviewed on NPR. The things he said and the way he said them added fuel to the fire of cryptozoological crankiness, in my opinion. It seems quite natural for his type to also have an interest in lost Lamanites and Nephites (and vice versa). Am I allowed to have an opinon based on what I heard him say, or do I have to surrender to Jane Goodall's endorsement?

LoaP, please give me a link to Meldrum's DNA article and I will look at it. I'm not going to buy DCP's book. Sorry, but I'm out of money this holiday season.