Leaderboard

I dont have a lot of faith in DNA versus a body. Small samples can be destroyed in one test. Which means that other labs cannot verify your work with tests of their own. Samples get contaminated or lost as well. DNA will absolutely do it if we can get through the hoops and loops. But a body bypasses all that. But if DNA is all you have???? Its light years ahead of a plaster cast or grainy photo. For the reasons you state in your first line: plaster casts or grainy photos are, if I am a scientist in a relevant field, far better than a DNA sample. For the latter I'll say: where's your type specimen? Don't have one? Contamination is my clear dismissal. I have to explain casts and photos. Experts have virtually verified that the provenance of Patty and many tracks is an unlisted species. The problem is that the society isn't holding science's feet to the fire for that alternative explanation...that they do not have. That evidence leaves clear markers that rule out a human as the subject, and make fakery such a farfetched explanation that it isn't one. DWA, Southern, and Norse can you expand your comments to improve clarity? If bigfoot were anything other than (technically) human, it would be divergent enough to be distinguishable in relatively small amounts of mtDNA. That would be one way to prove they exist with multiple biological samples. If my theory is right, being that I think that BF is from the genus homo and developed an entirely different survival strategy, then it's DNA may appear fully human but may have subtle (seemingly random) mutations that affect gene expression more than actual sequence which could look like ordinary human variation. Without deep study those kinds of things may never be fully identified. I have my doubts that if a specimen were in hand, we could persue the study of it unfettered. As soon as "human" DNA enters the picture, the ethics and protocol changes. Ownership of the specimen can then be challenged. Genetic sequence data then cannot be shared on a public data base without written consent of the donor which then blocks independent review. So you could prove it with a body, but you might not be able to keep it long enough..... Besides, the existence of wildmen is a crazy scary thing to drop on the world, even though Grizzly bears are likely more dangerous. I just had a crazy thought. Lets assume that BF is indeed some tribe of relic human with language. We all conjecture if the government knows they are there. What if the Government discovered them, actually made contact, and offered them the same protections as the Bureau of Indian Affairs. My crazy thought is, if BF watched what happened with all the other Native American Tribes: land stolen, displacement from traditional lands, reservation system, etc might a sentient BF tell the government they are not interested in protection and to leave them alone? That might explain some of the strange wilderness areas that simply pop up without any publicity.

Good grief. Yeah, and of course there is no record whatsoever of this happening. Sounds legit...

Thanks for the welcome. I've actually been here for a few. It's just hard to jump in some of these threads. I know what you're saying but I can't put much into it. I'm not sure where you are getting your info from but how do you know for sure how many are mean or not? Or how rare these kind of encounters are. I've read pretty much the same reports everyone else on here has read and a large number of them aren't nice. We can't just pick and choose which stories we want to believe in and discard the rest as nothing. Every encounter we've had wasn't nice. But fear? No, not at all. They've not been mean enough to cause fear. Do the ones in our area know we have weapons? They sure do. And we let them know it by letting them see us carrying our ar10's sometimes and our sidearms. We have never fired a shot at anything in this area and we would never take a shot at one unless attacked. Us showing them we carry boomsticks is basically an understanding between us meaning, don't try to hurt us or we will bring the thunder down upon you. It's been mutual so far. They really don't like us bringing new people there. Just a week ago I took my cousin's 16 year old son with me to put a couple of audio recorders out. Just after we got there he asked me if he could do some tree knocks. I never do tree knocks or howls but I let him do three knocks cause he watches finding bigfoot. Oh boy just not long after this one is already up on the ridge grunting and thrashing around. I keep walking up the ridge to get a sighting but my cousins son is getting really scared by now so we head back down to sit a recorder and get out of there. Soon as I'm turning the recorder on our visitor snaps a good sized fresh hardwood in two quickly followed by a loud knock up on top of the ridge we were just on. Fear didn't come into play but concern did for my cousins son. He was so scared at this point asking me to take him home. I had to go back this past sunday by myself and get my recorders and some large cat prints around the pond. I did not and will not go back up that ridge to find that snapped tree until my regular buddy goes up next week. I think he saw something and won't tell me because it freaked him out. Oh and I have it all on video. A classic class B encounter. Yeah, all bigfoot aren't nice for whatever reasons. I know they don't snap trees in half to say hello too you. But we are all about the audio and video/pictures we try to get and noting stuff up. I fully entertain the reason this post was made. I've read it since it was first started. I will however state that the supposed "dogman" that it was started about I don't and won't entertain.

Way too big.