My first reaction on reading this was to pass it off as a lightweight diatribe by an author mistakenly convinced only scientists can undertake research of any value, and that anyone investigating ‘fringe’ subjects is automatically a crackpot. Only on reading it a second time did I realise that Mr. Curnoe’s rant was a solid example of the lack of journalistic standards he was railing against, and deserved a response.

Lets first correct a few facts and misrepresentations. Mr Curnoe suggests the Russian conference had no scientific representation (he uses the terms "scientists" in accusing quotations). One of the participants is Jeff Meldrum, who is currently an Associate Professor of Anatomy and Anthropology and Adjunct Associate Professor of the Department of Anthropology at Idaho State University. Meldrum is also Adjunct Professor of Occupational and Physical Therapy and Affiliate Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology at the Idaho Museum of Natural History.

It was certainly a meeting of amateur investigators, but while Igor Bourtsev is not a published scientist, he is certainly a dedicated amateur, and not at all the hoaxer or publicity seeker that Mr. Curnoe alleges. I should know – he’s a good friend and we’ve met in Moscow several times. Igor has been actively involved in Russian investigations into their ‘wildman’; since the early 1950’s.

Igor may not be right about the Wildman being a surviving Neanderthal, but he has collected – and published – enough material to suggest there be something really interesting behind the decades of Russian reports.

What really wound me up is premise that the only published stories that can be believed are those from published scientists. That’s not only ridiculous, its elitist and more importantly downright dangerous. As a believer in climate change, I feel that science in general has done a poor job of communicating and relating to the general public on this major issue. Science, in general, needs better communication skills. Looking down on amateurs in any field, be they right or wrong, rather than positively engaging with them is the wrong approach. Science needs to discuss and debate, rather than pompously ridicule like this piece. Lets face it – papers write about the Yeti and Bigfoot because people love reading about them.

Mr. Curnoe’s declaration – “There is no Yeti”. Well, that’s a brave claim. I am reminded of the recent ‘Hobbit’ finds in Flores, with many scientists commenting on the possible connection with local stories of small, hairy creatures. Several scientists also seem open-minded about the possible existence of a new primate in Sumatra, the ‘Orang Pendek’, based on many eyewitness reports, footprints and few hairs. Perhaps there may be something behind the Yeti as well.

Let me declare my bias – I’ve actually co-authored a book on the Yowie. I can see Mr. Curnoe now jumping from his chair and yelling “AHA, an amateur AND a crackpot!” Well, I am university trained, and if Mr. Curnoe could be bothered to read Tony and my book, he’d see its pitch is that the fact that these wildman stories are so universal makes them damn interesting, whatever is behind them – be it animal, or perhaps some complex psychological or sociological phenomenon. Whatever it is, its no joke.

In Australia, the fact is that many aboriginal tribes had legends of large, ape-like animals prior to European arrival makes it even more fascinating. How could they describe apes if there was no primates here other than humans? Hey, even Sharon Hill, a scientist and a notable skeptic, gave the book a good review on Amazon!

There may well be no Yeti, or Yowie, or Orang Pendek, but something is going on, and its been happening across many cultures and many centuries. To me, that’s a complex question worth spending some time looking into, and I think it’s a shame that not many scientists feel the same way.

Wow..at first I thought it was Aprils fools day..How many "journalists" would write with so many ad hominems and personal insults in one article.But then I realised it was just a "scientist" having a little rant..but then what sort of "scientist: would have to swing from this weird subject to a rant/link to "climate change deniers".
Here is a link to another 30 thousand scientistswho question AGW..NOT CLIMATE CHANGE.
http://www.petitionproject.org/
How you dont get the difference between climate change and anthropomorphic climate change is stunning..or perhaps you do.. :)
You should be happy..the tax/trading will make the weather better for all of us. :)
And here is a link showing all the papers the MSM "forget" to mention refuting most of the tenants of AGW.
http://www.c3headlines.com/predictionsforecasts/