Leaderboard

The final word (IMHO) on Zana is this excellent free access article: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/share/NFUEBVWNUHN8HIZGVRHZ?target=10.1002/ggn2.10051 "Too degraded" is a relative term. It depends on the experience of the researcher, the laboratory instrumentation used, the methodology employed in the sequencing, and the software and method employed in interpretation. I humbly suggest, that one or more of the above parameters may not have been up to the task in the case of the nests. Paabo et all sequenced the entire Neanderthal nuclear genome with barely over 1 X coverage (1.3 as I recall).

Please be careful with the word "human": Any creature of the genus Homo is human, including us (sapiens), Neanderthals, Denisovans, Habilis, etc.

Yet this is the same "scientist" who was sued for abrogating contracts for dog dna profiling as I understand it and couldn't courteously return a deer skull (thought to be something like a juvenile primate skull, go figure) to Tom Burnette upon request after supposed dna testing was done. Something very fishy about the lack of propriety I would say. Like you say, you are privy to some stuff too but I would imagine if it smells like rotten fish, it is probably rotten fish.

The author was very generous with Ketchum, which in itself is noteworthy. It was a welcome change from the kind of opposition one is accustomed to in this society. And she is very much in the Standing League. The vast majority of people who publicly enter this field of 'Science' end up in that league regardless of their achievements or lack thereof. If you seek success in Science, research weapons, climate change, or sasquatches that died thousands of years ago, or you'll end up living in a tent in downtown.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2013/07/an-honest-attempt-to-understand-the-bigfoot-genome-and-the-woman-who-created-it/ Ultimately, she saw the collection of contradictions as a sign of her own sincerity. "I'm not sure why they're like they are. I don't think anybody is, and I think that gives people a real problem. But we can't change how the results came out. And I'm not going to lie about them, and I'm not going to try to make them fit a scientific model when it doesn't." After an hour-long phone conversation, there was no question about whether Ketchum is sincere in her belief that bigfoot exists and if her data conclusively proves that it's worthy of protection. But, at the same time, it's almost certainly this same sincerity that drove her to look past the clear problems with her proof. ===================== So the author sees Melba as sincere in her belief in Bigfoot. I concur. The author also questions if that’s WHY she cannot see her obvious mistakes…. Thats because Melba Ketchum is working backwards from a belief and she is pounding her “evidence” of a square peg through a round hole. I would say he is being very generous with Melba Ketchum. I would put her in league with Todd Standing. Except she has more sciency gobbley goob behind her. But at least Todd was original and not so lazy as to use a Chewbacca costume that could be spotted from SPACE.

This is simply not true. There is a reality. And Melba Ketchum tried to pass off her work AS reality!!! Science isn’t being unscientific by questioning her work. It’s absolutely doing its job! I don’t understand this mindset. If I went to Africa and I was a vet with some knowledge on genetics and I came back with a bunch of DNA samples, tested them and then wrote a paper (in my own peer reviewed journal) that proclaimed a new novel species? And the rest of science looks at my work and says….ummmm no. So I get mad and post pictures of a Star Wars character as some sort of buttressing proof!? How is science at fault here? Dear God people if you’re going to support primatologists and DNA sampling? Pick someone, ANYONE with a proven track record! Hey look! Dr. Mayor is holding up a REAL type specimen of a novel primate species! 🤯 That’s not EGO….that’s science. It’s why my pot pie comes out of the microwave hot. It’s why I can Bluetooth my phone to my TV and watch you tube videos. It’s why we know we share 98.9% DNA with a Chimpanzee. Despite my advocacy of Sasquatch being a real creature? I’m not going to cheat and move the goal posts of discovery to fit my world view. And I am NOT going to allow my feelings or pocketbook be manipulated by snake oil salesmen.

My dream would be a Legend Meets Science Sequel involving a challenge for suit makers: make a Patty suit/ PGF recreation in a same or similar way limited to 1967 materials. That demonstrative evidence would be 'science' in that it would be testing the principle at issue in the PGF. Hope this project gets off the ground. My bigger hope would be Bigfoot TV productions moving toward this type of TV show/ documentary and away from the 'Finding Bigfoot' formula. The subject needs serious discussion. The spirit of the previous Legend Meets Science should be the guiding tenet.

I think it relies on who took the sample and the chain of custody, etc. But Body parts equals thousands of DNA samples and science loves testable and repeatable results. We are fighting a stigma. A stigma that extant great apes only live in the tropical regions of the old world. And that Clovis first humans arrived here only 12,000 years ago. I think there is evidence that not only did humans appear here much earlier but that something may have preceded us. We are finding completely new species in the genus Homo who supposedly went extinct rather recently. And more importantly in ASIA. It’s not a stretch to think that the land bridge was utilized more than once by numerous human species. The Cerutti Mastadon find, the Chapala lake brow ridge, etc, all interesting evidence that may support this theory. Hopefully more will be found.

^ That explains my question exactly. Assuming that Bigfoot are an un-categorized species of the very 'bushy' and mysterious great ape family tree and with the possibilities for hybridization, mutation, variation, contamination, speculation, misidentification and pontification, lol; is there even the possibility for DNA, without corroborating body parts, to ever get the ball rolling? To me, at this point, that seems doubtful...