Learn more Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Shop now Learn More Shop now Learn more Click Here Shop Kindle Learn More Shop now Shop now

Customer reviews

4.6 out of 5 stars
4.6 out of 5 stars
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

on 14 May 2017
Loved the photos of the cast evidence, especially the partial body print. Sometimes the conclusions were a little drawn out and I lost interest.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 3 August 2017
Excellent quality and fast delivery.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 1 October 2006
There seem to be pitifully few well qualified academics like Dr Meldrum who are prepared to put their reputations on the line and publish a serious work on this controversial subject, so it good to be able to confirm that this book about the sasquatch mystery is obviously the culmination of several years of intelligent and thorough research by somebody who has the training and experience to do it properly. He has quite correctly approached this matter with the right leavening of caution, while keeping a clear and receptive mind. His own experiences in the forests and mountains of the Pacific Northwest, examining tracks and apparently coming close to these creatures, have obviously made an impression on him and provided the motivation to investigate and analyse the various aspects of their anatomy and behaviour. He is not afraid to launch a robust attack against those academics who dismiss the whole thing too easily. The result is an exciting work that raises expectations and the possibility that conclusive proof of the existence of these creatures might just around the corner. Living in the UK, I can only be an armchair enthusiast (although I am hoping to do some field research in North America soon) but I have no hesitation in recommending this work to any reasonably intelligent reader with an open mind and an interest in wildlife, and certainly all primatologists. If you do read it, when you have finished lend it to a sceptical friend. He or she might then appreciate why this is such an intriguing and potentially sensational subject, and one that perhaps does not deserve to be marginalised in the way it has been.
11 Comment| 23 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 30 December 2007
I have heard of and have been fascinated by this subject for years. I've also been very frustrated that there was a lack of respectable writing and research on this legend which, in my amateur view, possessed a ounce of credibility. I was very eager to read this book by the very educated and academic Jeff Meldrum hoping to come away with a definitive opinion on Bigfoot. I didn't.

The book is very well written and there are many many scientific arguments put across which the unscientific mind would find compelling. I do not have a scientific mind but a few negatives stand out.

Jeff Meldrum obviously believes in this ape and thus the book is very much geared towards persuading you it exists. I also notice that most of the experts that Meldrum quotes are members of the BigFoot Research Organisation and thus biased towards this legend.

Don't get me wrong. It's a great book, and puts across the history of the legend very well. It is certainly a good reference point to start from. That said, don't be fooled by the argument that Meldrum is stepping out on the line for this. How much money is there to be made as an Anthropologist compared to an Anthropologist who is claiming to have evidence for the existence of an undiscovered species. I suspect that actually Meldrum is doing quite well out of this.

Even my unscientific mind could find some flaws in his arguments which were sometimes a little blinkered. THAT SAID what Meldrum very respectfully does is put forward arguments as to why there should definately be an independant scientific research programme into this enigma. I for one would be very interested to know the out come. Last point! I'm not convinced the Patterson Bigfoot isn't a man in a suit.
1212 Comments| 10 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 2 January 2015
For those used to the slapdash approach of commercial TV to Bigfoot, be prepared for a bit of a shock. This book goes into great scientific depth on many points. The subtitle is Sasquatch meets Science, and the latter aspect is presented in a level headed manner, almost to the point of it reading like a science textbook.

If you want to be titillated by the mystery of Bigfoot, don't buy this book. If you want to consider the evidence analysed using rigorous scientific methods, go for it. It's a slog in some instances, (some might say 'boring') but that's exactly why this book can be placed above most others on the subject.

It's hard to dispute the conclusions reached.
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 7 May 2016
An interesting and at times frustrating book. Frustrating because if this were any other animal, mainstream scientists would look at the evidence, take it seriously and launch a research project. But as soon as the word 'sasquatch' is mentioned, the shutters come down and the view is 'it can't exist therefore it doesn't exist'. Didn't they say the same about mountain gorillas? Dr Meldrum deserves great credit for trying to get the subject into the scientific mainstream and in this book explores the history as well as the science of the bigfoot phenomenon. If I were to take only one thing from reading this, it's that all the thousands of footprints seen over the years CANNOT be explained away as mere hoaxes. In which case, what is making them? Isn't it science's duty to find out and not pooh-pooh from the sidelines? I await the day when a new discovery is announced and we realise that our world is a little bit more complicated than we thought.
0Comment| One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 11 July 2015
This book by Jeff Meldrum is one of the most well written ones I have ever come across, and not just in relation to the topic of sasquatch as an extant North American ape species. The academic register employed in the writing and structure of the book is very impressive in its systematic and detailed data presentation, discussion and analysis of the evidence. People convinced of the probability of a living population of relic hominoids or their descendants in America can, as well as sceptics alike, can finally find perfectly plausible reasons for the absence of evidence for Sasquatch along with physical and trace evidence gathered over the years. For Professor Jeff Meldrum possesses a remarkable explanatory power in his writing, especially with regard to the chapters on foot morphology of Sasquatch and the absence of hominoid fossils in American soil due to the soil acidity of temperate montane forests and of possible ancient forests inundated by rising sea levels. Altogether, this books presents an extremely cogent and well-rounded argument for the existence of sasquatch as it reinforces the open-minded principles of science in its examination of the ever-increasing evidence at hand. I sincerely doubt if Jeff Meldrum is out for publicity, for one will discover a serious, level-headed scientist behind the keyboard, always examining the evidence with a healthy dose of scepticism and yet with open-mindedness to deign to tread the path that the evidence leads to, wherever that may. I highly recommend this book for anyone, and not just for someone interested in the Bigfoot phenomenon.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 17 August 2013
Surprisingly readable for the layman. Meldrum is obviously a teacher as he can get his point across (mostly!) without getting bogged down in the technicalities which bedevil so many learned tomes.
0Comment| One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 1 December 2012
Sasquatch or Bigfoot is a legendary creature supposedly living somewhere in the forests and swamp lands of North America. Mainstream science regards Bigfoot as an ancient superstition turned into a kind of urban legend, and has relegated it to the same status as that of UFOs, ghosts and post-mortem Elvis sightings. Meanwhile, people on the ground keep encountering the creature. It's usually described as huge, hairy, ape-like and (sometimes) threatening. If Bigfoot is a real animal, it would presumably be an unknown species of ape. While the elusive beast has been reported from all over North America, there is a concentration of Bigfoot sightings in the Pacific Northwest and British Columbia.

"Sasquatch: Legend meets science" is a book by Jeff Meldrum, one of the few scientists who take the Bigfoot phenomenon seriously. There is also a film with the same title, available free on Youtube or on DVD from Amazon. The book is much better than the documentary, which simply summarizes some of the book's findings. In Meldrum's opinion, Sasquatch or Bigfoot is a real, flesh-and-blood great ape.

I admit that his arguments for its existence are surprisingly strong! I had a kind of conversion experience when reading it. If science has missed a huge, hairy and (I presume) smelly ape in the Evergreen State, who knows what else it might have missed? The return of the Christ in the etheric?

OK, that was in-house self-irony.

On a more serious note, "Sasquatch: Legend meets Science" is a competent summary of the pro-Bigfoot position. Since the author is a scientist, a few chapters are somewhat tedious and technical, but all chapters can be read by the interested layman. I was surprised by the large amount of suggestive evidence that could point to Bigfoot being an actual unknown animal: dermal ridges visible at the plaster casts of footprints, hair samples which doesn't match those of any known animal, "dynamic" footprints which look logical if made by an actual creature, and (of course) the Skookum print and the Patterson-Gimlin film. (I'm more sceptical to the Freeman video and the Memorial Day video.)

This would be more than enough to launch an expedition in search of some obscure subspecies of hog or antelope in the Asian underbrush, so why doesn't science take Sasquatch seriously? Here, we are obviously dealing with some kind of sociological processes at work. To be fair to the sceptics, there is a continuum between "natural" Bigfoot sightings and "supernatural" ones (including the inevitable UFOs and channelled messages), making it tempting to dismiss the whole phenomenon as a silly superstition or gigantic hoax. While my "Fortean" vein isn't overtly hostile to the fringier aspects of the BF phenomenon, I nevertheless understand why mainline scientists (or even mainline non-materialists) might feel uncomfortable with a phenomenon that looks "occult". However, the bits and pieces of evidence presented by Meldrum (all of them down-to-earth and completely boring from a Fortean standpoint) do deserve a fairer hearing than hitherto given - at least in principle. In practice, it might (ironically) be a good thing that mainstream science disbelieves in the Sasquatch, considering what usually happens to unknown hogs and antelopes if they are detected (clue: check the local bushmeat market). The same fate seems to have befallen the Bili ape, a previously unknown and somewhat peculiar chimp population in the Congo.

But back to mainframe. What I found most persuasive in Meldrum's case is that the "legend" of Bigfoot is so consistent over time, in a manner difficult to square with an exclusively sociological explanation. The Bigfoot antics reported by many eye-witnesses are remarkably consistent with primate behaviour. Yet, great apes are supposed to have been unknown to Native Americans before the arrival of White settlers. Many aspects of ape behaviour weren't mapped until the 20th century, and some may not be widely known among laymen even today. So why has these supposedly cultural constructs of the Pacific Northwest looked like apes and behaved like apes since time immemorial? Maybe because they actually *are* apes? Ceremonial masks from Native tribes showing the Sasquatch have ape-like features, and so have traditional Sasquatch sculptures. The Sasquatches are reported to espouse ape-like aggressive patterns, including hurling small rocks at intruders. Meldrum himself has been attacked in this manner several times. (I don't think misidentification with a black bear is likely in this case - unless U.S. bears have occult powers and can levitate rocks!) It's precisely this "biological" consistency which suggests something more than the Ivory Billed Woodpecker might be unaccounted for in the U.S. forests...

Even seemingly illogical traits turn out to be biologically possible on a closer look, such as the nocturnal habits of Bigfoot. The chimps at Rabongo in Uganda are largely nocturnal, suggesting it's possible for apes to turn to such behaviour if necessary. Nor are the origins of Bigfoot a deep mystery - a gigantic ape (Gigantopithecus) is known from the fossil record of East Asia, and could conceivably have reached North America in prehistoric times (so did the Red Panda). Meldrum believes that Gigantopithecus was omnivorous, which would also square with the reported habits of Bigfoot. The author also points out that most ape fossils have been found outside the tropics, perhaps suggesting that the original habitat of the apes was subtropical or even temperate. On a more daring note, Meldrum suggests that the weird ability of Bigfoot to scare people or make them feel nausea is due to infrasound. Some animals, apparently, do use infrasound to communicate or even to stun their pray.

That being said, I still have a lingering suspicion that there might be something more to the Bigfoot-Sasquatch phenomenon than simply an unknown ape in the West Coast rainforests. As already mentioned, there doesn't seem to be a neat way of distinguishing "natural" eye-witness reports from "supernatural" ones. The strange ability of the Sasquatch to instil fear in humans (and other animals?) could perhaps be explained by infrasound, but how far can you take these naturalist explanations before they become too exotic? How does one explain that a Bigfoot runs in front of a speeding car, when no other cars are in sight? Why doesn't this supposedly reclusive animal simply wait for the only car on the highway to drive by, and then pass the road undetected? How does one account for the vanishing acts of this creature, or its constant appearances outside its logical geographical range? My favourite example is the White (sic) Sasquatch observed in a town on Rhode Island! That's on the...ahem...East Coast.

Personally, I'm more or less convinced that Associate Professor Jeffrey Meldrum's "Sasquatch: Legend meets Science" has solved one part of the mystery at hand. Or at least pointed out a perfectly reasonable working hypothesis. However, I also feel that there might be other aspects of the problem that are less easily solved within a strictly naturalist framework...
0Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on 22 March 2014
It is easy to stand on the periphery, casually denouncing all evidence of bigfoot as faked, because "bigfoot doesn't exist." With the 21st Century discoveries of mammals we didn't suspect existed it should be less of a surprise to find a large ape in the Asian and North American forests than to believe none existed.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

Need customer service? Click here