norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Never claimed to have any forensic evidence in my possession, at this point in time. That info has been disclosed years ago in various public venues and for you to assert otherwise, is unbecoming. You claim to have been apart of a group that shot and tracked a Bigfoot and collected a blood sample. I asked for proof of that evidence and all I get is deflection from you and now I'm "unbecoming" because I'm asking the hard questions? Huh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Never claimed to have the evidence in hand as "proof" rather, I referred it (blood/stomach content samples) as evidence I collected and turned over to others. The story has been in publication for ~10 years so for you to demand something that never was a part of the storyline is simple obfuscation, on your part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 LCB, The blood & stomach samples collected during the "Louisiana Hunt" were initially (blood) typed by a member of the GCBRO organization (Woodswatcher) who was a lab tech at a Tulsa hospital and he conveyed to our group, the blood type findings. A second blood sample was later recovered by the hunt organizer (Lansdale) and he later publically conveyed a preliminary DNA analysis (done by a lab in San Antonio) came back as "unknown primate". However, given the shroud of silence regarding any follow-up work on these items, my public skepticism regarding these claims has been no secret. IMO, the samples may well have come in as homo sapien or so close, a legal distinction may have been problematic hence the silence as the legal/moral ramifications were possibly something the GCBRO people did not want to deal with any further. This is all simple conjecture! Point us to which labs and which hospitals did the lab work, so that it can be independently verified. Never claimed to have the evidence in hand as "proof" rather, I referred it (blood/stomach content samples) as evidence I collected and turned over to others. The story has been in publication for ~10 years so for you to demand something that never was a part of the storyline is simple obfuscation, on your part. What story line? You claim to have collected a Bigfoot blood sample after your group shot and tracked it and was scared off. I wanna know what lab I can call to verify that indeed a Bigfoot blood sample was indeed received from your group and what were the findings. Company name, and telephone number will suffice, thanks...... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake County Bigfooot Posted March 16, 2015 Author Share Posted March 16, 2015 Well I guess if you found it to be human like you might have a problem with the ape theory as well, not something you would want to share. Not that I am taking sides, but it is this view of them being apes, which I too lean toward, that is posed as a justification for harvesting a specimen, if that were proven to be not the case, and in fact they were much more like humans than apes, well there goes specimen collection. We have to recognize that our biases shape out interpretations with whatever we encounter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 It may be simple conjecture to those with a lineal thought process however, the facts have been conveyed as I understand them and the directions to the other parties involved, so conveyed. If, you are having a problem with believing the experiences I have conveyed, then you really have more of a problem with the messenger than the message. That's your perogative however, IMO the reaction may well be founded in the personal discomfort created when you have to think through your own position (pro-kill) rather than mine, hence the spin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 No human aka homo sapien sapien lives naked in the mountains of the PacNW with no fire or shelter or tools. You and I and Ishi as well would die from exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Well I guess if you found it to be human like you might have a problem with the ape theory as well, not something you would want to share. Not that I am taking sides, but it is this view of them being apes, which I too lean toward, that is posed as a justification for harvesting a specimen, if that were proven to be not the case, and in fact they were much more like humans than apes, well there goes specimen collection. We have to recognize that our biases shape out interpretations with whatever we encounter. Not only a problem with theory but quite possibly a serious legal one as well. That's my primary take for what has transpired since then. No human aka homo sapien sapien lives naked in the mountains of the PacNW with no fire or shelter or tools. You and I and Ishi as well would die from exposure. You, I or Ishi have no proof to the contrary as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 It may be simple conjecture to those with a lineal thought process however, the facts have been conveyed as I understand them and the directions to the other parties involved, so conveyed. If, you are having a problem with believing the experiences I have conveyed, then you really have more of a problem with the messenger than the message. That's your perogative however, IMO the reaction may well be founded in the personal discomfort created when you have to think through your own position (pro-kill) rather than mine, hence the spin. The only spin here sir is of your own doing. I'm utterly comfortable in my own skin. Thank you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 I'm sure those with the torches and pitchforks were comfortable (at the time) in their own skins, as well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Norseman, No ill will is meant whatsoever as I believe you are good of heart. I apologize for making you squirm a bit as the path you're own is the one I have already trod in years past and I wish someone had given me reason to pause and think early on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWWASAS Posted March 16, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted March 16, 2015 The arguments here on this thread have been pretty circular with proponents arguing among themselves. Evidence of why we never seem to get anywhere. Someone implied something that I would like to expound on. Let me throw out a hypothetical. Let us say that someone pro kill does succeed in bagging one and gets it delivered to a reputable team of scientists. They do DNA testing and are able to type it. Take xrays or MRIs and do comparative anatomy and not only is not an ape but nuclear DNA shows it be an ancestral human in the human family tree. What then? The shooter just shot grandpa! They will not be able to keep a lid on that because they will need verification of their findings from other labs. The previously very friendly lab could turn on the shooter and call authorities just to cover their butts. Where does this leave the shooter? Anti-kill people as we have seen can be very vocal and will be calling authorities and demanding legal action. Told you so's will be all over the internet. If this is the case, and BF is ancestral human, I can almost guarantee the shooter will end up on court defending himself. Guilty or not, self defense or not, the shooter will have legal fees, for a sensational legal trial, that will bankrupt a normal person. Whoever pulls that trigger better know what he is shooting or be aware of what will happen if BF is more human than ape. It might even be better if some redneck with nothing to his name does the deed and can get a public defender because anyone with anything might loose it to legal fees. The prosecutors would dig up every person they can find that have had a BF in their sights and chose not to shoot because of how human it looked. There are many such reports. The shooter's defense might have problems because of that. If you intend to shoot one you best provoke it first, at least that way you can claim self defense. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faenor Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 LCB, The blood & stomach samples collected during the "Louisiana Hunt" were initially (blood) typed by a member of the GCBRO organization (Woodswatcher) who was a lab tech at a Tulsa hospital and he conveyed to our group, the blood type findings. A second blood sample was later recovered by the hunt organizer (Lansdale) and he later publically conveyed a preliminary DNA analysis (done by a lab in San Antonio) came back as "unknown primate". However, given the shroud of silence regarding any follow-up work on these items, my public skepticism regarding these claims has been no secret. IMO, the samples may well have come in as homo sapien or so close, a legal distinction may have been problematic hence the silence as the legal/moral ramifications were possibly something the GCBRO people did not want to deal with any further. Do you have the blood type results? I'm a medical technologist at a hospital lab and work a bit in the blood bank. Generally fresh or refrigerated blood stored in a tube containing an anticoagulant is required. You would probably need to directly draw the blood from the Sasquatch since once coagulation occurs it becomes difficult to type and screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 (edited) Faenor, This was done back in 2002 and the residual samples disappeared while in custody of the hunt organizer. Would have given anything to have been a fly on the wall whilst they were discussing the DNA results as they went ballistic on getting our samples back once the DNA results (from the second blood sample recovery) came back. Woodswatcher surrendered them w/o our (me & DG) knowledge and/or consent and then repeatedly lied to me about their whereabouts as I finally learned the outcome from another source. I'd contacted Dr. Meldrum (2002) and he referred me to Dr. Fahrenbach (for DNA analysis), who instructed me to overnight the remaining (original) sample to him in Beaverton. I had told both of them they were to have the samples with absolutely no strings attached with my only request was to be apprised as to exactly what this entity was in classification. Edited March 16, 2015 by Yuchi1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yuchi1 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 What you also have to understand is the hunt organizer had little if any scientific motive for this event. He conveyed to me/us the body was to be offered for sale to local timber companies (GP & Weyerheuser had facilities in the area) for seven figures of cash and a NDA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSA Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 (edited) Randy...that hypo gets kicked around a lot, but it all comes down to prosecutorial discretion. Personally, if I were a DA in some rural county where this has happened, I'm not likely to bet my political future on prosecuting the guy who shot the first publicly acknowledged BF. Instead, I think the percentage move would be to lobby the legislature to pass statutes prohibiting it from happening again, propose the local government to set aside areas for continued preservation of the species (using federal money, of course) and prepare the local Chamber of Commerce for the biggest onslaught of tourist dollars they've ever seen. Then, I think I'd announce my candidacy in the next mayor's race! Edited March 16, 2015 by WSA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts