SB: Thanks for such a thoughtful response to my post. I thought I left this reply last night. Sorry for the delay.
Quote: The evidence that has been collected by most researchers feel that their evidence is sufficient for the creatures existence. But as we are learning that this evidence is not enough to prove this creatures existence at all by science standards.
The evidence is certainly enough to convince me and apparently many others here, but, as difficult as the task may be, the simple collection of evidence isnâ€™t actually research. Thatâ€™s a very intricate, controlled, rigorous and specific process in any science, and it usually yields quantifiable results. Evidence may seem strong, but outside the context of â€œby the rulesâ€ scientific inquiry, itâ€™s powerless to tell a story to a society of skeptics. Research design, especially with a subject generally perceived as mythical, has to be solid and as airtight as possible: exceptionally well thought out.
Yet, there are hundreds upon hundreds of reported sightings of these creatures by witnesses with evidence that proves they seen some thing out of the norm. But this does not prove this creatures existence but should show interest to science that there is some type of animal that is roaming with in our wilderness.
To us, this is common sense, but to address some of your later points, PhDs have to pay the bills, too. Whatever they do has to provide them with some tangible reward. Thatâ€™s only fair. It could be someone only masters-prepared, too. Theyâ€™re qualified peers. If well-versed in bf culture, theyâ€™d know how to design a solid study based on existing scientific literature and what evidence they know they could collect in that very controlled, scientific way. Although there seems to be precious little scholarly literature, peer-reviewed or otherwise, whoever does this should be up to speed on it. Theyâ€™d know how to write a grant to get that money for the equipment they might need to get out and collect the evidence and to support them as they design, implement and document the thing. This all takes massive amounts of time, and not many folks can afford to do it for nothing. Besides all that, PhDs often get their grad students to do their studies anyway. If you put a legit study together, some PhD might be eager to attach his/her name to it. Who is actually out there trying to get research funded? They donâ€™t give you money without knowing exactly what you want to prove and how you plan on proving or at least supporting your hypothesis.
The research has been on going and has not stopped.
By this do you mean that people are out trying to collect photographic, audio or physical evidence? This is great, but unless this activity is attached to a specific study using those same rigorous methods, itâ€™s not actually research but evidence collection, and possibly not admissible as such.
It is science that has stopped or refused to research into this by not funding the proper people with reputable PHD to do the research. But I believe that this has been done in the 70's by a chosen few who wrote up a detailed report on these creatures. But the problem is that it did not fit with what there concept of what animal behavior is suppose to fit. So the funding stopped due to what was reported.
Who is writing the grants for funding?
The best way to research these creatures is in the field and in a known area of fresh encounters that can be controlled and must be kept under wraps.
It is already being done by amateurs who have no idea about animal behavior but are learning as they go. College or going back to school helps with writing up a study. But it will take a PHD for this write up to be accepted among their peers. But with out a body the evidence for the write up is weak and will be turned down, unless a well respected PHD can have a personal encounter to get a study started.
I think John Bindernagle and Anna Nekaris, among others, are of the opinion that bf exists and, like me, donâ€™t necessarily need a sighting. There are certainly others, no?
That's just it, there is no protocol of the proper handling of the DNA, so they cannot narrow it down. Is the DNA contaminated by the handlers? or is this Human DNA found with in of the creature it self?. No channels exist of proper testing to see if the Human DNA belongs to the handlers or the creature it self. In other words they have not isolated the human strand of the so call contaminated DNA, nor have they gone onto details of the unknown strands of the DNA they have collected. It almost seems like they are refusing to research this creatures existence further and in my opinion I believe that they are scared. They are scared of that unknown strand that has mixed with Humans that does not match with nothing on earth. I am not saying that they are aliens , I am saying that they are refusing to add this unknown to the gen bank when ever they discover a new species. You can look this up your self if you do not believe me. They add new species to the gen bank every other month or even week with new species being discovered.
Iâ€™m actually aware of this situation based just on my limited exposure to the available information. A big problem, from what Iâ€™ve seen, is that samples are brought to a lab in good faith but with questions about their collection and without a study design into which to plug the results. For us, designing a study obviously starts with the hypothesis that bf exists. It then defines specifically what constitutes supporting or contradicting evidence. It includes, probably among other things, 1 the collection of such evidence with 2. a plan for its collection and 3. provides a vehicle for translating that evidence into 4. pre-defined data points aimed at answering 5. pre-determined research questions deemed relevant to supporting the hypothesis by the investigator (and his/her grantors). A broad question of bfâ€™s existence should be supported by the conclusions reached logically by answering the smaller, more specific questions, in this case, what about this dna?
No, and nor will there ever be DNA ever entered into the Gen bank from this creature. Like I said they are scared of the truth and where it may lead them too. An open mind will lead to discovery , but a closed mind will only lead you to a locked door with out a key.
They may be scared of the government conspiracy surrounding this as well. I donâ€™t have to see the black ops helicopter to be suspicious of that. Call me paranoid. I may be too green to believe there will never be a database. GenBank is probably out of reach for now. A separate database imight be doable. I have faith that somethingâ€™s gonna break.
I hope this helped
Thanks again, SB. Quite helpful!