Guest DWA Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 Honest to God, some people will keep putting new conditions on their denial. "Morphology DNA thousands of footprints and thousands of eyewitness reports so consistent they'd have to be the work of primatologists only they aren't are all well and good. But now you have to marinate the hairs in coelacanth drippings for 20 years." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 Ah, the old " traits known only to primatologists" canard. I love that one. Why don't you list a few? You won't. You never do. You just turtle and ignore the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottv Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 Mountain lion population estimates have been made by back tracking in the winter (snow) and collecting hair samples, for DNA, on the track line. Has anyone tried to back tracking any of the snow track ways? Or any track way for that matter? https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/41247 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 Get a hair! Did you get a hair? Get a hair! No hair? Why didn't you get a hair? Couldn't find a hair? There had to be hair! (Later the same day . . .) Hair examination won't work! Uncut hair doesn't prove anything! Geez. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 6, 2017 Share Posted June 6, 2017 (edited) You are correct. I am not terribly interested in hair morphology tests. Hair can be used for DNA testing, however. Or are you going to continue to pretend that is not true? Edited June 6, 2017 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 Does us a favor; find a DNA laboratory that will do the analysis of hair samples from a Bigfoot and confirm in writing they will do it, keep it confidential and share the results with the person submitting the sample before those results are sent out for peer review. Also find out how many strands of hair they would need. Since you are obviously unable or unwilling to do actual field work, it would be great if you could do that for the rest of us. Now don't get discouraged in trying to find such a lab; they are much more difficult to find than Bigfoot hair itself. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 (edited) Branco, when a DNA lab gets results they don't like - it's deemed "undetermined." Any lab worth their salt does not want the painful publicity and scrutiny of providing conclusive tests of this caveman. Even if you had the DNA results, the skeptics will say the sample population is insufficient for a firm determination - and does not qualify as sufficient evidence. They'll say its anomalous. And until other samples verify the first results - no determination can be addressed. Any lab, any scientist - who steps out of bounds - just kissed his career/their lab goodbye. Edited June 7, 2017 by FarArcher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 Nothing like trotting out the excuses in advance. Must keep the expectations low, mustn't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 26 minutes ago, dmaker said: Nothing like trotting out the excuses in advance. Must keep the expectations low, mustn't we? Again, the ignorance of how things actually work in the real world is staggering. A perfect example of why I think incest should be illegal. Moving on. Non-government and non-university labs are not funded. It's a business. The business relies on its professional reputation in the business community - as they much generate revenue. Revenue keeps the doors open. Reputation is paramount. If an independent DNA lab determines results that they are unfamiliar with, or goes into an area that may affect their credibility, or they produce results where others may question their credibility - they will NOT give the actual results - as it's much too easy to say, "undetermined." In such a way, they avoid a lot of headaches that a business simply doesn't want. This is how I know you're not a businessman, because you'd already know this. Maybe find something you're good at. Barber College, maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 So, reputation is paramount, but it's common knowledge that these labs will not give the actual results? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 OK, I said I wasn't going to spoon feed some info, but I am going to start a new thread.Presidential Memorandum of March 9, 2009. I'm going to explain what that memo's real purpose was, and how it aimed to actually take control of scientific research in EVERY field. I will post the memo, and, as I have time, i'll string it all together. You are absolutely right FarArcher. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7.62 Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, dmaker said: So, reputation is paramount, but it's common knowledge that these labs will not give the actual results? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. He's making sense in what he's saying minus the snarks in this thread . Just think about it for a second , not only would a private lab suffer from this these labs are used by defense attorneys all the time to battle state and federal labs in our justice system .Can you imagine the prosecution saying to the jury,, Oh by the way , this is the lab that said Bigfoot is real. Edited June 7, 2017 by 7.62 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarArcher Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 9 minutes ago, dmaker said: So, reputation is paramount, but it's common knowledge that these labs will not give the actual results? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I didn't expect you to get it. Don't let the facts get in the way of your determinations. It just wouldn't be you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 10 minutes ago, 7.62 said: He's making sense in what he's saying minus the snarks in this thread . Just think about it for a second , not only would a private lab suffer from this these labs are used by defense attorneys all the time to battle state and federal labs in our justice system .Can you imagine the prosecution saying to the jury,, Oh by the way , this is the lab that said Bigfoot is real. If Bigfoot was proven real by the results, that would be quite the feather in their cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7.62 Posted June 7, 2017 Share Posted June 7, 2017 Just now, dmaker said: If Bigfoot was proven real by the results, that would be quite the feather in their cap. No it wouldn't . not without a body to go with it. This subject will not be proven and accepted by the entire scientific community only by a hair sample ...that's just the way it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts