Oonjerah Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 Rev Jeff, Fringe News #80, Bigfoot Files Pt 2 review.
Guest Urkelbot Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 We are Human Beings rascar, the most selfish species on the planet bar none. Humans aren't the most selfish just the most successful. Any sort of altruism towards another species is incredibly rare nature. Human beings are probably the least selfish organisms on the planet in that respect. Unless you argue any sort of conservation efforts undertaken by humans are selfish.
Guest ChrisBFRPKY Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) Sykes didn't get any good samples? I'm surprised. I was hoping he'd have or has at least one. The evidence collection is lacking though. Why is that? I think BobbyO has the right idea why. Ask yourself, if you have conclusive DNA evidence that you know for fact is a definite Sasquatch specimen, why would you give it away? Or one better, why on Earth would you pay someone to take it freely and test it? A good DNA sample will absolutely place the director of the study in the history books and bury him in cash. Look what Ketchum is trying to do. Look what Sykes is doing now with the Polar bear findings...... So, what's in it for the Bigfooter? "Thanks much and here's your money back, there was no charge for testing this sample that has now made me rich, famous and remembered in History as yielding the most shocking discovery in human history." I don't think everyone is greedy but you gotta admit, it'd take a schmuck to freely give away something he worked years to get to make someone else rich. There's got to be something in it for the researcher. Edited October 29, 2013 by ChrisBFRPKY
Guest Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) It's very perplexing in lieu of sample #7. "Not Stated." (He sure knows how to keep this Turkey in suspense.) "US project" : word play. Can it be that #7 is from Canada? Of the 7 samples from Washington State only six were given results. Edited October 29, 2013 by kezra
Oonjerah Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 ^ kezra, Do you mean that in Bigfoot Files, pt 2, Dr. Sykes specifically explained why he gave no results for sample #7. Was it non-viable? I was thinking maybe it meant, "not stated today," & "I'll tell you later." No?
Guest Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 its hard to tell if something exciting is being saved for the journal or a result was just non viable so not worth a mention. The wording is more or less exactly ' of the 7 samples from washington state, 2 came back as cows, one a Black bear, a white tail deer, the Olympic project sample submitted by Derek Randles came back canine, wolf or dog. Marcel Cagey's sample was also canine. In Arizona a Racoon, Texas a horse, and in Michigan a Porcupine. Smeja and Placer County - 2 Black Bears So it was glossed over, quickly moving onto Arizona results. They only interviewed 4 submitters (Randles, Smeja, Shirley/Fields, Cagey)
Guest Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 All this speaks to is the lack of our ability to gather evidence properly, I know that Meldrum has had hairs that basically came back as no known animal type from Gen Bank, so what we have here is an example of being made to look very stupid. All of us that conduct our own field research need to listen to the lesson, We need to quit Squatching and start researching, not more whooping and tree knocking, but hard searches for the physical evidence. We neglect that all too much and all too often and settle for experiential evidence that proves nothing to no one. Foot print evidence is still the strongest form of evidence we have for Sasquatch, and some hair that obviously was missed by this study... which I think really sucks, because we should have had our samples vetted by somebody, say Meldrum, and not allowed all the crap to find its way into the lab. You tell me none of this stuff was examined beforehand by a qualified animal hair specialist to see if it was worth testing? So dang stupid!!! Oh pretty please could someone upload this episode on Utube for the rest of us nut cases to get a look I see it the same way. Bigfootology in its current form is just not research or science, except for very few individuals. Just to go out, sometimes, somewhere and use techniques that didnt bring up any results for decades isnt research! To many claim themselves to be researchers, instead they should call themselves enthusiasts and leave the stage to Meldrum and company.
Lake County Bigfooot Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) Still cannot get a link, at least a safe one, that will let me see the show. I think I have heard enough to know what it will be, but I would like to view it and have my own personal blow out, then regroup. No offence GuyfromIndiana, but I just am frustrated with what we think is research... I here recordings, blobsquatch photos, canine hairs, it just gets tiring, maybe it's a bit like old Rene Dahinden, I cannot tolerate this stuff.... Edited October 29, 2013 by Lake County Bigfooot
Guest shoot1 Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 Current Bigfooting Methodology = Tomfoolery. Instead of BFRO-styled "expeditions", something like http://keepingtrack.org/wildlife-monitoring-programs should be the standard.
southernyahoo Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 ^What would they teach? How to interpret a large human track as an undiscovered ape? How to dodge the legalities of shooting what makes those tracks? How to document a bunch of stuff that can't be positively attributed to a new species? I think we got that going already....LOL
Guest Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) Ok, finally got to watch and was ready for the worst based on posts around the internet, but found it really a decent portrait. They could have sensationalized Justin more, and didn't...and even if tough to watch his story left him some humanity, as they did all. Dr. Sykes chuckle about 2 groups wood knocking to each other unfortunate, but confess...it is an issue since Finding Bigfoot in some areas....although those guys stated four miles to a home.... and so on.. Didn't like the claim these were the best samples...as I recall the community was having trouble scrounging anything up.. Bobbie Short posted a funny comment in What's New on her site.."if you have any Bigfoot samples laying around, send them to O-L". of course she posted it above the count for how many were sent to MK..perhaps 100 ...........and of course it is limited to hair (and guys like Rugg still waiting on that tooth)..... Yeah, some little digs. (Evans comment..paraphrased "tracks are stupid to study and will never prove" ..errr.. Meldrum?), but more considered really in addressing the pressures to witnesses, and the divided community than many...and in keeping with the travel log..for international viewers... Mark seemed unpersuaded by his interviews... .it is a Brit piece..and the BF enthusiasts did agree to have a "reveal" of results...duh.... the truth is JS story is sad, and so is our "community," and it is like a religion in many ways, with primarily amateur enthusiasts in the field, who sent in identifiable animals with hopes....oh well. Any BF researcher with an encounter, doesn't question the reality, they aren't bears, etc....but, what are they? What does come thru IMO, is a future.... Sykes, put out a hair trap design, the cost is down..$1500 and refunded if positive... and ultimately the entire genomics field is getting cheap...and the processes/methods to isolate this only improve..as well as the data in ganbank..and other extinct animals/humans So, it won't stop anyone...might humble us a bit...reflect on how foolish we look and rethink appearances on BF shows? ahah, there is always another, new witness.... Thumbs up still...and I envy Mark his job.. AND kezra your post duly noted... I go with your hope Edited October 29, 2013 by apehuman
southernyahoo Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 Dr. Sykes chuckle about 2 groups wood knocking to each other unfortunate, but confess...it is an issue since Finding Bigfoot in some areas....although those guys stated four miles to a home.... and so on.. Didn't like the claim these were the best samples...as I recall the community was having trouble scrounging anything up.. Sykes' study seemed primarily focused on the PNW, which to me presents a different set of odds for finding samples with it's vastness and great fauna diversity. It is actually like a double edged sword which seems more plausable to some that BF could be there but also more difficult to find and sort from the probable knowns.
Guest Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) Perhaps, I just think we as a community were tapped out..or the "independants'..were anyway . What is interesting is no formal submission from BFRO or Meldrum/Farenbach.... I find that really, really odd... BFRO...so many claims of possession of hair....why no submission? and Meldrum wrote about a year ago in some comment..he had talked with Henner and was wanting to "re-do" the hair collection as a collaboration b/c of advances ..then I never saw another comment... could be two things... Henner said..no.... or yes....who owns all those hairs? Henner...? the submitters? if he said yes.....then a very quiet study could be happening.....b/c if not..why would either of those BF Horsemen pass up free testing..of the entire collection? Henner's BF hair pronouncements have been the Gold Standard for a long, long time.... hummmm Edited October 29, 2013 by apehuman
chelefoot Posted October 29, 2013 Posted October 29, 2013 Apehuman, Where were you able to watch it? I've been looking for a way to see it since it aired and have had no luck. Michele
Recommended Posts