Product Details
Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science

Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science
By Dr. Jeff Meldrum

List Price: $15.95
Price: $10.85 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details

Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com

43 new or used available from $5.98

Average customer review:

Product Description

In this landmark work on a subject too often dismissed as paranormal or disreputable, Jeffrey Meldrum gives us the first book on Sasquatch to be written by a scientist with impeccable academic credentials. He gives an objective look at the facts in a field mined with hoaxes and sensationalism. Meldrum reports on the work of a team of experts from a wide variety of fields who were assembled to examine the evidence for a large, yet undiscovered, North American primate. He reviews the long history of this mystery--which long predates the "Bigfoot" flap of the late fifties--and explains all the scientific pros and cons in a clear and accessible style, amplified by over 150 illustrations. Anyone who has pondered the mysteries of human evolution will be fascinated and eager to join Dr. Meldrum in drawing their own conclusion.

Product Details

  • Amazon Sales Rank: #101623 in Books
  • Published on: 2007-09-04
  • Released on: 2007-09-04
  • Original language: English
  • Number of items: 1
  • Binding: Paperback
  • 320 pages

Features

Editorial Reviews

Review

"Jeff Meldrum's book Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science brings a much needed level of scientific analysis to the Sasquatch - or Bigfoot - debate. Does Sasquatch exist? There are countless people - especially indigenous people - in different parts of America who claim to have seen such a creature. And in many parts of the world I meet those who, in a matter-of-fact way, tell me of their encounters with large, bipedal, tail-less hominids. I think I have read every article and every book about these creatures, and while most scientists are not satisfied with existing evidence, I have an open mind."
--Dr. Jane Goodall, DBE UN Messenger of Peace & Founder - The Jane Goodall Institute

"Jeff Meldrum 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. With objectivity and insight he analyzes evidence from tracks, skin ridges on the soles of feet, film footage, and DNA, and he compares it to that on primates and various other species. 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." --Dr. George Schaller, Vice-President of the Wildlife Conservation 

About the Author

DR. JEFFREY MELDRUM is an Associate Professor of Anatomy and Anthropology at Idaho State University.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.

Introduction

Doug Hajicek, nature film producer, took a break with his cameraman, and wandered near the shoreline of Selma Lake, nearly 1000 miles north of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. In the Arctic to film giant lake trout, they had flown into this remote location by floatplane. Along the isolated beach they encountered a crisp 17-inch footprint. The print was exceptionally clear and detailed, and except for its enormous proportions, clearly human-like in form, with distinct toes and a broad rounded heel. Some 40 inches further ahead was another similar footprint, followed by another, and so on trailing alternately into the distance. This resembled no bear track. Besides, a polar bear hind paw measures only between 10 and 14 inches long. The hind paw of an Alaskan brown bear may reach a full 16 inches in length, but their range is generally restricted to the Pacific coastline. Grizzlies do range farther to the east but their foot is only about 10 inches long. Could it be an out-of-the-way Alaskan Brown, or an over-sized grizzly, fishing for giant salmon? Hajicek weighed that possibility but he was familiar with bear sign from extensive documentary film-making with Lynn Rogers, the “man who walks with bears,” and he knew that a bear track consists of a distinctive alternating pattern of hind and forepaw prints. The narrow interdigital pad of the fore paw is much abbreviated compared to the hind paw, to which is added an extended distinctly tapering heel pad. Whatever animal had left these tracks was walking upright, on hind feet only, and had struck off from the lakeshore in an apparently determined course with an impressive stride. Judging from the freshness of the tracks, it may even have been the filmcrew's arrival by floatplane that sent it on its way.

Hajicek’s curiosity was piqued and together with his companion, they followed the advancing line of footprints. For over a mile they traced the creature’s enormous strides, before deciding that they didn’t actually want to catch up to whatever behemoth had left the immense tracks clearly and deeply impressed in the frosty tundra soil. The men remained mystified over what could have been responsible for these prodigious footprints. They returned to the lake thinking that they could readily follow the tracks from the air over the relatively treeless landscape and perhaps overtake the trackmaker. But the pilot of the floatplane refused to talk about the tracks and rebuffed their suggestions to pursue them, and so they gave up on the idea.

Hajicek was unfamiliar with Sasquatch and therefore had no real concept of a giant upright ape upon which to hang the enigma of the footprints. The obvious and unavoidable fact that some unusual animal had made this impressive trackway continued to dog him, and his thoughts frequently returned to the scene of the discovery. The suggestion that someone might have intentionally hoaxed them at that precise spot beside a 70-mile long lake in the middle of the Canadian wilderness, accessible only by floatplane, seemed absolutely nonsensical. Hajicek thought about it a great deal and eventually, with the advent of the Internet, encountered the website of the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO), and discovered that he was not alone in his experience. In fact, a surprising number of other people had discovered large inexplicable footprints in the wilds of North America. He also learned that the BFRO was compiling an electronic database of reports of sightings and footprints submitted by witnesses from all walks of life. A network of field investigators responded to and documented these reports, where possible, by interviewing witnesses and collecting corroborative evidence, or determining alternative explanations. Hajicek began to educate himself about the accumulated information concerning the history and nature of this hypothetical and strangely elusive primate. He was surprised and irritated that the public at large, and particularly the media, ignored the extensive evidence for the existence of this otherwise legendary animal. Being a filmmaker by profession, he thought what better project than to produce an informed documentary that dealt objectively with the data and explored the question of Sasquatch with an open mind. The folks at the Discovery Channel concurred and so the concept of Sasquacth: Legend Meets Science was conceived.

The format of the documentary was a noticeable departure from the established formula for “monster” media. Instead of trotting out a series of sensational eyewitness accounts with interviews and dramatic recreations, then “balancing” them with retorts by armchair skeptics and willfully ignorant scientific experts, Hajicek opted to let the data stand on their own. He would present the accumulated evidence on its own merits and enlist the expertise of scientists willing to evaluate it objectively and to pursue their analysis wherever it might lead them with out prejudice. Several of these recruited scientists were previously unconcerned with the matter of sasquatch, but nevertheless, in the spirit of exploration, were quite willing to ply their skills to evaluate the evidence laid before them. Others harbored a longstanding interest in the subject, but had rarely spoken openly of it for fear of ridicule and a concern for their reputed credibility. A few of the scientists, like Dr. Bindernagel, Dr. Fahrenbach, and me, had already crossed paths with the evidence and were actively engaged in ongoing research into the matter, in spite of its unpopularity within mainstream science, and even our own institutional colleagues.

The Internet has provided a novel and readily accessible forum for the exchange of ideas and information. Like Hajicek, other witnesses frequently submit reports of their encounters with sasquatch to the many sites on the Internet concerned with the topic. The Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization was one of an overwhelming number of websites that one is confronted with when searching the Internet for information relating to sasquatch or bigfoot. It was the one that captured Hajicek’s attention and subsequently cooperate during the development of the documentary concept. Many of the pioneering scientists Hajicek would work with were associated at one time or another with the BFRO. For a time the BFRO took the lead among a new generation of amateur and professional investigators. There were a number of organizations of various stripe, but the BFRO boldly touted the distinction of being “the only scientific organization probing the Bigfoot/Sasquatch mystery.” A rather grandious assertion perhaps, but, in so far as efforts were made by its investigators to adhere to the principles and methods of scientific research during the collection, handling, and evaluation of objective evidence, that standard was applied with varying success. Like any community, the BFRO was not without its volatile personalities, egos, strong wills, deep-seated opinions, conflicting agendas, and other controversies. However, in spite of intermittent lapses, there has been a degree of cooperation, collegiality, and professionalism among its individual membership.

Matthew Moneymaker, the founder and driving force behind the organization, recruited and sometimes rode rough shod over a line-up of amateur curators and investigators with varied skills and backgrounds. Affiliated with their ranks have been a number of credentialed scientists -- primatologists, anthropologists, archaeologists, wildlife biologists, geologists, and engineers, which pursue a professional interest in the matter. Some of the most dedicated field researchers, however, have little, or no formal training in the sciences, but often possess a vast experience in the outdoors and keen powers of observation and discernment. The self-described aim of the BFRO is as follows:

The mission of the Bigfoot Field Researchers Organization (BFRO) is multifaceted, but the organization essentially seeks to resolve the mystery surrounding the Bigfoot phenomenon, that is, to derive conclusive documentation of the species' existence. This goal is pursued through the proactive collection of empirical data and physical evidence from the field and by means of activities designed to promote an awareness and understanding of the nature and origin of the evidence.

The BFRO, the oldest and largest organization of its kind, is directed by a virtual community of scientists, journalists, and specialists from diverse backgrounds. The researchers who compose the BFRO are engaged in projects, including field and laboratory investigations, designed to address various aspects of the bigfoot phenomenon. As a result of the education and experience of its members and the quality of their efforts, the BFRO is widely considered as the most credible and respected investigative network involved in the study of this subject.

When compelling evidence is collected by or submitted to the BFRO, it is presented to scientific and forensic specialists for evaluation. The BFRO organizes and reports observations and data and publishes research material. Through this process, the BFRO steadily improves the size and scope of its collective expertise.

Those in the organization anticipate that this emphasis on cooperation and professionalism is not only the most realistic approach to resolving the mystery, but that it furthers the BFRO's long term goal: determining how these rare and elusive animals can and should be protected and studied after their existence is generally acknowledged by governmental agencies and the scientific community.

Admittedly, this is not a wholly “scientific” posture, i.e. “to derive conclusive documentation of the species’ existence.” The strictly scientific stance would be to seek to resolve the question of the existence of sasquatch either way, without any appearance of a “pro-Bigfoot” bias. To its credit, the BFRO investigators are routinely critical of reports and go t...

Customer Reviews

Most Interesting5
I first learned about "Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science" on November 10 of this year, when I was sitting in my car listening to NPR's "Talk of the Nation/Science Friday". They had a guy on named Jeff Meldrum, who was talking about Sasquatch sightings. He sounded very knowledgeable and intelligent -- oh, and he had a new book out. Intrigued, I sought it out at the local Borders store. It was, I think, a very good sign that it was in the "Science/Biology" section, rather than the "Paranormal" section sandwiched in between "Crop Circles" and "UFOs".

Now, most of us have probably heard tales of Sasquatch, or Bigfoot, from childhood onward. It's part of American folklore. I think subconsciously I'd always kind of associated Bigfoot sightings with ridiculously gullible people who might also claim to have seen Elvis at the local shopping mall. Steven Spielberg poked fun at this in one scene of his classic film "Close Encounters of the Third Kind".

But a funny thing happened as I dug into the book, a nice, sturdy hardcover tome suitable for reading while propped up in bed. I learned that a wide variety of people have seen signs of something big and mysterious in the woods of North America. These are experienced backwoodsmen, hunters, trackers, naturalists and primatologists. Sightings by settlers go back to the mid 1800's. Even Jane Goodall, a world-renowned export on apes, was persuaded by the evidence she'd examined. It would seem that, whatever Sasquatch may turn out to be, it's no joke.

Without repeating the entire book, I will instead list some of the big questions and observations that are made or raised therein.

o The chapter on Cryptozoology discusses various "unknown" creatures which may exist around the world. One of these is the yeti, or "abominable snowman", of the Himalayas. How similar are its footprints to those of Sasquatch?

o One useful technique for discovering unknown mammal species in remote places is to consult with indigenous peoples. They, after all, are in the best position to know where to look. So, what does Native American legend and lore, and artwork, have to say about Sasquatch?

o There have been some pretty infamous hoaxes concerning Bigfoot, particularly the ones perpetrated by Ray Wallace and his family members. Does this mean that all Sasquatch sightings are hoaxes? How would it be possible to tell real ones from fake?

o There are tantalizing fossil remains of an ancient giant ape called Gigantopithecus. Could Sasquatch turn out to be one of these? Just how hard is it for fossils to be created in places like Oregon and Washington State? How commonplace are fossils for known primate species, such as chimpanzees and gorillas?

o Casts of Sasquatch footprints, including known forgeries, are quite abundant. What does detailed analysis of the presumed "real" ones have to say about the kind of creature which made them. How similar are they to, say, bear paw prints?

o What about dermatoglyphics, the fingerprint-like ridge patterns found in some exceptional footprint casts? What do experts have to say about these?

o Wildlife photography turns out to be much more challenging than many of us think. A lot of the pictures we see in calendars and the like are actually posed, using creatures in captivity. Chimpanzees and wolverines both are notoriously difficult to film in the wild. Plus, commercial-grade videotape doesn't make for the best pictures, especially after they've been copied a few times.

o By far the most famous Bigfoot video was one taken on 16mm film in northern California in 1967, by Roger Patterson and Bob Gimlin. It has long been dismissed by experts as a fake. But can modern image enhancement techniques yield useful information? Is some of the behavior evinced by the creature in the film the kind of thing people in the 1960s would have known about? Or is it perhaps something primatologists have learned about only in the past couple of decades?

o Modern computerized motion-capture techniques, like those used in movie special effects, have been used to recreate the kind of skeletal-muscular structure which would be needed to produce some well-documented sets of Sasquatch tracks. What does this evidence show?

o The holy grail of discovering a new species, other than capturing an actual live specimen, would be sequencing its DNA, perhaps from hair samples. What have DNA tests and hair sample comparisons taught experts?

o One challenge with describing unknown species: it is very easy to say that hair does NOT come from, say, moose, elk, bear or wildcats. But it is much harder to say what it IS. What can be learned by comparing the various "unknown" hair samples? Do they consistently look like they could come from a single unknown species?

o There is a principle, called Bergman's rule, which notes that related animal species tend to get larger the closer to the poles they get and the farther from the tropics. One example is bears, where the smallest are a kind found in South America, while the biggest are polar bears. Page 94 shows a graph of the sizes of Sasquatch footprints ranging from northern California to northern Saskatchewan. Is the graph consistent with Bergman's rule?

The chapters come with lots of useful diagrams and photos, including 16 pages of color photos right after page 96. The exceptionally well-written pages are filled with a wealth of information about wildlife that I never knew before. It was worth reading for that alone. Some of it can get pretty technical, to the point that I just had to skim it. Finally, there is an extensive index and bibliography in back, for those who want to do further research.

Jeff Meldum's conclusions purposefully take the middle ground between excessive skepticism on one hand and excessive credulity on the other. Clearly, scientists can be satisfied that Sasquatch really exists only if they can find something truly tangible -- a skeleton, for instance.

Capturing Sasquatch would be a major coup. However, based on various eyewitness accounts of close encounters, including by the author himself, this is likely to be a very large, dangerous creature. Also, people who claim to have literally had one in their gun sights have reported being extremely reluctant to squeeze the trigger. Native American tradition views Sasquatch as sacred, and at least one county in the U.S. actually has laws protecting them.

One thing is for sure: scientists really ought to keep looking into the matter. The impression I get is that the sightings aren't going to go away any time soon.

Should you read this book? I would encourage it. If nothing else, it is a sober, painstaking scientific analysis of available evidence by a large number of experts, in multiple disciplines. This is what science should be. It is very illuminating even if the subject should turn out to be completely bogus in the end.

Final note: There is also, it appears, a companion DVD. It looks like you have to go to their web site to order it, but I'm tempted.

The Best Sasquatch Book Out There5
Over the past couple of years, I've read quite a few books on Sasquatch. Of the newer books, "Raincoast Sasquatch" by J.R. Alley was easily the best...until now. I really don't know anything about Alley and I can't say anything about his motivations, but as I read the many other recent books I kept getting this feeling that "Bigfoot is Big business" to quote Jerry Coleman. Indeed it seems that some current "researchers" compile a list of sightings and then proceed to make incredible postulations about all aspects pertinent to Sasquatch and unfortunatley, some even make sweeping generalizations about known animal behavior which are in fact completely untrue. Up until now, there appeared to be a lack of true scientific investigation on behalf of the research community and in many of the recent books there was a general request from these guys for academia to investigate the Sasquatch phenomenon. Well, thanks to Jeff and the other researchers involved, we have a good scientific book to read and enjoy. This book is by far the best of the rest. It's not chock full of sightings, it's not hinging all bets on "Patty", and it's not pursuing the UFO-Bigfoot theory. Thank God! What you do get is good material from footprint examinations by a specialist in bipedal biomechanics, dermatoglyphics, vocalization analysis, some "Patty" discussion, and some statistical analysis. The latter which I find a little problematic.

I think Fahrenbach has developed a nice, simple methodology for trying to determine some metrics for Sasquatch feet. I don't agree that his stats will necessarily remove or otherwise separate hoaxes from real feet based upon dimensions. If we consider that the ultimate purpose of a hoax is to have fun and "pull the wool over someone's face", then wouldn't we, as a hoaxer, intend to create a fake foot which will conform to known dimensions? It seems unlikely that anyone would fake a footprint 30 inches long and 5 inches wide because who would believe it? Thus, it seems more likely that a hoaxer would make 15 or 16 inch feet that are sufficiently wide as to agree with other prints. Therefore, I think Fahrenbach's data would be more convincing if he chose to include data from measurements made on fake feet which supposedly are in collections. Then, we would get a true comparison of where these fake feet lie in comparison to assumed real feet. Furthermore, I think consultation of a local soils specialist may help in constraining the predicted weight of the beast because they could determine some range for the lithostatic, effective, and hydrostatic forces necessary to compress the soil. This may only be applicable to fresh prints. Other than those minor concerns, I think this is an excellent book and a way forward for the science. Hopefully, Jeff has started an enduring investigation into the world of Sasquatch.

If you believe in Science...History is about to change forever5
It took me only 3 1/2 days to finish this book, the third-most important Sasquatch book to have in your collection (followed closely by "Meet The Sasquatch" and "Sasquatch: The Apes Among Us"). Meldrum covers so many topics that were covered in the TV special that preceded this handsome volume, but the book goes beyond the TV special. Meldrum discusses the Ray Wallace fiasco, the Patterson/Gimlin Film (with an exclusive interview with Bob Gimlin), video footage, footprint morphology and dermatoglyphics, bear/Sasquatch misidentifications, Great Ape behavior and its parallels to Sasquatch behavior, statistical data and information and several other different topics. I would say if you only buy one Sasquatch book this year, make it this one. It's terrific, well-written and scholarly and sober. Would make a great Christmas or birthday gift for the skeptic in your family or circle of friends.