norseman Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 First of all, thanks for sharing Branco. Glad you made it out of there! Look forward to seeing the photos, but wish you found some hair or scat that would really knock it out of the park! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 These are three of the several photos taken at the bed's location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 9 minutes ago, norseman said: First of all, thanks for sharing Branco. Glad you made it out of there! Look forward to seeing the photos, but wish you found some hair or scat that would really knock it out of the park! You're welcome. Yeah, me too; was not looking forward to walking all the way back through the mud and water wearing just mountain hiking boots. I forgot to change to my boots. You can bet we looked for hair in the original depression and scat in the area, but we didn't find sh...... anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 On 6/2/2017 at 9:08 PM, Branco said: Dmaker said: " Branco, as for your memo claim? Your outline of it is rather vague. I asked if you were saying Obama issued a memo dealing with bigfoot and Ketchum. You said yes, it would cover both of those topics. That is different than a secret bigfoot memo. I'm sure you could produce some report about some memo that covered some scope of wildlife in general and one could loosely apply that to both bigfoot and Ketchum's study. That is not what I meant. For about the third time, I ask that you read this carefully. This is what I said: "Kind'a think they may have given Dr. Sykes a little heads up & advice when he visited that lab a time or two before he revealed his findings. If Dr. Sykes had actually found that the DNA of that one sample from the USA was from a relic hominid, his testing would have violated regulations established in response to a Presidential Memo issued by Obama while Dr. K's work was ongoing. Had he declared the sample from the "cross breed bear" showed it was really a Sasquatch, that Memo and the scientific community would have discredited him and his work. by hook or crook. Dmaker said: I'll ask you directly. Did this memo mention bigfoot and Ketchum specifically? If not, then I don't care about it at all. If your answer is yes, then we might have a bet. That was never part of the bet, the bet was about the existence of the memo. Read what I said a few more times, maybe that little 25 watt watt bulb will light up. Thanks for the advice WSA; I will follow it to the letter forthwith. Did he really? I had no idea he would have done something like that! Branco, that Dr. Sykes would have been immediately discredited and run out of town - for "scientific incompetence" had he identified a sample coming from an unidentifed hominid - is fact. And it's not just in the field of biology. One, if not THE primary reason no one in government wants this can of worms opened up - is the very significant damage it would do to the timber industry, the mining industry, and even the petroleum industry. It would be a major, major financial disaster. Maybe not to Kuwait, but big time money in the US and Canada. The same thing works FOR the petroleum industry. Pre-vaporized gasoline in a gas engine burns so cleanly it emits no hydrocarbons nor does it need cooling. It also gets about ten times the mileage for the same sized engine. Something so simple cannot be allowed to wreck trillions of dollars currently invested in oil. A friend brought over a top forensic engineering team from Germany to test his technology - and sure enough - his results were dead-on, but they packed up their equipment and left - saying, "If we verify our results - we're out of business. This will not be allowed, and it would be professional suicide." So yeah, these things happen. Just follow the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 You believe that "bed" could only have been made by a bigfoot? I would disagree. Without any supporting physical evidence, it's impossible to determine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted June 5, 2017 Moderator Share Posted June 5, 2017 21 minutes ago, dmaker said: You believe that "bed" could only have been made by a bigfoot? I would disagree. Without any supporting physical evidence, it's impossible to determine. By the same logic, lack of physical evidence, it is equally impossible to determine what did NOT make it. MIB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 Yes. Hence, the problem with evidence that is not falsifiable. Grand claims can be made and never disproven or proven. Thus benefit of the doubt can be bullied into the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 It was nice of bigfoot to leave you a tip. He could probably have used that dollar to buy a can of Luck's Baked Beans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCBFr Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 On 5/31/2017 at 11:58 AM, norseman said: The shows I've seen they basically follow the gorillas around, and even interact with them. What I want to know is if they found a Gorilla nest that was slept in 1-2 nights, six months ago? Would they still be able to gather samples? And would those samples yield DNA? Remember that the west side of the Olympics gets 100 plus inches of rain per year. Norse - mDNA can be pulled from a single animal hair and can be used to determine species even if it has been lying around for a decade and touched by hundreds of human hands. Finding said hair in a land with 100 inches of rain per year is a different matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 4 hours ago, MIB said: By the same logic, lack of physical evidence, it is equally impossible to determine what did NOT make it. MIB Well, that's just not true. Let me show you. I have never seen one of those IN MY LIFE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, dmaker said: You believe that "bed" could only have been made by a bigfoot? I would disagree. Without any supporting physical evidence, it's impossible to determine. Yes Sir, I Know the bed was made by a Bigfoot. Anyone with and ounce of common sense, normal eyesight, an inquiring mind, but without an pompous, ego driven belief that he/she knows everything, would have concluded the same thing. Your disagreement with the facts are as immaterial and pointless as a buffalo gnat 's attempt to copulate with a turkey buzzard. Let me clue you in; there was in fact supporting physical evidence that a Bigfoot had not only carefully made the pile of duff shown in the photo, but had also lain on the original duff under it at some time in the past. The foot print sizes and shape, and the indentations left in the ground by the animal's weight is physical evidence that no human or other animals made those tracks. The sizes of the parcels of duff that were lifted from the ground by something with two forearms and hands that were slid along the ground's surface were generally two feet long and nearly that wide in some cases. It was obvious that the length of the forearms plus the hands that lifted the duff parcels were not those of typical humans. The fact that the ground and rotted duff left exposed when the top layers of the duff had been lifted were later carefully covered by duff gathered in hands-full from nearby high-ground, absolutely shows the entire actions were performed by a highly intelligent animal. It may have been impossible for you to make these determinations, but no surprise there. Edited June 5, 2017 by Branco 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 (edited) Everything you just listed is pure speculation. Did you happen to gather any physical evidence, such as a hair sample? Edited June 5, 2017 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 Branco was there, examined the sign firsthand. You weren't there, you didn't see diddly squat, meaning your assumption of pure speculation - is pure conjecture. Did you see the footprints? Did you see what was disturbed and what wasn't? Do you have a list of animals that have the physical attributes to replicate that which was disturbed, and subsequently distributed? Tell us of your hunts - your time in the field - your experience tracking - your personal experiences, and if there aren't any, what were you doing wrong? Blind? Deaf? Clueless? Do you know what to look for? Do you know what you're looking at when you see disturbances? Do you know the habits and tendencies of different animals in your area, feeding times, ingress and egress, favorite areas? No, you clearly don't. But by all means - continue. You bring so much to all of us. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 Firsthand speculation is still just speculation. If a giant, hairy ape-man rested in a leafy nest, there should be plenty of hair samples to gather. I don't believe this was done. Evidence is needed to bridge all the speculation in this subject. Evidence of the type that can be tested. Without that, all you have is speculation. If that is enough for you, then great. But why do you get in such a state when I simply point out that speculation is speculation? Does the lack of physical evidence bother you? I'm simply saying there are other sources for this than an undocumented ape-man. Especially when there is no evidence of said ape-man available to support this speculation. Why does that get you in such a tizzy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 5, 2017 Share Posted June 5, 2017 Doesn't get me in a tizzy. Only in your mind should there be plenty of sample at any given location at any given time. Maybe they don't shed like you think they should - which would be an erroneous assumption on your part. Maybe they slept in a bearskin. Maybe a piece of carpet. Maybe 1000-denier satin sheets on the ground - you don't know as you weren't there, and you didn't examine the site, the evidence, nor the sign. I don't see you doing anything BUT speculating. Sitting behind your keyboard - which isn't exactly the ideal point of reference for a critter I think everyone agrees is an outdoor critter. Does the lack of physical evidence bother me? I'd say there's a buttload of evidence - maybe not according to your rules - but it's there. Tons of evidence. Same, exact evidence that science applies to every other discipline. Just the other day, scientists after a three year study - concluded that they could not find evidence that black holes have a solid center. You see - two theories on black holes. Some say matter that goes in disappears. Others say there must be a solid center. To test it, they observed for three years, a suspected black hole location. You have to understand this is real science - you can't SEE a black hole. But they say there is such a thing. So they try to observe light patterns near the black hole to see how fast a star would disappear as it crossed the Event Horizon. If matter disappears gradually as its pulled apart - (as they reasoned) then it doesn't have a solid center. But if the star goes in whole, in a black hole with a solid center, it should appear like our sun does at sunset. Wait. Forgot my point. No, I remember now! Every single bit of that science - cosmology, astronomy, cosmic physics - based entirely on observation. Observation. Only. Real Science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts