Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Admin

The Sykes / Sartori Report - Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project (2)

39 posts in this topic

Please continue the topic discussion here.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigfoot exists, and there are actually more than one type! Yikes..

Human "like"  DNA  does not necessarily mean that they are human.

Small Family groups of 2 adults with a child have been reported. Otherwise they seem to be solitary.

Edited by SweetSusiq
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 Would have been nice if he wouldn't have ignored SY's samples he offered...........

 

Could not copy this quote from the old closed thread, so this is what you get ^

 

Yes, SY's sample with an asthmatic biped character heard near the site if included would have been interesting.   I did not like that he was denied.   That was very fishy to me. 

 

I hold it against Sykes that he was that picky that he would not allow a verifiable researcher such as he and TEXLA to be allowed into the mix.  

 

His loss.   

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it could be his loss, or more likely The Plan...... IMHO, in the words of Yogi t....this ain't over til it's over

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could not copy this quote from the old closed thread, so this is what you get ^

 

Yes, SY's sample with an asthmatic biped character heard near the site if included would have been interesting.   I did not like that he was denied.   That was very fishy to me. 

 

I hold it against Sykes that he was that picky that he would not allow a verifiable researcher such as he and TEXLA to be allowed into the mix.  

 

His loss.   

 

The walk up cough sequence I think your referring was in TX not OK where SY hair samples are from. But Yes you see what I see , kinda suspect

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NYT's Science feature had a short piece on the study results this morning. Nothing new except the "official" establishment take on the results, which I thought was quite balanced, taking the lead from Sykes' own caution about reading his study to conclude there is no BF.   In short, it treated the subject with dignity, and how often does that happen? No nudges to the ribs and winking by smirking news anchors here. Maybe we are starting to all grow up?

 

There is this nagging thought in my mind about this being only a mtDNA study, and how many results only came back "human."  I shelve that fact for future reference, but I'd be lying if I said it didn't influence my perception just a tad. Anyone else?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess we still don't know who sent in the sample from Texas. I know there are a few in the NAWAC group that are from Texas , so the one human result might be from area X in actuality. I was pretty sure their sample collected from a window sill on the cabin looked like modern human head hair, and seemed probable that it was from one of the people who has been staying there , even with the split distal end. 

 

To clear something up on my sample, it was collected in Concho Oklahoma in 2007, and wasn't collected in association with our recording of a coughing biped recorded in May 2008 in East Texas along the Neches river. I only wish I could get a full boat of evidence in one place. 

 

I wrote Sykes in July of 2012 and made a submission request as per the collateral hominid project web site instructions. I never heard anything back from him or anyone connected with it.  I also sent some hairs to Meldrum from my sample, and couldn't get confirmation from him that he had received them, though he did say that he did send various samples that he had received ( I presume from various individuals) on to Sykes, and I would question whether they were labeled as to from whom they were from and from which state they were collected. It's possible they might have been labeled as being from the state the sample submitter lived in as that would be the return address on the envelope / package.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after reading this thread...

 

 

what a mess.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've felt for a long time that the intrigues and calamities that seem to befall nearly all Bigfoot research in indicative of not only poor science but also of the absence of a grounding in the factual.  A circus like atmosphere is a more convenient way of making it more difficult to ferret out subterfuge.  Or to put it another way has something to hide.  That said any endeavor begun with a reality based foundation intent on proving the reality of the endeavor will function best with as many details kept in the open as possible.  That  all Bigfoot research seems rooted in the climate first mentioned in this post does not bode well to the depth of the reality of the issue at hand.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that a grounding in the factual at one time meant accepting the earth as flat.    Heresy, scientific and otherwise, was required to discover the truth.    Understanding what is THOUGHT to be factual has a value ... I think a person does need to know which lines they are crossing, which scientific dogma they are challenging, if only to predict and prepare the defense-of-turf response of the establishment.  

 

We are not done having to commit a sort of heresy to get at new truth.   That is the real nature of real science, not the scientific establishment, but of science itself. 

 

MIB

Edited by MIB
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that a grounding in the factual at one time meant accepting the earth as flat.    Heresy, scientific and otherwise, was required to discover the truth.    Understanding what is THOUGHT to be factual has a value ... I think a person does need to know which lines they are crossing, which scientific dogma they are challenging, if only to predict and prepare the defense-of-turf response of the establishment.  

 

We are not done having to commit a sort of heresy to get at new truth.   That is the real nature of real science, not the scientific establishment, but of science itself. 

 

MIB

There is every possibility that Bigfoot exists or did exist.  The red flags with research is seems is that time after time all projects fall to infighting, double crossing and outright falsehood.  While real credentialed science has it's share of internal issues real science does manage to get things done whereas in this arena there is an eternal waiting.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another viewpoint:   http://www.bf-field-journal.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-sykes-farce-aka-genetic-analysis-of.html

 

Re: #2 in his poop sheet of weaknesses is moot.

 

Though Rhett is an ABD and an M.S. ,in behavioral sciences he would certainly be qualified to be recognized as a social scientist and thus a scientist for the purposes of any publication.  Whether he was the most highly qualified of the possible authors may be in question of course, but not whether he is capable of putting his name on a scientific paper.  He may be "out of field" if biological sciences is a prequalifier of some sort to be a co-author. His last name is Mullis not Mullins too.  

Edited by bipedalist
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Interesting that it is stated in the blog referenced above that Ketchum determined mtDNA could NOT be sequenced from Sasquatch hair alone.   It is claimed there must be a skin tag.  I believe this to be incorrect and that a root bulb should suffice.   Anyway, more strangeness.   

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is, as I pointed out before a few times - with this being the last -, there is a simple reason that Dr. K. & Dr.S were unable to have their findings accepted & published if there was any DNA that showed human linage in the samples. 

 

If, as noted in the link in post #13. the DNA tests were done by a lab in this country, there was was ZERO chance of that lab reporting the results if any trace of human DNA, even if it was totally obvious.

 

It is the same reason that no lab will knowingly accept a sample (or body) from anyone or any group that has deliberately shot, killed or injured what that person/group asserts is a BF.

 

The reason is based on this: Presidential Memorandum on Scientific Integrity (March 9, 2009)

 

No; the POTUS did not mention Bigfoot or Sasquatch, but follow the yellow brick road from that memo to where there's skid marks on the road.

 

(If the samples comes from buried skeletal remains, on private land, and some of the intact sections of bones are submitted to the right place in the right manner, that might work to show the existence of an unclassified hominid.)  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0