Thought this was pretty interesting. Looks like all of us that have made fun of folks claiming this thing was real may not have the last laugh... I still don't believe it.
BIGFOOT� DNA SEQUENCED IN UPCOMING GENETICS STUDY
Five-Year Genome Study Yields Evidence of Homo sapiens/Unknown Hominin Hybrid Species in North America
DALLAS, Nov. 24--A team of scientists can verify that their 5-year long DNA study, currently under peer-review, confirms the existence of a novel hominin hybrid species, commonly called �Bigfoot� or �Sasquatch,� living in North America. Researchers� extensive DNA sequencing suggests that the legendary Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago as a hybrid cross of modern Homo sapiens with an unknown primate species.
The study was conducted by a team of experts in genetics, forensics, imaging and pathology, led by Dr. Melba S. Ketchum of Nacogdoches, TX. In response to recent interest in the study, Dr. Ketchum can confirm that her team has sequenced 3 complete Sasquatch nuclear genomes and determined the species is a human hybrid:
�Our study has sequenced 20 whole mitochondrial genomes and utilized next generation sequencing to obtain 3 whole nuclear genomes from purported Sasquatch samples. The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to Homo sapiens and other primate species. Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens.
Hominins are members of the taxonomic grouping Hominini, which includes all members of the genus Homo. Genetic testing has already ruled out Homo neanderthalis and the Denisova hominin as contributors to Sasquatch mtDNA or nuDNA. �The male progenitor that contributed the unknown sequence to this hybrid is unique as its DNA is more distantly removed from humans than other recently discovered hominins like the Denisovan individual,� explains Ketchum.
�Sasquatch nuclear DNA is incredibly novel and not at all what we had expected. While it has human nuclear DNA within its genome, there are also distinctly non-human, non-archaic hominin, and non-ape sequences. We describe it as a mosaic of human and novel non-human sequence. Further study is needed and is ongoing to better characterize and understand Sasquatch nuclear DNA.�
Ketchum is a veterinarian whose professional experience includes 27 years of research in genetics, including forensics. Early in her career she also practiced veterinary medicine, and she has previously been published as a participant in mapping the equine genome. She began testing the DNA of purported Sasquatch hair samples 5 years ago.
Ketchum calls on public officials and law enforcement to immediately recognize the Sasquatch as an indigenous people:
�Genetically, the Sasquatch are a human hybrid with unambiguously modern human maternal ancestry. Government at all levels must recognize them as an indigenous people and immediately protect their human and Constitutional rights against those who would see in their physical and cultural differences a �license� to hunt, trap, or kill them.�
Full details of the study will be presented in the near future when the study manuscript publishes.
###
Dr. Ketchum is available for interview or to answer further questions about the Sasquatch genome study and associated research on novel contemporary hominins at [email protected]
My friend's son, Richard Germeau is part of Olympic Project and I have been getting updates for about three years. I even told about it here that there was going to be an announcement. It just tool longer than I thought because of some legal squabbles from some who provided hair for the sampling.
My criticism about the existence of "Bigfoot" is: N. America is covered with game camera's, where's the photo-proof?? The best bowhunters in the world go way back in the wilderness of the Lower 48, where's their Bigfoot trophy, or footprint pics, or sightings??? Carcasses or bones, where are they???
I not about to buy into a myth without conclusive proof....
My criticism about the existence of "Bigfoot" is: N. America is covered with game camera's, where's the photo-proof?? The best bowhunters in the world go way back in the wilderness of the Lower 48, where's their Bigfoot trophy, or footprint pics, or sightings??? Carcasses or bones, where are they???
I not about to buy into a myth without conclusive proof....
I agree. In my line of work physical evidence is everything. Until I see a body Bigfoot is a myth.
My criticism about the existence of "Bigfoot" is: N. America is covered with game camera's, where's the photo-proof?? The best bowhunters in the world go way back in the wilderness of the Lower 48, where's their Bigfoot trophy, or footprint pics, or sightings??? Carcasses or bones, where are they???
I not about to buy into a myth without conclusive proof....
I'm not a believer in Bigfoot, I just find the whole thing kinda entertaining.
I am open minded. If I had not worked with the dad of one of the researchers and had years of background and insight into their work I would have been a little more skeptical. Bot I got to see the trail cam pictures when something licked the trail cam and I have seen the DNA findings so I am a little more prepared for this news release than most.
BTW, these kids that did the work here on the Olympic Peninsula did all the work with their own funds and have not made a penny on it. They did it for the fun of it.
I'm not a believer in Bigfoot, I just find the whole thing kinda entertaining.
I am open minded. If I had not worked with the dad of one of the researchers and had years of background and insight into their work I would have been a little more skeptical. Bot I got to see the trail cam pictures when something licked the trail cam and I have seen the DNA findings so I am a little more prepared for this news release than most.
BTW, these kids that did the work here on the Olympic Peninsula did all the work with their own funds and have not made a penny on it. They did it for the fun of it.
The lack of a body or any pics makes it hard for me to be open minded.
We'll have to see what, if anything, this DNA stuff amounts to.
If it does prove to be true than we will have to face some real hard decisions. Things like will a 270 just bounce off or what is the best way to field dress one.
My friend's son, Richard Germeau is part of Olympic Project and I have been getting updates for about three years. I even told about it here that there was going to be an announcement. It just tool longer than I thought because of some legal squabbles from some who provided hair for the sampling.
Rich used to post pretty frequently on another site I'm a member at. Only posts updates on his Olympic Project once or twice a year now.
�Our study has sequenced 20 whole mitochondrial genomes and utilized next generation sequencing to obtain 3 whole nuclear genomes from purported Sasquatch samples. The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to Homo sapiens and other primate species. Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens.
I have one question that I can't find an answer to: where, exactly, did they find the tissue to do the DNA analysis on, and what made them suspect these tissues were sasquatch so as to launch the study? How old were the tissue samples?
Supposedly there have been creatures struck by vehicles. Maybe it came from there.
I'm in the "wait and see" crowd. Until it completes the peer review, I'm more than a little skeptical.
Ed
yeah im the wait and see type....i understand why no bodies have been found out in the woods.....out here on the arid plains its unreal how fast a even a cow can be reduced to a skeleton and the bones themselves disappear fairly rapidly.....put the same thing in the PNW where its wet and the soil is on the acidic side and it happens even faster....i know in the Congo if researchers dont get to a gorillas body with in a day or so they never find a trace of one....
some of the other things like not showing up on any of the thousands of game cams or one never being hit and killed outright by a car to produce evidence is a lil harder to explain....
all in all im not willing to bet one way or the other....
I have one question that I can't find an answer to: where, exactly, did they find the tissue to do the DNA analysis on, and what made them suspect these tissues were sasquatch so as to launch the study? How old were the tissue samples?
The article begs more questions than it answers.
Watch the vid and she says where they got the DNA samples.
I have one question that I can't find an answer to: where, exactly, did they find the tissue to do the DNA analysis on, and what made them suspect these tissues were sasquatch so as to launch the study? How old were the tissue samples?
The article begs more questions than it answers.
Watch the vid and she says where they got the DNA samples.
Maybe I missed it, but all I heard her say was from WHOM they got the samples, not where they were recovered from.
She DOES speak to handling the samples correctly according to forensic requirements, but does not go into detail. I'm supposing that all of this is covered under the peer review.
As fun as it is to speculate about Gigantopithecus (bigfeets) I just have a hard time believing one would not have turned up before now. I'm been in some damn remote places in the west, and it's still not that hard to find trash, debris, or other signs of humans.
OTH, if it is proven to exist, watch the Fed lock away a bunch of land, to protect them
I think the might be real. I have had a person that had no reason to lie to me describe seeing them in the PNW. Nobody will know for sure until one is bagged.
My sense is that it would be pretty neat if Bigfoot existed. And
I would like to believe.
But my brain says that Bigfoot does not, nor ever did, exist.
I can't believe that something like Bigfoot exists, and there has been no physical or verified sighting of this big creature, the recent study notwithstanding.
I wondered how long it would take the story to break here.
Assume it is real.
Do not be distracted by the media circus. The science itself is rock solid, reliable, repeatable.
There are still things that could go wrong so far as publication of the "proof", not because the work was shoddy but because the public presentation was done in violation of the terms of the journal the paper was submitted to.
Bigfoot went extinct in May of 1980 when Mt. St. Helens blew - these guys don't want to admit it but all serious cryptozoologists acknowledge that fact.
My friend's son, Richard Germeau is part of Olympic Project and I have been getting updates for about three years. I even told about it here that there was going to be an announcement. It just tool longer than I thought because of some legal squabbles from some who provided hair for the sampling.
Scott, I know Rich, we've gone Steelheading together..good dude.
Ishi's tribe was thought to be extinct long before Ishi showed-up in Oroville, California (in 1911). Ishi, long dead now, should be well known to everyone who knows the history of the Pope & Young Club (Ishi taught Saxton Pope how to hunt with a bow).
The name "Bigfoot" always brings back fond memories of dear ol' "Piejo" of Notasulga, Alabama. The ball of each huge equilateral deltoid foot was as wide as the distance from his heel to his toes.
There was, of course, ne'er a shoe for 'im, and the sight of ol' Piejo pedaling his bicycle barefooted was the stuff of permanent memories � even more memorable than his perpetual grin.
Ishi's tribe was thought to be extinct long before Ishi showed-up in Oroville, California (in 1931, IIRC). Ishi, long dead now, should be well known to everyone who knows the history of the Pope & Young Club (Ishi taught Saxton Pope how to hunt with a bow).
Didn't he play Right field for the Mariners, and now left for the yankees?
I do wonder why no one who has participated in "scientific" expeditions, has never really seen him and photographed him.
Can any government "scientific" expeditions do a better job exploring the woods than the American Hunter?? Since the first white men hit the shores of America not one hunter/farmer has ever bagged one, and that's many generations of hunting, along with a Civil War that had men crashing through the countryside and a Depression that had desperate men shooting anything they could eat. That's enough proof for me that they don't exist.
Occam's Razor says that until substantial empirical evidence surfaces, they don't exist. A DNA test without any other physical evidence just doesn't cut it for me. IOW, "Bring Me The Head Of Bigfoot!!"
Not true. Occam's Razor states "among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected."
Essentially, regarding bigfoot, you have to balance the likeliness of one however fantastic explanation against the likeliness of the number of other, otherwise unrelated, things that would have to happen simultaneously to counter-explain the same observed occurrence.
Deer and elk that feel free to roam around in full view of everybody before and after hunting season know how to make themselves hard to find when primers start popping, muzzles start barking, and bullets start whizzing around.
Or maybe that's just because men who smell like meat-eaters fill the woods with their spoor.
If all hunters were vegetarians, or if ALL smelled like does in heat, maybe even Sasquatch'd look into the matter.
I have one question that I can't find an answer to: where, exactly, did they find the tissue to do the DNA analysis on, and what made them suspect these tissues were sasquatch so as to launch the study? How old were the tissue samples?
The article begs more questions than it answers.
Watch the vid and she says where they got the DNA samples.
Maybe I missed it, but all I heard her say was from WHOM they got the samples, not where they were recovered from.
She DOES speak to handling the samples correctly according to forensic requirements, but does not go into detail. I'm supposing that all of this is covered under the peer review.
Ed
This is the crux of the problem. Handling, chain of custody, findings, procedures, resutls... all overshadowing the most important point- and one which Doc picked up on- Where'd they source the samples?
Still no answer, which is IMO evidence of no evidence.
They'll wag the dog with this one for a while longer.
[quote=DocRocket] where, exactly, did they find the tissue to do the DNA analysis on, quote]
I believe it was at the end of an old logging road in a condom next to some roaches containing medicinal marijuana. The safe sex thing is the real reason for the low population density.
Locard's Principle of Transferance is that we are constantly leaving and picking up evidence. If you apply it to bigfoot they would be leaving evidence in such areas as foot prints in their many travels, fur,poop, many, many signs of eating either vegitation or making kills, their carcass when they die, photos on game cameras and everyone with a cell phone camera, being killed on highways, homeowners and hunters, their offspring when they wander off or become seperated when they flee.
Ishi did wander out of the mountains but their presence was known as they had their camps raided many time and items stolen for souveniers which in the case of bigfoot would have documented their existence to others.
I just can't believe that such a large creature could feed, travel, exist and move with the presences of seasonal foods wouldn't have wound up at the taxadermy shop by now.
NAMIBIAN media report a strange muppet-like beast has been shot dead after a group stumbled across several of the creatures in dense jungle. Locals came across the bizarre being while they were escorting a shooting party in Namibia, local media reported. Witnesses state that the creature was spotted apparently foraging for food, one of the shooting party wounded it with his rifle and it escaped into the thick brush. The locals tracked it to a nearby lair or nest where they found three more creatures of similar size. The wounded creature attacked one of the shooting party and it was shot dead, the others escaped into the brush The body of the creature was taken back to the local camp, police later removed its corpse and a full forensics investigation is under way.
I find it hard to believe that NO ONE has hit one with a car, truck, train, or what ever IF they are out there. Bet the person that hit that drunk dumbass in Kalispell with the gili suit on was wootin it up until he/she backed up and took a good look at what they actually hit. Would be neat if it's true, but time will tell.
My criticism about the existence of "Bigfoot" is: N. America is covered with game camera's, where's the photo-proof?? The best bowhunters in the world go way back in the wilderness of the Lower 48, where's their Bigfoot trophy, or footprint pics, or sightings??? Carcasses or bones, where are they???
I not about to buy into a myth without conclusive proof....
Add to that all the great hound packs running in Bigfoot country that never ever find one.
All those stupid shows with idiots tramping around in the woods at night beating on trees and howling at the moon.
Seriously if you really do believe in such a creature you're as dense as a box of rocks! There has never been one solid piece of evidence that they exist beyond some rednecks supposedly seeing them. Every piee of so called evidence ends up being shreaded to pieces once it's looked at with a critical eye.
Millions upon millions of trail cameras all over the country and not one picture??? I read one idiot claim that bigfoots could detect the infered light beam of the motion detector on the trail cameras and stayed away from them so they didn't get their pictures taken. Ya right a creature living in the wild 1. can detect infered light and 2. knows that if it crosses the light it's picture will be taken???
Behind every piece of so called evidence there is at least one person busting a nut laughing!
But, you can't realistically say just because we haven't found one yet means there are none. In the early 90's they found a small species of deer in Vietnam. Viet-[bleep]-Nam. A country where more than a couple wars have been fought. Deep in the jungles. And it's not the largest of countries by any means. Once they found it, they learned it's habits and instincts. Turns out, there are quite a few of them.
The giant squid was considered a seaman's tale not more than 8 years ago. Never captured one or filmed one. Until one day they did. Soon after, they learned where and when to film them, and suddenly, there's tons of footage and we know much about them.
So why haven't hunters found them??? The typical hunter travels less than a mile from his launch point. I know there are many on this board who are NOT the average hunter. But consider how little of the wilds of America you really see even when you ride horseback 5 miles and hike another 5.
Several years ago, they said there are ZERO jaguars in the U.S. Now we have game camera footage of them and scientists believe they are residents, not visiting from south of the border.
Part of the Bay Area in Ca. used to have the highest concentration of brown bear in the U.S. Until we killed them off. Now they say there are ZERO brown bear in Ca. But I can tell you that's BS. I've seen them. Friends and family have seen them. And the Fish and Game admits to tying to re-introduce them, while at the same time says there are none.
The same people say there are no Timber wolves in Ca. I can personally tell you that's BS as well. There was also an attempt to re-introduce them. Possibly to interbreed with the tiny population that was believed to exist in the Sierras. But they still officially say there are none.
Point is, there are tons of species being discovered everyday. Animals and plants in areas we thought we knew much about. There are known animals in areas that they aren't supposed to be. Hardly ever to be seen, and hard evidence is even less frequent. Yet every now and again, it becomes official. Usually long after people like us knew it was true.
How many threads have there been on this site about mountain lions in areas where the State says there aren't any??? LOTS of threads and the most common theme there is that the government agency has it's head of it's arse and we know better cuz we've seen them. Rarely, but still.
So, bigfoot??? Who knows. Probably not. But maybe. That's the only answer I can give right now for me. I can't say I've personally ever seen or heard any evidence of one. But I won't say that means a dang thing.
Seriously if you really do believe in such a creature you're as dense as a box of rocks! There has never been one solid piece of evidence that they exist beyond some rednecks supposedly seeing them. Every piee of so called evidence ends up being shreaded to pieces once it's looked at with a critical eye.
Millions upon millions of trail cameras all over the country and not one picture??? I read one idiot claim that bigfoots could detect the infered light beam of the motion detector on the trail cameras and stayed away from them so they didn't get their pictures taken. Ya right a creature living in the wild 1. can detect infered light and 2. knows that if it crosses the light it's picture will be taken???
Behind every piece of so called evidence there is at least one person busting a nut laughing!
are you really that ignorant...maybe that isn't the correct term....good conspiracy tho
pira, The giant squid lives thousands of feet below the surface, a place people are never at so it's easy to understand why we didn't have prove of them till recently. Lions being in places they haven't been before or in a hundred years is irrelevant. THere were no lion in Wisconsin till a couple years ago but there are now a very few transient lions in the state. And they are showing up on cameras, tracks are being found, bear dogs are treeing them, etc. So if the couple lions in the state can be prooved why not the bigfoots? BEcause there is no such thing!
If what you say is true about the jaguars then there is proove, still none of bigfoot! I bet if you talked to the locals in VIetnom they would have told you they were there and would have shot one for you. Just because we didn't know about it didn't mean others didn't know about it.
I just might vote for bigfoot next time around. He'd have a better chance of winning, be more believable and more honest than Romney. Plus he'd be more qualified than obama...
But, you can't realistically say just because we haven't found one yet means there are none. In the early 90's they found a small species of deer in Vietnam. Viet-[bleep]-Nam. A country where more than a couple wars have been fought. Deep in the jungles. And it's not the largest of countries by any means. Once they found it, they learned it's habits and instincts. Turns out, there are quite a few of them.
The giant squid was considered a seaman's tale not more than 8 years ago. Never captured one or filmed one. Until one day they did. Soon after, they learned where and when to film them, and suddenly, there's tons of footage and we know much about them.
So why haven't hunters found them??? The typical hunter travels less than a mile from his launch point. I know there are many on this board who are NOT the average hunter. But consider how little of the wilds of America you really see even when you ride horseback 5 miles and hike another 5.
Several years ago, they said there are ZERO jaguars in the U.S. Now we have game camera footage of them and scientists believe they are residents, not visiting from south of the border.
Part of the Bay Area in Ca. used to have the highest concentration of brown bear in the U.S. Until we killed them off. Now they say there are ZERO brown bear in Ca. But I can tell you that's BS. I've seen them. Friends and family have seen them. And the Fish and Game admits to tying to re-introduce them, while at the same time says there are none.
The same people say there are no Timber wolves in Ca. I can personally tell you that's BS as well. There was also an attempt to re-introduce them. Possibly to interbreed with the tiny population that was believed to exist in the Sierras. But they still officially say there are none.
Point is, there are tons of species being discovered everyday. Animals and plants in areas we thought we knew much about. There are known animals in areas that they aren't supposed to be. Hardly ever to be seen, and hard evidence is even less frequent. Yet every now and again, it becomes official. Usually long after people like us knew it was true.
How many threads have there been on this site about mountain lions in areas where the State says there aren't any??? LOTS of threads and the most common theme there is that the government agency has it's head of it's arse and we know better cuz we've seen them. Rarely, but still.
So, bigfoot??? Who knows. Probably not. But maybe. That's the only answer I can give right now for me. I can't say I've personally ever seen or heard any evidence of one. But I won't say that means a dang thing.
�At one time the jaguar was common in southern Texas, and apparently there were a few in southern California when the first Americans arrived. James O. Pattie, the famous mountain man and beaver trapper, reported seeing one on the lower Colorado River in Arizona back in the eighteen thirties." Jack O�Connor; �The Big Game Animals of North America� 1961
Jack goes on to report several sighting by outdoorsmen and jaguar kills by lion hunters in his day, mainly in Arizona.
That reinforces my point that while cat and bear hunters have found jaguars with their dogs, they have never found Bigfoot.
I believe some people can't spell worth a schit and I have proof.
Nothing like posting how stupid everyone is and managing to misspell almost every word in the process.
Laffin.
I'm a product of public education and I know I can't spell worth crap. But my post is evidence that I can't spell. I've yet to see any evidence that there is a bigfoot. Show me something that's been peer reviewed and shown to be real? You never will be able to because there is no such animal. Discovering a new species of ant or minnow is one thing but trying to say that there is a breeding population of great apes living in areas that have people moving all over is beyond any reasonable believe.
It is my understanding that the DNA lab is well known and extremely reputable. Samples came from many places including almost my back yard. The researchers financed years of work themselves. No grants or government money involved. I was told of the DNA results around two years ago. There has been double blind testing.
I do not know why this information has been released before publication and review.
I am NOT saying bigfoot is real. I am saying my mind is still open. Time will tell.
I will be surprised if Mr. Big turns out to exist. But pleasantly surprised!
As us denizens of the PNW know, the Coast Range has areas that are virtually impassable. And, if Bigfoots are indeed part human, then they may be quite I intelligent- IE not really animals per se. So expecting to find them the way we find animals may be silly.
I believe some people can't spell worth a schit and I have proof.
Nothing like posting how stupid everyone is and managing to misspell almost every word in the process.
Laffin.
I'm a product of public education and I know I can't spell worth crap. But my post is evidence that I can't spell. I've yet to see any evidence that there is a bigfoot. Show me something that's been peer reviewed and shown to be real? You never will be able to because there is no such animal. Discovering a new species of ant or minnow is one thing but trying to say that there is a breeding population of great apes living in areas that have people moving all over is beyond any reasonable believe.
1. I totally agree that misspelling and typos on an internet forum have no bearing on a person's intelligence. That's a stupid argument, and just makes it look like the person is reaching for a reason to be right.
2. I agree that it's 99% probable that bigfeet are just scary stories from our tribal days to keep us in the village after dark. Or something like that. But all I'm saying is that there is NO PROOF that bigfoot exists, and likewise, there is NO PROOF that it doesn't. No proof ever exists until it does. My post was only meant to illustrate that the possibility exists and can't be counted out. Large animals live in the wilderness without detection quite often. It's not unreasonable. Just not probable.
To many folks, "there is no proof" really means "I haven't seen any proof that forces me to accept it � and I won't."
If what I've heard is true, university anthropologists have shelves of "Bigfoot" track casts and photographs that they've accepted, shelved, and forgotten with a yawn of disinterest. (Not collected in the field by them, that is, so of course those things don't mean anything.) A reasonably sane and reliable outdoorsman-hunter friend of mine discovered and collected something that he considered evidence, took it to the head of the state university's anthropology department, and watched the guy nonchalantly add it to an impressive collection of similar "nonprofessional" evidence.
Do I conclude that since I haven't seen it, or any TV news report or YouTube video about it, it doesn't exist? No, I'm content to leave that kind of "thinking" to the smug fools who dote on it.
I'm waiting to see what eventually evolves that no one in his right mind can refuse to acknowledge. I won't need a blood-covered dead Sasquatch in my bed to convince me that Sasquatch is (or was) real. But some folks wouldn't even recognize such a thing as that as proof of something that they don't want to believe.
I do not buy (or even accept as a gift) the popular practice of "reasoning" backward from a conclusion to a delicious premise and then blabbing that premise as if it's a "logical conclusion."
Of course it's possible, even remotely plausible, that something resembling a Big Foot lives in the wilds of North America (after all, the African mountain gorilla was for a very long time thought to be mythological). The question is the existence of good evidence, of which there appears to be none.
This lady's conclusions that it not only exists, but that it's a hybrid human/ape is quite simply absurd, as even if there was a million to one shot of one ever being conceived and born, it would be an extremely unhealthy creature, and would certainly be sterile. Tigers and lions are genetically more closely related than are we to any primate, yet they are only rarely able to produce a hybrid offspring (and then only under specially controlled circumstances), and their hybrids tend to suffer serious health issues.
Of course it's possible, even remotely plausible, that something resembling a Big Foot lives in the wilds of North America
And that is quite simply absurd also.
To say that something is possible and remotely plausible is hardly an endorsement of a theory that said thing exists. It's unlikely in the extreme, lacking solid evidence. And the human/ape hybrid theory is absurd on its face.
I do not know why this information has been released before publication and review.
It was a screw up by one of the people involved. Thanksgiving day he released a statement. The rest should have just let it go and pretended not to notice, instead two others tried damage control and it backfired, flushed out his screw up, the whole thing is going viral.
I will be surprised if Mr. Big turns out to exist. But pleasantly surprised!
As us denizens of the PNW know, the Coast Range has areas that are virtually impassable. And, if Bigfoots are indeed part human, then they may be quite I intelligent- IE not really animals per se. So expecting to find them the way we find animals may be silly.
Jeff, I'm in agreement with you on both points. I would be pleasantly surprised if it turned out that there is a population of sasquatch out there. But I remain highly skeptical at this point.
As I posted earlier, my first question is "Where did they find these alleged tissue samples, and what were they?" I mean, did they find a jawbone? A hank of hair caught on a thornbush? Parts of a decomposing corpse?
Then I'd want to know how the evidence was collected, and by whom, and the whole chain of evidence thing.
Because I've done enough bench research in DNA/molecular biology biochemistry to know there are LOTS of ways to fabricate evidence. I'm not accusing the researchers and labs in this story of fraud, understand, but I know that if someone who really knew their way around the ol' molecular bio lab wanted to fabricate a "sample" and pull a hoax on the scientific world, they could do it. God knows my fellow grad students and post-docs and I, back when I was in grad school, pulled off some world-class hoaxes while we were sitting around twiddling our thumbs waiting for the end of a centrifuge cycle or a long HPLC run... I mean, you're stuck in the lab at 2AM waiting on results, and somebody says, "We could really bugger up ol' Lorscheider's such-and-such study if we injected his rats with thus-and-such"... and the next thing you know 3 or 4 giggling scientists have sneaked into the animal care center and are injecting a bunch of rats with something. Not to really screw Lorscheider's research, of course... just half a dozen rats, so he'd have all this normal-looking data, then the half-dozen crazy outliers, and he'd be pulling his hair out for a couple days until somebody'd point out that he'd been punked.
I know, it sounds juvenile, and I guess it is. But scientists are nerds, and have a nerdy sense of humor. The Far Side exposed us for what we are!! And some of 'em are crazy psychopaths, and want to screw up other people's research, really badly. These are the kinds of people who make up computer viruses... malignant twerps who really don't have a life... people who make TRH look almost normal, to give you a frame of reference.
So it seems to me that if a very smart, well-trained, but ethically-adrift and psychologically disturbed person(s) decided they were going to punk the molecular-biology world with some fake Bigfoot tissue "samples", based on what little I've done/known about DNA bench research, they could do it.
You have to look at more than just the fact that they've found sequences showing mixtures of human and "unknown primate" DNA. Example: how do you explain away the effects of hybrid sterility? As others have pointed out, hybrids between species more closely related than we are to any other primate species, tend to be fragile health-wise, and more important, sterile. If Bigfoot is a primate "mule", he can't reproduce. Example 2: viable population threshold? We know that for a species to maintain reproductive viability, a certain minimum number of individuals must exist in the breeding population. For primates, that number is certainly in the thousands of individuals. A population of 20 sasqatches in the PNW would not be sufficient to maintain viability.
Which begs the question: if there's 1000 sasquatches in the PNW, how come we're not seeing dead sasquatch carcasses, game-camera pictures, or any other evidence of living creatures, other than that 40-year-old 8mm movie they show about 5000 times a year on Discovery Channel? A population that large is awfully hard to conceal.
Not to mention the fact that there is NO primate species in existence that lives in strict solitude, like grizzlies, do. So we should expect to find troops or tribes of sasquatches, if they are true primates, and larger groups of any species are easier to pin down than solitary animals like jaguars, or grizzlies... and we have no problems finding individual big cats, even in wild areas like the mountains of northern Mexico and Arizona, do we?
Take all these matters in to consideration collectively, and it's just too much of a stretch, at this point.
But I would very much like to be surprised to find that my skepticism is wrong.
But, you can't realistically say just because we haven't found one yet means there are none. In the early 90's they found a small species of deer in Vietnam. Viet-[bleep]-Nam. A country where more than a couple wars have been fought. Deep in the jungles. And it's not the largest of countries by any means. Once they found it, they learned it's habits and instincts. Turns out, there are quite a few of them.
it wasnt a small deer, it was a 200 pound primitive ox....actually most would be surprised at the list of land animals over 100 pounds that have been found in the last 30 years....one of the Southeast Asian rhino species was found not that long ago where no one thought they were a long, long way from the rest of the animals population....1500 pound animal living in an area with fairly high population density and no one knew it was there...
if anyone is truly interested in "hidden animals" the book"The Encyclopaedia of New and Rediscovered Animals" is an interesting read about animals that have been discovered in the last 100 years....surprising as hell just how lil we know of certain areas like the Amazon, "jungle Africa" and Southeast Asia....
they go off some into the possibility of things like Bigfoot and the like but the majority of them are on real critters and their speculation on the rest is based off o the other stuff thats been found....one neat fact in one of them, a type of manta ray completely unknown to science was "discovered" by a marine biologist watching the opening credits to the TV show Survivor....a ton and a half animal discovered cause of "stock footage" filmed for a TV show...
A handful of Vikings spent a few years in Canada - about a thousand years ago - and we found all sorts of proof.
The odds of an entire race of hominid existing in North America - without ever leaving so much as a single bone - anywhere - is approaching the infinitesimal.
A handful of Vikings spent a few years in Canada - about a thousand years ago - and we found all sorts of proof.
The odds of an entire race of hominid existing in North America - without ever leaving so much as a single bone - anywhere - is approaching the infinitesimal.
Humans leave structure remnants and artifacts. Animals don't, so, although I too am a big foot skeptic, yours isn't a particularly good argument, IMO.
But, you can't realistically say just because we haven't found one yet means there are none. In the early 90's they found a small species of deer in Vietnam. Viet-[bleep]-Nam. A country where more than a couple wars have been fought. Deep in the jungles. And it's not the largest of countries by any means. Once they found it, they learned it's habits and instincts. Turns out, there are quite a few of them.
it wasnt a small deer, it was a 200 pound primitive ox....actually most would be surprised at the list of land animals over 100 pounds that have been found in the last 30 years....one of the Southeast Asian rhino species was found not that long ago where no one thought they were a long, long way from the rest of the animals population....1500 pound animal living in an area with fairly high population density and no one knew it was there...
More likely the locals didn't know it was "missing".
It is my understanding that the DNA lab is well known and extremely reputable. Samples came from many places including almost my back yard. The researchers financed years of work themselves. No grants or government money involved. I was told of the DNA results around two years ago. There has been double blind testing.
I do not know why this information has been released before publication and review.
I am NOT saying bigfoot is real. I am saying my mind is still open. Time will tell.
ScottF, you are at laest being reasonable in not screaming "its real its real!"
However the issue I have is that all of the testing clouds the point of the validity of the samples. You can run a sample thourgh any wiz-bang tech DNA sampler machine you want, analyze it across multiple fields and platforms... great.
All talk of the analysis of the samples... no talk of who and where they were found and collected.
Where did the sample come from?
I figure some bright college kid is engineering screwy samples that they are running very elaborate tests on.
A handful of Vikings spent a few years in Canada - about a thousand years ago - and we found all sorts of proof.
The odds of an entire race of hominid existing in North America - without ever leaving so much as a single bone - anywhere - is approaching the infinitesimal.
Humans leave structure remnants and artifacts. Animals don't, so, although I too am a big foot skeptic, yours isn't a particularly good argument, IMO.
Then where do these exhibits of bones and fossils, we see in the museums of prehistoric critters come from?
But, you can't realistically say just because we haven't found one yet means there are none. In the early 90's they found a small species of deer in Vietnam. Viet-[bleep]-Nam. A country where more than a couple wars have been fought. Deep in the jungles. And it's not the largest of countries by any means. Once they found it, they learned it's habits and instincts. Turns out, there are quite a few of them.
it wasnt a small deer, it was a 200 pound primitive ox....actually most would be surprised at the list of land animals over 100 pounds that have been found in the last 30 years....one of the Southeast Asian rhino species was found not that long ago where no one thought they were a long, long way from the rest of the animals population....1500 pound animal living in an area with fairly high population density and no one knew it was there...
More likely the locals didn't know it was "missing".
actually anymore you would be surprised how clueless locals can be depending on the area....have read a number of stories by DIY hunters in Southeast Asia where except for a few ribes they could not rely on the locals, western influence has been enough that even moderatly sized villages no longer rely on the jungle for the majority of their living....one guy constantly surprised locals by shooting tigers within a stones throw of the village....villagers were saying there hasnt been tigers around for a generation or more...
A handful of Vikings spent a few years in Canada - about a thousand years ago - and we found all sorts of proof.
The odds of an entire race of hominid existing in North America - without ever leaving so much as a single bone - anywhere - is approaching the infinitesimal.
Humans leave structure remnants and artifacts. Animals don't, so, although I too am a big foot skeptic, yours isn't a particularly good argument, IMO.
Then where do these exhibits of bones and fossils, we see in the museums of prehistoric critters come from?
Under the right conditions fossils can form, but forests don't generally provide such.
Everything else is just idle -> malicious speculation.
The samples came from all across the US and Canada. We don't know which of the 109 or so she began with went into the 20 that were fully processed for mtDNA nor the 5 samples from 3 individuals that were processed for nuDNA.
However ... note she says the entire genome was mapped. This means she isn't just looking at little clips of DNA and ignoring others.
This is likely the best, most complete, most rigorous DNA work that's ever been done .. so far. If this is bad, shaky work, we need to open the prison gates and release every criminal convicted based on DNA because this work is much more thorough than what the FBI is doing for criminal prosecutions.
A handful of Vikings spent a few years in Canada - about a thousand years ago - and we found all sorts of proof.
The odds of an entire race of hominid existing in North America - without ever leaving so much as a single bone - anywhere - is approaching the infinitesimal.
Humans leave structure remnants and artifacts. Animals don't, so, although I too am a big foot skeptic, yours isn't a particularly good argument, IMO.
Then where do these exhibits of bones and fossils, we see in the museums of prehistoric critters come from?
Under the right conditions fossils can form, but forests don't generally provide such.
in general there arent many "forest" fossil sites....infact i can only think of 5 off hand and all of them were the results of uncommon phenomenon....one in Germany was from a "killer lake" that would spew out huge amounts of CO2 regularly which killed huge numbers of critters and happened to preserve a number of them in the silty lake bottom due to the low oxygen environment....another in South America is the result of a volcano that covered everything in ash....there is another like that in the easten US.....
most fossil sites are from river flood plains as thats the most common way animals get buried fast....anything that sits on the surface gets eaten by rodents or just plain denigrates from the elements...
But,,, Ice and snow do preserve, and isn't the Abominable Snowman Bigfeets cousin?
you want the real theory? if there is such a thing as the yeti it doesnt live up in the snow areas, there is nothing to eat, prolly just crosses them going from one valley to the next....
But,,, Ice and snow do preserve, and isn't the Abominable Snowman Bigfeets cousin?
you want the real theory? if there is such a thing as the yeti it doesnt live up in the snow areas, there is nothing to eat, prolly just crosses them going from one valley to the next....
The samples came from all across the US and Canada. We don't know which of the 109 or so she began with went into the 20 that were fully processed for mtDNA nor the 5 samples from 3 individuals that were processed for nuDNA.
However ... note she says the entire genome was mapped. This means she isn't just looking at little clips of DNA and ignoring others.
.
Sooooooo... we have 20 samples that yielded mitochondrial DNA, and only 3 nuclear DNA samples. Hmmm. That means we have 76 samples that DIDN'T meet criteria to even start analysis, and only 3 that met criteria for nuclear DNA analysis. And no one can say definitively where these samples came from, other than some dude found something in the woods somewheres, and thought it must be sasquatch tissue. Boy, I'm really starting to get excited, here!
Let's just frame the issue a bit differently. We have a research team that says they've mapped the entire genome for a species that has only been photographed and tracked sporadically over the past hundred years or more, a species of which no one has ever found a carcass, or shot or trapped one.
<sigh> Seems to me 23 "samples" wouldn't be that hard to fabricate in a molecular biology lab (and even easier if there were half a dozen guys in labs all over the USA and Canada, with access to all kinds of "donor" DNA clips, and ship to various post offices for re-shipping... I'm not saying it was done, I'm just saying it could be done. And there are people out there who are just nutty enough to do it.
I do wonder why no one who has participated in "scientific" expeditions, has never really seen him and photographed him.
Can any government "scientific" expeditions do a better job exploring the woods than the American Hunter?? Since the first white men hit the shores of America not one hunter/farmer has ever bagged one, and that's many generations of hunting, along with a Civil War that had men crashing through the countryside and a Depression that had desperate men shooting anything they could eat. That's enough proof for me that they don't exist.
Occam's Razor says that until substantial empirical evidence surfaces, they don't exist. A DNA test without any other physical evidence just doesn't cut it for me. IOW, "Bring Me The Head Of Bigfoot!!"
If this is bad, shaky work, we need to open the prison gates and release every criminal convicted based on DNA because this work is much more thorough than what the FBI is doing for criminal prosecutions.
Really? And you know this how, exactly? You ever work in a molecular bio lab? Were you involved in the multi-center research that led to the science that underlies the criminal DNA "fingerprinting" methodology? Didn't think so.
As it happens, I was. I worked in that field for only a brief time. I got into molecular bio as a sideline on my own grad studies research. I got into the field long after the work had started, and got out long before it was done, but got into it enough to become familiar with the enormity of the task. The number of man-hours, the volume of work in university labs all over North America that led to the criminal DNA work that's being done in forensic labs nowadays would stagger the imagination. It involved studying thousands and thousands of DNA samples from scores of thousands of documented human beings, not suspected human tissue samples, before the evidence was solid enough to be given credibility that could be applied in the courts.
There is no way that a single lab in Texas, or even a dozen labs around the country, looking at 23 samples of alleged sasquatch DNA could come close to the effort and sample power of the hundreds of labs, thousands of researchers, and scores of thousands of samples that were involved in developing the human DNA "fingerprinting" database.
The samples came from all across the US and Canada. We don't know which of the 109 or so she began with went into the 20 that were fully processed for mtDNA nor the 5 samples from 3 individuals that were processed for nuDNA.
However ... note she says the entire genome was mapped. This means she isn't just looking at little clips of DNA and ignoring others.
.
Sooooooo... we have 20 samples that yielded mitochondrial DNA, and only 3 nuclear DNA samples. Hmmm. That means we have 76 samples that DIDN'T meet criteria to even start analysis, and only 3 that met criteria for nuclear DNA analysis. And no one can say definitively where these samples came from, other than some dude found something in the woods somewheres, and thought it must be sasquatch tissue. Boy, I'm really starting to get excited, here!
Let's just frame the issue a bit differently. We have a research team that says they've mapped the entire genome for a species that has only been photographed and tracked sporadically over the past hundred years or more, a species of which no one has ever found a carcass, or shot or trapped one.
<sigh> Seems to me 23 "samples" wouldn't be that hard to fabricate in a molecular biology lab (and even easier if there were half a dozen guys in labs all over the USA and Canada, with access to all kinds of "donor" DNA clips, and ship to various post offices for re-shipping... I'm not saying it was done, I'm just saying it could be done. And there are people out there who are just nutty enough to do it.
Doc I think you nailed it here, people do crazy things for whatever reason. They are able to grab an audience temporarily while things get hashed out, get their 15 minutes of fame, and then slip away never to be heard again. It works every time because sane people without an agenda cannot fathom how or why anyone would fabricate things like this, and they apply their own moral compass to others and give them the benefit of the doubt.
Remember the guy that claimed he found a dead bigfoot and had it in his freezer. He even sent the DNA off to labs to be tested and released pictures of it. Turned out to be a bigfoot costume and some opossum guts. What could his motive be, what did he hope to accomplish?
Remember the guy that claimed he found a dead bigfoot and had it in his freezer. He even sent the DNA off to labs to be tested and released pictures of it. Turned out to be a bigfoot costume and some opossum guts. What could his motive be, what did he hope to accomplish?
I believe someone posted a picture of that in this thread.
Scientists can be an odd lot and not always very scientific , especially if something doesn't fit their norm.
"Scientists" embraced the Piltdown Man for sixty years because it fit their 'missing link' expectation before they finally found it to be fake. At the same time they ignored Java Man because it was too primative to meet their expectations. Then figgered out it was real, too primative or not.
So there you go. If it doesn't fit the model then it's 'junk science' fabricated by 'whackos'.
Scientists can be an odd lot and not always very scientific , especially if something doesn't fit their norm.
"Scientists" embraced the Piltdown Man for sixty years because it fit their 'missing link' expectation before they finally found it to be fake. At the same time they ignored Java Man because it was too primative to meet their expectations. Then figgered out it was real, too primative or not.
So there you go. If it doesn't fit the model then it's 'junk science' fabricated by 'whackos'.
O
The build up anomalies are what brings about paradigm shift and revolution in science.
paraphrased from The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn
This is where some of the tissue samples came from, bear hunter shot 2 supposed squatch's in 2010. Don't believe it but there is one source of the alleged DNA.....
Haven't made up mind one way or the other but seems to me if the Squatch folks are the real deal it surely would benefit mankind in the long run from several avenues. Hypothetically,,What's evident to assume is they aren't dangerous by nature, have managed to become quite solitary and meld into the wild which isn't that difficult.They would surely possess higher intelligence which may have lead to disposing of their dead and using unheard of natural cures for their diseases.
Hundreds of thousand of hunters afield or in the the woods is a mute point far as I'm concerned.The vastness of wilderness on the North American continent is just that and hiding out there is quite doable IMO.Ever wonder how many sets of eyes are watching you that you never see?..Would be great if it's true but I have my doubts.
Hunter 1 and Hunter 2 described them as a cross between a gorilla and a bear. They said that they had very large heads, almost too big for their bodies. They also stated that the little ones had a much flatter face than a bear. They spent as much time on two legs as they did on four. The smaller figures began getting closer and closer, at on point, just a few yards. One of them climbed up a small outcrop above hunter 1. Hunter 1 started to get the feeling he might be attacked. He made a quick decision, turned and fired. The figure went down and rolled right down to Hunter 1's location. He lifted it up, and then placed it in the brush. They then decided that they needed to leave, now.
Okay, let's examine this story. Hunter 1 shot a large presumed adult animal, which he initially thought was a bear. He shot it in the chest, and it ran off. The hunters made no effort to track the wounded animal to recover it or end its suffering, but instead hung around the site where they shot and killed a smaller animal they presumed to be a juvenile.
Then they left.
This was in 2010. The hunters supposedly "did not believe" in Bigfoot prior to this incident, we're told. This suggests they knew of stories of Bigfoot, which is a reasonable presumption... after all, is there ANYONE in North America who hasn't heard the Bigfoot legend? Yet they shot and killed at least one unidentified animal, and then just left.
I can't imagine anyone in their right mind leaving behind evidence of Bigfoot in this day and age. They'd be famous, at least, if not actually rich. Yet we're to believe these guys just hid the carcass and took off.
Originally Posted by Derek Randles
I, Derek Randles was put in touch with the hunters about two weeks later. I interviewed them both by phone extensively, and separately. I found that their story matched perfectly with no inconsistency's. I could also tell that they were natural and not rehearsed.
Really. Natural, and not rehearsed, and the "interviews" took place "about two weeks" after the fact. And of course, I'm sure Mr. Randles is a trained interrogator/investigator, and used the usual methods a trained interrogator uses to root out collusion in fabricated stories.
Yep, I'm REALLY starting to get excited about all this Bigfoot "evidence" now.
Woody, I'd love to see some credible evidence come to light, it would be wonderful to find a new hominid species living among us.
But c'mon. The DNA story has some serious questions about it that need to be answered before we can place it in context, as I've already pointed out, and this story of the hunters is a [bleep]' joke.
you all mean to tell me that the 6 million dollar man episodes with bionic bigfoot were all just a bunch of b.s episodes and not based on real stuff??????????????????
Woody, I'd love to see some credible evidence come to light, it would be wonderful to find a new hominid species living among us.
But c'mon. The DNA story has some serious questions about it that need to be answered before we can place it in context, as I've already pointed out, and this story of the hunters is a [bleep]' joke.
i would think its far more likely that a hominid would be found in Southeast Asia, especially given other primitive hominids actually did make it there.....but who knows...
i would think its far more likely that a hominid would be found in Southeast Asia, especially given other primitive hominids actually did make it there.....but who knows...
C'mon man, bigfoot crossed the Bering Sea land bridge into Alaska some 20,000 years ago.
you all mean to tell me that the 6 million dollar man episodes with bionic bigfoot were all just a bunch of b.s episodes and not based on real stuff??????????????????
I remember when Steve Austin met up with Bigfoot. I also remember the Incredible Hulk's encounter with Bigfoot.
Given the DNA evidence shows a hybrid creature maybe the Soviets were successful in their ape/human hybrid experiments, maybe they turned a few loose in the US once they discovered theses hybrids weren't easily trained.
To me the information that is out there right now about Bigfoot is too thin to draw any conclusion one way or another. Maybe one day a study will be completed and published that contains enough clear, verifiable information that can clear the question up. I hope it does anyway.
I never had a question in my mind about Bigfoot until one night at a hunting club meeting when a friend, that I trust, told me that he had seen one. He said that he had never told anyone about it and it had been about 20 years since it ran across the road in front of his car. Both he and his wife saw it. He was as serious as a heart attack and he believes it. I don't know what he saw, but I believe he saw something that in his mind was a Bigfoot.
I guess the part of the whole Bigfoot story that bothers me the most is the vast number of sightings and apparent lack of any substantial verification. About 15 years ago a friend called me one Saturday and asked me to come look at some tracks at our hunting club. I went to see the tracks in question as did several other members. Four of those that saw the tracks, including me, have a Bachelor of Science degree in Biology. It was a puma track in Georgia. No question about it. A cast was made and taken to the DNR. They denied that it was a puma and stated that there were no pumas in Georgia. Later it was found out that in fact is was a puma that had been released in Florida and had ranged up into Georgia before getting itself killed by a car. The DNR knew it was in Georgia and where it was. Evidently, they were just trying to hide the fact so people wouldn't get upset until the study could be completed.
The point is that one puma released in Florida that ranged up into Georgia, left evidence every where he went that was seen and collected on numerous occasions. He was eventually killed by a car and the corpse was recovered. If you assume that puma was the only one in Georgia at the time, what are the odds that he would be seen, have tracks found that were recognized for what they were, that it would be killed 100 miles from where the tracks were found and the corpse recovered? Yet we supposedly have had populations of Bigfoot living in the same areas that have been and are frequented by people every day for thousands of years and not one has ever been killed and recovered or found dead. That is thin!
I would love for the questions to be answered. I would love to know what it was that crossed the road in front of my friend. I would love to see research that substantiates the existence of Bigfoot. But right now it is just hard for me to believe.
it would be wonderful to find a new hominid species living among us.
Offhand, does anybody know if any other primates live as far North (or South) of the equator as Bigfoot allegedly does in the PNW?? Isn't the PNW a pretty harsh environment during the winter, furry hobbit-feet or no??
it would be wonderful to find a new hominid species living among us.
Offhand, does anybody know if any other primates live as far North (or South) of the equator as Bigfoot allegedly does in the PNW?? Isn't the PNW a pretty harsh environment during the winter, furry hobbit-feet or no??
I work with a guy who wears size 16s so I know bigfoots exist.
I went to school with a guy who had large deformed feet about the size of the so called bigfoot tracks. I remember he has several surgeries and had to wear custom tennis shoes. I have often wondered what happened to him.
, and this story of the hunters is a [bleep]' joke.
I get the distinct impression ya'll don't want to hear what I have to say, but I'd like to add something you may find interesting ... disgusting ... enlightening ... many other things perhaps.
As I posted earlier, my first question is "Where did they find these alleged tissue samples, and what were they?" I mean, did they find a jawbone? A hank of hair caught on a thornbush? Parts of a decomposing corpse?
One of the main people who collected samples was a Tribal Police officer. Not a medically trained DNA expert.
ScottF, you are at laest being reasonable in not screaming "its real its real!"
However the issue I have is that all of the testing clouds the point of the validity of the samples. You can run a sample thourgh any wiz-bang tech DNA sampler machine you want, analyze it across multiple fields and platforms... great.
All talk of the analysis of the samples... no talk of who and where they were found and collected.
Where did the sample come from?
I figure some bright college kid is engineering screwy samples that they are running very elaborate tests on.
I will not say it is real until we see proof. As of now we have only seen a early leaked report even though I have known about these results for around two years.
One of the main evidence and sample gathers was a tribal police officer from Forks, WA. Not a DNA expert. But this was not just one sample and some came from other states. I have no information on who or how that was collected.
I will use this analogy. I live about five miles north of the center of what wildlife experts call the densest mountain lion population in the US. I know they are there and I suspect they cross my farm but I have never seen one.
Yes! everyone realizes how much the so called native American's of Washington seek the truth, just ask em about Kennewick man.
This thread has just once again proved that once convinced otherwise you can beat a guy over the head with the truth, and he will still say, "but what if".
This place reminds me of the Tonight shows Jay walking, and we wonder why Obama was elected then reelected.
Man seems to have retrogressed to the point that believing anything that doesn't fit snugly into known facts and hasn't yet proven to be true is a primordial fear.
Yes! everyone realizes how much the so called native American's of Washington seek the truth, just ask em about Kennewick man.
This thread has just once again proved that once convinced otherwise you can beat a guy over the head with the truth, and he will still say, "but what if".
This place reminds me of the Tonight shows Jay walking, and we wonder why Obama was elected then reelected.
The man worked for the tribe as a police officer. He was white, still is as far as I know.
Again, I am not saying bigfoot is real, I am reporting what I have been told over the last five years. It matches with the info release.
I will wait for proof but just because I have not killed one I do not automatically rule out that it could possibly exist. I am unconvinced either way.
Man seems to have retrogressed to the point that believing anything that doesn't fit snugly into known facts and hasn't yet proven to be true is a primordial fear.
This is exactly why I've said we can't count it out. I don't buy it, but we just can't count it out.
Humans are egotistical by nature. We've proven ourselves wrong over and over. But we never let that stand in our way.
Scott---I know Rich isn't a biologist but he is a police officer that is trained in chain of custody evidence handling. He is also, to my knowledge, very professional and of of the highest integrity. I'm willing to continue to withhold judgement but will keep an open mind. Flatlanders pretending they know our wilderness areas do provide good laughs though.
I'll let the campfire doubtfuls continue to pontificate about which, as usual, they don't have a f.ucking clue about. Rich G. has put a lot of time and effort into this and a year or so ago clued some of us in on his "potential" findings.....
Hunter 1 and Hunter 2 described them as a cross between a gorilla and a bear. They said that they had very large heads, almost too big for their bodies. They also stated that the little ones had a much flatter face than a bear. They spent as much time on two legs as they did on four. The smaller figures began getting closer and closer, at on point, just a few yards. One of them climbed up a small outcrop above hunter 1. Hunter 1 started to get the feeling he might be attacked. He made a quick decision, turned and fired. The figure went down and rolled right down to Hunter 1's location. He lifted it up, and then placed it in the brush. They then decided that they needed to leave, now.
Okay, let's examine this story. Hunter 1 shot a large presumed adult animal, which he initially thought was a bear. He shot it in the chest, and it ran off. The hunters made no effort to track the wounded animal to recover it or end its suffering, but instead hung around the site where they shot and killed a smaller animal they presumed to be a juvenile.
Then they left.
This was in 2010. The hunters supposedly "did not believe" in Bigfoot prior to this incident, we're told. This suggests they knew of stories of Bigfoot, which is a reasonable presumption... after all, is there ANYONE in North America who hasn't heard the Bigfoot legend? Yet they shot and killed at least one unidentified animal, and then just left.
I can't imagine anyone in their right mind leaving behind evidence of Bigfoot in this day and age. They'd be famous, at least, if not actually rich. Yet we're to believe these guys just hid the carcass and took off.
Originally Posted by Derek Randles
I, Derek Randles was put in touch with the hunters about two weeks later. I interviewed them both by phone extensively, and separately. I found that their story matched perfectly with no inconsistency's. I could also tell that they were natural and not rehearsed.
Really. Natural, and not rehearsed, and the "interviews" took place "about two weeks" after the fact. And of course, I'm sure Mr. Randles is a trained interrogator/investigator, and used the usual methods a trained interrogator uses to root out collusion in fabricated stories.
Yep, I'm REALLY starting to get excited about all this Bigfoot "evidence" now.
No matter how many times I will say that it can't be counted out just yet, this story screams BS. For exactly the reasons you state.
There's just NO WAY two guys would shoot an unknown animal and not AT LEAST take a picture. Hunter's are very likely to have a camera on them. And are very likely to be able to identify every known species in that geographical area. To find and shoot one that is unknown would be HUGE news in ANYONE'S mind. No way this happened this way in my mind. Doubt it happened at all.
There are also people who believe that there is no intelligent life outside our little planet earth, yet believe that the universe is infinite. In an infinite universe the chances of another form of intelligent life being out there is 100%, yet everybody wants proof, even when it is staring them in the face.
Flatlanders pretending they know our wilderness areas do provide good laughs though.
Couldn't agree with that more. I don't think people realize how remote and rugged the mountain regions of the U.S. really are. And how easy it would be for something to exist out there and never be found.
Flatlanders pretending they know our wilderness areas do provide good laughs though.
Couldn't agree with that more. I don't think people realize how remote and rugged the mountain regions of the U.S. really are. And how easy it would be for something to exist out there and never be found.
Nobody found DB Cooper either, must not have been here.
Flatlanders pretending they know our wilderness areas do provide good laughs though.
Couldn't agree with that more. I don't think people realize how remote and rugged the mountain regions of the U.S. really are. And how easy it would be for something to exist out there and never be found.
Nobody found DB Cooper either, must not have been here.
AND...folks had a relatively good idea (generally speaking) of where he "landed/bounced".
This is exactly how non-believers try to discount our belief in God.
There are also people who believe that there is no intelligent life outside our little planet earth, yet believe that the universe is infinite. In an infinite universe the chances of another form of intelligent life being out there is 100%, yet everybody wants proof, even when it is staring them in the face.
� Flatlanders pretending they know our wilderness areas do provide good laughs though. �
Until ya hafta get outa bed at 0300, bundle-up for 40� below fashion, and go trompin' out to dig their shiverin' butts outa snowbanks. Seems that Disney and Wilderness Family tend to skip-over a few vital points in their outdoor-TV education.
You said "Rich" ... is this Germeau? If so, I've heard him speak. Quite an impressive guy. Not one I'd want searching for me unless I wanted to be found.
, and this story of the hunters is a [bleep]' joke.
I get the distinct impression ya'll don't want to hear what I have to say, but I'd like to add something you may find interesting ... disgusting ... enlightening ... many other things perhaps.
Doc - here's the joke from the joker's mouth:
Nobody here ever "hunted" like this, right?
TOM...
Please don't get me wrong... I don't have a dog in this hunt. Whether Bigfoot exists or doesn't, is something that I have no academic interest in. But unlike many of our Campfire compadres, I DO have more than a bit of academic scientific experience, and I've offered what my criticisms are of the "evidence" presented thus far. That's all.
So far the evidence seems extremely flimsy, and it wouldn't even begin to pass peer review. I've tried to point out some of the major inconsistencies in this evidence.
As an investigator, both in research science and in the forensic field, I have come to regard eyewitness reports as the least reliable form of evidence we have available to us. The video/podcast you posted is 48 minutes long. I watched 2 minutes and confirmed my suspicion that this is a video/podcast production based on nothing more than eyewitness reports, and I don't have time to watch a 48 minute video/podcast presented by people who have an obvious financial incentive in convincing you and me of their "theory".
As well, given the written report you posted earlier, the eyewitnesses aren't just witnesses, they're actually potential defendants, violators of game code at the very least and in my suspicious mind, probably something more. Sorry, I won't waste close to an hour of my time on such rubbish. I don't care enough about the existence, let alone what these people are prepared to say without being under oath.
, and this story of the hunters is a [bleep]' joke.
I get the distinct impression ya'll don't want to hear what I have to say, but I'd like to add something you may find interesting ... disgusting ... enlightening ... many other things perhaps.
Doc - here's the joke from the joker's mouth:
Nobody here ever "hunted" like this, right?
TOM...
Please don't get me wrong... I don't have a dog in this hunt. Whether Bigfoot exists or doesn't, is something that I have no academic interest in. But unlike many of our Campfire compadres, I DO have more than a bit of academic scientific experience, and I've offered what my criticisms are of the "evidence" presented thus far. That's all.
So far the evidence seems extremely flimsy, and it wouldn't even begin to pass peer review. I've tried to point out some of the major inconsistencies in this evidence.
As an investigator, both in research science and in the forensic field, I have come to regard eyewitness reports as the least reliable form of evidence we have available to us. The video you posted is 48 minutes long. I watched 2 minutes and confirmed my suspicion that this is a video production based on nothing more than eyewitness reports, and I don't have time to watch a 48 minute video presented by people who have an obvious financial incentive in convincing you and me of their "theory".
As well, given the written report you posted earlier, the eyewitnesses aren't just witnesses, they're actually potential defendants, violators of game code at the very least and in my suspicious mind, probably something more. Sorry, I won't waste close to an hour of my time on such rubbish. I don't care enough about the existence, let alone what these people are prepared to say without being under oath.
You said "Rich" ... is this Germeau? If so, I've heard him speak. Quite an impressive guy. Not one I'd want searching for me unless I wanted to be found.
As a single sample, you are right. But when a countless number of absences of evidence occur, you might take a hint and suspect that, indeed, absences is evident.
Proving that there is a Bigfoot is relatively simple actually. Produce one and you have proof. But what do you guys require to prove that one does not exist?
I will believe in Big Foot, or whatever you want to call it, when it shows up at my place. In all the years of this nonsense no one sees it, no one shoots one, and a dead one is never found. This dog don't hunt. Like the Loch Ness monster and the Yeti, its a legend based on folklore or myth.
The only Big Foot I know existed died at Wounded Knee creek in 1890.
I don't think one exists, just don't hold those who do think they exist in contempt.
If someone wants to present evidence to me that they do exist I will certainly listen and form an opinion once I have the facts. If the DNA evidence turns out to be what they say it is, there would still need to be other evidence to convince me. As Doc said, even the DNA evidence is weak, given sample size.
"There is no evidence" is dog-easy for some to grab onto with an eager leap and grasp. � but � "Here's some evidence" is impossibly hard for 'em to swallow with a toilet plunger.
Personally, I don't believe in Sasquatch, but I find the DNA story interesting.
Some of the assumptions posted on this thread, based on nothing more than speculation are as outlandish as a few of the bigfoot stories I've read.
The only real knowledge we have regarding the dna testing is a small press release, yet some have managed to become experts on the five year study just by reading a few paragraphs.
It may very well be a bogus claim, but pontificating on how the testing is flawed without knowing any details on how it was conducted is bogus as well.
Scott---I know Rich isn't a biologist but he is a police officer that is trained in chain of custody evidence handling. He is also, to my knowledge, very professional and of of the highest integrity. I'm willing to continue to withhold judgement but will keep an open mind. Flatlanders pretending they know our wilderness areas do provide good laughs though.
I'll let the campfire doubtfuls continue to pontificate about which, as usual, they don't have a f.ucking clue about. Rich G. has put a lot of time and effort into this and a year or so ago clued some of us in on his "potential" findings.....
I did not know you knew him. I only know his dad and have never met Rich.
It is kind of funny to read how some folks who have never seen our country know all about it.
You said "Rich" ... is this Germeau? If so, I've heard him speak. Quite an impressive guy. Not one I'd want searching for me unless I wanted to be found.
Please don't get me wrong... I don't have a dog in this hunt. Whether Bigfoot exists or doesn't, is something that I have no academic interest in. But unlike many of our Campfire compadres, I DO have more than a bit of academic scientific experience, and I've offered what my criticisms are of the "evidence" presented thus far. That's all.
Doc, we are on the same page with this. I too am waiting publishing and review. I am just a little ahead of you on this because I have been in the loop for several years. I already knew all that was released. And I know the reputation of the man who was in charge of the project and search in my back yard. So this was not the surprise to some of us here in western WA as it was to the rest of the world. I have no real opinion of the bigfoot thing and I would not bet a spent rr case either way.
I know nothing of DNA testing or the ways to fool it. I do know there were blind tests done at several labs. I also understand the reputation of the Dr who did the release is excellent.
I dunno Brent...why doncha' go ahead and prove it doesn't exist.
Pics, tracks, DNA, first hand accounts, historical legend, etc doesn't prove it's existence show us some proof of nothing.lol
Prove that the legendary giant bird of prey, called a roc, doesn't exist.
the roc(ruhk is the original spelling) was likely based off of distorted stories told to and eggs sold to Arab traders from the elephant bird(Aepyornis) which lived in Madagascar probably even after Europeans had permanent settlement there...
I've been thinking about this since this thread started.
I was getting pissed thinking about the probable government grants that have been paid out to study this.
But now that I think about it, if the someone came to me and said they'd pay me a decent salary per year to hang out in the woods and look for a creature that most likely didn't exist, I'd jump at it. Even knowing people would laugh.
That seems to make sense if you ignore the problems of dealing with the goofermint (or look at 'em through a long telescope with the big end next to your eye).
Just the paperwork alone would keep you indoors, madly scribbling when you weren't answering the 'phone.
While I was in rehab after my stroke (2001), the social worker set-up an interview with the VA. The VA decided to pay me a tiny monthly stipend and paid it for a year or so. Then the VA decided that I shouldn't have gotten it � and would have to pay it back, plus interest and penalties.
So the Treasury Department has been deducting a honking amount from my Social Security, and neither the Treasury Department nor the VA will say a mumblin' word to explain why, how much I still owe, or � .
When the FBI crime lab wanted to buy a copy of my big cartridge book, I refused to sell 'em one.
"I'll give you a copy, but I'm not about to sell you one."
The FBI guy was puzzled � wanted to know why.
"I'm not going to mess with all the paperwork for just one copy of the book."
He laughed. "You must have done business with the government before."
"No. I've worked for the government before."
So I sent 'em a copy, paid the postage, and didn't have to mess with a stack of paperwork or pesky goofermint noses.
I'm still holding out hope I run into one some day, maybe a badly injured one. I'd nurse it back to health, and then make it fetch ducks for me for the rest of its life. I'd let it eat the head, guts, feet and feathers of all the ones he brought back. I'm not a savage, after all.
But now that I think about it, if the someone came to me and said they'd pay me a decent salary per year to hang out in the woods and look for a creature that most likely didn't exist, I'd jump at it. Even knowing people would laugh.
But what if "someone" said you had to use an unknown T/C Encore rifle during the filming segment??
But now that I think about it, if the someone came to me and said they'd pay me a decent salary per year to hang out in the woods and look for a creature that most likely didn't exist, I'd jump at it. Even knowing people would laugh.
But what if "someone" said you had to use an unknown T/C Encore rifle during the filming segment??
Unless it's in 270, I don't see a problem with it.
It may very well be a bogus claim, but pontificating on how the testing is flawed without knowing any details on how it was conducted is bogus as well.
Gotta love the internet.
Glad you enjoyed my pontificating, JM.
I have no idea if the testing was flawed, and made no comment on that one way or another. But as Dr. Ketchum is an accredited researcher in this field, I actually have confidence that the lab DNA analysis is solid. Whether the samples provided are real is a question that needs to be asked, for reasons I have previously pontificated upon, and which I need not reiterate.
But like I said before, I have no dog in this fight. If they find Bigfoot, too bad for Bigfoot. If they don't, too bad for us.
Apparently I have offended a number of 24HCF members by trying to inject a bit of scientific scepticisminto the discussion, as they seem to equate scepticism with dismissal.
I'm tired of trying to educate people. I've got some hunting to do this weekend, I think I'll go do some research into the theory that .270 bullets just bounce off deer. IME, so far at least, they might... but they sure blow the schitt outta speedgoats, rockchucks, skunks, and coyotes!
� If they find Bigfoot, too bad for Bigfoot. If they don't, too bad for us.
I'd be happy enough just knowing for sure whether he's really out there somewhere, free and unmolested.
Ishi turned-out to be a genuine gentleman of the first water, but our world had no niche for him, and he paid for not completely fitting-in.
We need our myths, our legends, our old songs.
As a longbow archer, a bowsinger, I cherish the words of Ishi and those who knew him. I like to think we would treat him better today. That an army of bowhunters would see to that. Those few who did honor and learn from Ishi were bowmen.
But Ishi and his people left sign and were found.
I still say if Bigfoot is out there, good hounds would have found him long ago.
Ishi and Bigfoot is akin to apples and oranges if even that.
Quote
1870-1911: Period of Concealment: a remnant band (five to twenty individuals) of Yahi hide in the Mill Creek area.
November 10,1908: Surveying party surprises a band of four; Ishi escapes and hides; out of curiosity the surveyors take tools and artifacts from the camp.
October, 1910: T.T. Waterman leads an expedition into the Mill Creek area to attempt to find the lost band of Indians, finds "incontrovertible evidence of their existence in a wild state." No contact made.
Ishi August 1911: Ishi walks out of Butte County wilderness into Oroville.
Ishi and Bigfoot is akin to apples and oranges if even that.
Quote
1870-1911: Period of Concealment: a remnant band (five to twenty individuals) of Yahi hide in the Mill Creek area.
November 10,1908: Surveying party surprises a band of four; Ishi escapes and hides; out of curiosity the surveyors take tools and artifacts from the camp.
October, 1910: T.T. Waterman leads an expedition into the Mill Creek area to attempt to find the lost band of Indians, finds "incontrovertible evidence of their existence in a wild state." No contact made.
Ishi August 1911: Ishi walks out of Butte County wilderness into Oroville.
All Bigfoot would have to do to make out all right is claim he was from Mexico and snuck across the border. The Government would find a place for him and all his folks.
Apparently I have offended a number of 24HCF members by trying to inject a bit of scientific scepticisminto the discussion, as they seem to equate scepticism with dismissal.
I'm tired of trying to educate people. I've got some hunting to do this weekend, I think I'll go do some research into the theory that .270 bullets just bounce off deer. IME, so far at least, they might... but they sure blow the schitt outta speedgoats, rockchucks, skunks, and coyotes!
I've been thinking about this since this thread started.
I was getting pissed thinking about the probable government grants that have been paid out to study this.
But now that I think about it, if the someone came to me and said they'd pay me a decent salary per year to hang out in the woods and look for a creature that most likely didn't exist, I'd jump at it. Even knowing people would laugh.
I have been saying this since this thread started. There is no federal money. These guys spent their own money, worked real jobs to pay the expenses.
Am I typing this with white letters on a white background?
There is no grant, federal, state, or big business funding. They did it out of their own pockets.
Apparently I have offended a number of 24HCF members by trying to inject a bit of scientific scepticisminto the discussion, as they seem to equate scepticism with dismissal.
I'm tired of trying to educate people. I've got some hunting to do this weekend, I think I'll go do some research into the theory that .270 bullets just bounce off deer. IME, so far at least, they might... but they sure blow the schitt outta speedgoats, rockchucks, skunks, and coyotes!
Your take on DNA informed me but did not offend me.
Now the 270 thing. If you swage Morton Meat Tenderizer into a 458 bullet and shoot it out of a 45-70 you may be able to get a tenderized deer soft enough to allow penetration with a 270. It would take some tricky shooting but it might work.
But, Scott, there has to be better things for the government to spend our tax dollars on than bigfoot research.
There is, some silly cow here got a grant to study the feasablity of making surf boards to suit women....more to the point some other silly cow OKed the idea.
The point is clear. 'Scientists' expected to find a 'missing link'. Piltdown Man had characturists of both man and ape so they embraced it without question. Sixty years later someone took the time to bore into the jaw and realised it was not a fossil.
It took 'scientists' sixty years to verify the fabrication. Not very good science.
Saw Bigfoot down at a "Gentleman's Club". He was ridin' a Harley, colors said "BANDIDOS". They are okay, just don't get 'em all confused and don't mess with their sows.
I've been thinking about this since this thread started.
I was getting pissed thinking about the probable government grants that have been paid out to study this.
But now that I think about it, if the someone came to me and said they'd pay me a decent salary per year to hang out in the woods and look for a creature that most likely didn't exist, I'd jump at it. Even knowing people would laugh.
I have been saying this since this thread started. There is no federal money. These guys spent their own money, worked real jobs to pay the expenses.
Am I typing this with white letters on a white background?
There is no grant, federal, state, or big business funding. They did it out of their own pockets.
Didn't mean this study. Meant any study in the past. On any silly thing. Well, silly until it's proven true anyway. The particular post you quoted was really in jest anyway.
My criticism about the existence of "Bigfoot" is: N. America is covered with game camera's, where's the photo-proof?? The best bowhunters in the world go way back in the wilderness of the Lower 48, where's their Bigfoot trophy, or footprint pics, or sightings??? Carcasses or bones, where are they???
I not about to buy into a myth without conclusive proof....
+1 Very fishy scientist.
I disagree, theres already undisputed evidence of bigfoots existence.....We have a Sasquatch in the whitehouse.
My criticism about the existence of "Bigfoot" is: N. America is covered with game camera's, where's the photo-proof?? The best bowhunters in the world go way back in the wilderness of the Lower 48, where's their Bigfoot trophy, or footprint pics, or sightings??? Carcasses or bones, where are they???
I not about to buy into a myth without conclusive proof....
+1 Very fishy scientist.
I disagree, theres already undisputed evidence of bigfoots existence.....We have a Sasquatch in the whitehouse.
Stupidity at the highest level.
![[Linked Image]](http://earloftaint.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/bigfoot.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj252/elkhuntinguide/thawed-creature-in-freezer11.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2012/11/19/1226519/551463-beast.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.gorillanaut.com/reviews/images/BigfootMovies/bigfoot1.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w188/TheRealHawkeye/Roc.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/princess-letizia-carla-bruni-michelle-obamas-butts.jpg)
![[Linked Image]](http://images.watoday.com.au/2010/04/01/1280423/article-elephant_bird111-420x0.jpg)
DUIP!