tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post3767666544638272050..comments2024-01-05T05:02:20.353+00:00Comments on CRYPTOZOOLOGY ONLINE: Still on the Track: DALE DRINNON: Gambo and AmbonUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-90670503960283639272011-05-02T18:13:43.953+01:002011-05-02T18:13:43.953+01:00Hi Darren, perhaps you should take that part up wi...Hi Darren, perhaps you should take that part up with the Wikipedia as well, for Wikipedia is the source of that statement, as indicated by the link in my article: I was merely quoting it.<br /><br />Keep up the good work! Dale D.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-13600090997585661842010-04-18T10:11:09.231+01:002010-04-18T10:11:09.231+01:00Hi. My views seem to be totally misrepresented in ...Hi. My views seem to be totally misrepresented in this article: I don't remember ever saying that the 'Gambo' carcass never existed. Rather, I'm <a href="http://darrennaish.blogspot.com/2006/02/gambo-rides-again-beaked-beast-of.html" rel="nofollow">on record</a> as saying that Burnham most likely misidentified a carcass belonging to a known species of cetacean.Darren Naishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00324870234525004643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-9345670991412209902010-04-16T16:03:38.742+01:002010-04-16T16:03:38.742+01:00Dale Drinnon: [I] "added different informatio...Dale Drinnon: [I] "added different information to the Wikipedia article which was subsequently removed...I was not arguing for the identity of the carcass but drawing attention to the fact that the description was indeed close to two reports listed by Heuvelmans as possible "Marine saurians"".<br /><br />Ye', they're terrible for that.<br /><br />They originally included Madeleine Ennis' observation that subsequent researchers' failure to reproduce her experimental 'homeopathy' results might be due to the fact they'd carried out a different experiment with a different protocol using different materials - now there's no mention of her observations at all, leaving the distinct impression her results've been disposed of.<br /><br />...makes you wonder who's really in charge there, and what they're afraid of.<br /><br />To me there should at the very least be links to observations like yours, which I find highly intriguing and, I suggest's precisely the sort of thing that'll stimulate the imaginations of the researchers of tomorrow.<br /><br />Then again, maybe that's PRECISELY why they do it!borkyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05042275165058229970noreply@blogger.com