Leaderboard

I'm sure he is taking a conservative outlook on the effects of the report, but I don't think that reflects what he believes about the evidence he's turned into the study. Surely he would expect that there are notable differences in bigfoot, otherwise there is nothing to prove. The evidence prior to this Ketchum study has for a very long time indicated that this hairy biped was from the genus homo. The tracks, the sounds, the hairs, the pictures and video, plus the fact that anything less would not have managed to elude science, and it's DNA would have stood out like a sore thumb when collected by biologists. So none of what is going on here should be unexpected. I certainly can't get into a technical debate where DNA is concerned, but the maternal lineage is obviously only part of the story, we'll have to rely on the real experts there, and I have'nt heard that we had erectus DNA unless we have dated some sequence to that time period, which would leave room for speculation whether it was erectus or some other hominid. Dr. K still seems confident that the proof is in the DNA , but the proof won't be entirely dependent on the DNA alone because it is also tied to the morphology in the samples, and cricumstances of their collection. IMO there are observable characteristics in the hairs that doesn't correspond with what would be expected in ordinary human head hairs and apparently to some, not even in the known primates. In addition to DNA there is testing available in the fields of toxicology and isotopic analyses that could strengthen the case for them. If all findings are repeatable , I think the samples can be quite persuasive. Since I'm a submitter, I don't see a hoax by anyone, it is simply a matter of whether there is anything diagnostic to the question of bigfoots existence in the samples, and that alone determines what really is definitive.

In support of 'Sasfooty' above, she asks: "Why is it so unbelievable that they might occasionally do other things that we do?" Let's keep in mind that curious caches of human generated articles, such as clothing, plastic items, toys, etc., are sometimes found deep in country where humans have no particular business. It has been suggested that Squatchy collects this stuff during his travels and stashes it in a location where he can safely examine and play with it until he eventually abandons it, perhaps out of boredom. Query: Do both male and female Squatch collect human artifacts or is one gender more prone to it than the other? As well, folks often report objects curiously missing from their campsites, even when no other humans are in the vacinity. Does this perhaps mean that BF is often a kleptosquatch? - Dudlow