Jeff Meldrum on NPR
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on November 12th, 2006
On Friday, November 10, Dr. Jeff meldrum was interviewed on NPR by Ira Flatow on his Talk of the Nation: Science Friday show.
Anthropologist, author and scientist Jeff Meldrum talks about the evidence for (and against) the existence of Bigfoot. Are there animals hiding in the woods that we know nothing about? Meldrum’s new book is Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science.
You can listen to the segment with Dr. Meldrum from their website here.
The interview references the Associated Press attack on Dr. Meldrum, as well as the September 27, 2002 interview with Dr. Jane Goodall with Ira Flatow. Mr. Flatow mentioned this previous interview on Friday because of a question asked of Dr. Goodall by a caller. Dr. Goodall responds to the caller who asks about Bigfoot.
Following is a transcript of that portion of the program:
Dr. Goodall: As for the other, you’re talking about a yeti or bigfoot or sasquatch.
Ira Flatow: Is that what he’s talking about?
Dr. Goodall: Yes, it is and…
Ira Flatow: Is that the message I’m missing here?
Dr. Goodall: I think that’s the message you’re missing and…
Ira Flatow: Is that right?
Caller: Pretty much.
Ira Flatow: I’m out of the loop. Go ahead.
Dr. Goodall: Well now, you’ll be amazed when I tell you that I’m sure that they exist.
Ira Flatow: You are?
Dr. Goodall: Yeah. I’ve talked to so many Native Americans who all describe the same sounds, two who have seen them. I’ve probably got about, oh, thirty books that have come from different parts of the world, from China from, from all over the place, and there was a little tiny snippet in the newspaper just last week which says that British scientists have found what they believed to be a yeti hair and that the scientists in the Natural History Museum in London couldn’t identify it as any known animal.
Ira Flatow: Wow.
Dr. Goodall: That was just a wee bit in the newspaper and, obviously, we have to hear a little bit more about that.
Ira Flatow: Well, in this age of DNA, if you find a hair there might be some cells on it.
Dr. Goodall: Well, there will be and I’m sure that’s what they’ve examined and they don’t match up. That’s what my little tiny snippet says. They don’t match up with DNA cells from known animals, so apes.
Ira Flatow: Did you always have this belief that there, that they, that they existed?
Dr. Goodall: Well, I’m a romantic, so I always wanted them to exist.
Ira Flatow: Alright?
Caller: Thank you.
Ira Flatow: Thanks for calling. Well, how do you go looking for them? I mean, people have been looking, right? It’s not like, or has this just been, since we don’t really believe they can exist, we really haven’t really made a serious search.
Dr. Goodall: Well, there are people looking. There are very ardent groups in Russia, and they have published a whole lot of stuff about what they’ve seen. Of course, the big, the big criticism of all this is, "Where is the body?" You know, why isn’t there a body? I can’t answer that, and maybe they don’t exist, but I want them to.
You can listen to the segment with Dr. Goodall from their website here.
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005.
I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films:
OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.
Wow, thanks to Mr. Woolheater for posting Dr. Goodall’s definitive statement, “I’m sure that they exist.” That’s about as positive as it gets. I wish we could print her words TEN FEET TALL and air them on every TV station on the globe.
It is so rare to hear such an affirmation from the always conservative, academic science side of the fence. The only other expression of absolute belief that I have ever heard came from the late Dr. Krantz.
With all due respect to those other academics who, for fear of peer reprisal, are carefully balanced on the proverbial fence, I must say that we could use a little more affirmative action a la Jane Goodall and Grover Krantz.
Recently I have listened to a few radio interviews with so-called leading BF investigators who could not bring themselves to commit the way Goodall and Krantz have done, even though I sensed they were literally biting their tongues behind their microphones for want of fessing up.
Wow, fear of reprisal and ridicule run so unbelievably deep. You all know the old saying, ‘some folks wouldn’t say sh** if they had a mouth full of it’. I wonder how long they can stand to just chew on it.
Yeah, I was a little curious about this contradiction too. She says she is sure, then goes and says that maybe they don’t exist. Maybe she means she is sure that there is a possibility of their existence? Regardless, Dr. Goodall’s vote of confidence is not a bad thing. It’s good to see that she is not afraid to give her opinion on this subject when it could very well attract ridicule to her. That may be why she changed her wording at the end to say “may exist”, but I find it to be a positive thing that she has come forward with her views on sasquatch.
It sounds like they were trying to back her into a corner and she was caught off guard.
I disagree, Shill. The evidence is there. The existence of the evidence is not contingent on your acceptance or denial of it. The evidence is there to indicate the existence of an unlisted species. You, and others, can accept the evidence or not.
Also, the purely emotional response that “it simply can’t exist” (which we hear far too often) should not taint an objective review of all the evidence, which as Dr. Meldrum has pointed out very well in his book, constitutes more than enough reason to warrant comprehensive investigation into the matter by more than underfunded, part-time volunteers.
Dudlow: your comments are, well, worth comment.
I’ve gotta say that I think these things exist. But I don’t say that, by and large. Not to other people. (I sure never bring it up unprompted.)
I understand why researchers who are sure the animals exist are reluctant to talk. It’s a weird world. People believe in beings for which there’s no evidence (fill in your Supreme Being here); and dismiss, out of hand, critters for which there’s copious evidence. Mainstream science claims no hard evidence exists, when the only difference between sasquatch evidence and hard evidence is that mainstream science won’t even look at it.
I’m sure a lot of intrigued people have seen the evidence piling up; gotten in the field; gotten hooked…and then had wait-a-minute moments. A big, bipedal ape? Right here in our back yards? Gotta admit, it seems farfetched, doesn’t it?
Sometimes it just takes a long time to chew, even when you’re sure what it is you’re eating. I’ve been there. I responded to the newspaper editorial posted on another thread; left my name and other identifying info; and actually thought afterward: holy cow, what did I DO there….? What if someone sees this…and puts two and two together….?
So yeah. it’s kinda hard even for us “believers” to believe. (I hate that word, as applied to sas. Like Grover Krantz, I don’t believe. I see evidence which leads me to conclude.)
But even there: I’ve never seen one. Possible evidence, once. (And as objective as I could be about what I saw, even if I had no fear of anyone or anything at all, I couldn’t say more than “possible.”) And all the evidence I’ve read is, well, seconhand. It’s so good, and so voluminous, that my stock answer now is to direct any skeptic to the BFRO and TBRC sites, period. They then have to come back and tell me what specifically it is that they’re not buying.
But I didn’t put the sites up. Heck, somebody could have faked averything on them. I know, rationally it’a sbout the same as an artist counterfeiting a million one-dollar bills, freehand. But I don’t KNOW FOR SURE.
So I get it. Wish I didn’t have to. But I do get it. As has been noted here, even Jane double-clutched after her original affirmation.