Leaderboard

It's got to be a carcass, Larry? Behold this "peer" discuss the DNA acquired after a sasquatch was shot: https://sasquatchgenomeproject.org/linked/authors_response_to_passing_reviews.pdf Sorry, Larry. That's unethical.

Thanks for asking, bipedalist. But it may not be necessary. What I was alluding to for the posted chart is that even if it isn't accepted to be showing evidence of Sasquatch DNA mutations it does show something that is nonetheless MORE than interesting. Some of the footnotes in the chart say that any ONE of those mutations are rare in Humans. Dr. Haskell Hart, who created the chart after going through the Sasquatch Genome Project's raw data results, said that one of the mutations was rare in 20,000 Human genomes that were registered in the Genbank back in 2012. I've been thinking about that. How it might relate to the degraded Human DNA found in the soil samples of the Olympic Project's Washington nest site? Not saying there IS a correlation, but what if the degraded HumanDNA from the nest site had one or two (or three!) of the same mutations as what is in Dr. Haskell Hart's Table 22 that I'd posted here. Wouldn't it be interesting if the same mutations were present from both sources? Remember, one of the chart's mutations is rare in Humans. Two, or even three, of those mutations in one Human genome would be highly improbable. In fact according to the Genbank at that time two of those mutations together in one Human genome didn't even exist. All WE would have to do then is pressure Dr. Disotell to release this raw data from the nest site DNA results so that Dr. Hart could go through and assess that data to see if there were any alignments of Dr. Disotell's data with the data from his Table 22's list of mutations. Sound like a plan? I think so. Because if only genus Homo was found at the nest site, and it matched somewhat with the mutations in Table 22, then that would really be something for everyone to know. Filling in the blanks: It could mean that genetically odd Humans may have been the nest builders. Agreed? Oh where is Larryzed when one needs him!

Yep, I kinda remember that as an ex-MOD

Let me know when you guys had enough fun...

I spit out my coffee... haha Yeah cause science and evil have never been lovers before right

No, people simply choose to ignore it. Want proof? Look a coupla pages back and see the amazing response and scientific discussion that ensued when I posted the chart the first time, LOL. A discussion that involved....wait for it, Larryzed.....no one. Because the agenda here is to make sure that the science NEVER gets discussed. Which is a sure fire way for me to make certain that the SCIENCE gets brought up every chance I get. It's a good goal

Pffsstt. Cat vets are shrieking everywhere by the comparison!

Cat vet genetics isnt valid science.

How does it feel to be facing those whose goal is to distract from the science and double down on the things that are about anything but? How do you like being in the 'hiflier' hot seat? Now sit in that seat for about four years and you'll get what it's like to get anything done around here. And you've now seen the push back against progress in its action and full glory. First hand. All against one....fun isn't it? Huntster, they will do everything thy can to keep from discussing the science. Science just like this:

NO Its not. There are standards to peer review and the Scientific method. Shes not pursuing leads, shes grifting at this point and adding to the white noise of the subject, not answers.

Absolutely correct. Filter out the fakes and focus on better examples than the grifting vet.

Not all of it. Belief didn’t get her in hot water with the state of Texas, neither did Bigfoot. I don’t understand why most of us will not give Todd Standing a pass, but we will give Melba Ketchum a pass? Explain that to me? This hero worship of charlatans does absolutely nothing to help our cause. As a community we are better off with competent, honest representatives that have real peer reviewed results! 🤷‍♂️

This thought should be deeply considered by everybody who believes that these creatures exist. If you make contact, keeping it confidential will be key to your overall benefit.........

Kinda'. I was banned, but I returned upon invitation to come back. Same profile name, same avatar, same guy. I didn't sneak back as Hamster.

Thats exactly what it was, the rest is wishful thinking. Believe what you want, she's not qualified and her "results" were amusing at best.

She isn’t a criminal. She is incompetent.

Until the SSq and all the other related principalities make their move ( and they are going to) and we then know for sure what the dealio is "in reality", there will be no consensus either on the street corner or within the scientific community. We have always had Ad Hominen attacks and other like tactics to move the focus away from what is actually being looked at... That these tactics exist tells a piece... Now The good doctor didnt do herself any favors going public with her interactions with the SSq and all that goes along with that... I suppose for many the question isnt do SSQ somehow reach out to some of us, but do ya speak about it when they do? Certainly anyone should know that doing so is akin to being soon canceled (or worse) in some circles... I mean the question should be why her... not is she nuts... and when ya resolve that question then it seems clear who is controlling the narrative and thats not comfortable to think about me thinks...

Here is a new interesting article. I was not aware she got into hot water in Texas (not Bigfoot related). https://centerforinquiry.org/blog/the-return-of-melba-ketchum/

I would go with your comment. You know them, or maybe you don't. Somethings........ Camera flashes evolved from flash powder, flash bulbs ( battery capacitor flash ) to electronic flash. Those methods caught the human eye with a dilated pupil and the resulting 'red eye' in the pictures. Modern flash set ups have a low power 'pre-flash' just before the major flash. The pre-flash causes the pupils to constrict so the red eye effect is minimized. Automotive headlights are continuous output so our pupils adjust to a small opening.

the US population has doubled in 70 years, IMO based on SSRS database data, sightings increase with pop culture references to bigfoot, not to the population. I could be wrong about this, but this is my understanding. I came to this conclusion based on the number of sightings per year changing wildly. I would love to be proven wrong. Clearly, other factors are involved than just us vs them populations. A declining them population would result in lower numbers, but a rising us population would hide some of that decline by masking it behind more human hours in their ecosystems. Pop culture can also influence sightings by making it cool to go camping again, resulting in more people in the woods. Anywho, this is what the numbers look like for the past 73 years: 7 1950 2 1951 2 1952 7 1953 1 1954 6 1955 8 1956 6 1957 12 1958 9 1959 19 1960 12 1961 13 1962 27 1963 23 1964 25 1965 28 1966 25 1967 45 1968 55 1969 68 1970 50 1971 86 1972 127 1973 103 1974 142 1975 135 1976 186 1977 174 1978 144 1979 146 1980 112 1981 101 1982 90 1983 84 1984 93 1985 98 1986 87 1987 110 1988 94 1989 92 1990 102 1991 88 1992 108 1993 115 1994 134 1995 121 1996 144 1997 185 1998 156 1999 253 2000 236 2001 208 2002 230 2003 278 2004 262 2005 289 2006 213 2007 202 2008 193 2009 154 2010 187 2011 232 2012 164 2013 157 2014 111 2015 82 2016 64 2017 60 2018 40 2019 66 2020 23 2021

I collected five or six years of evidence of such "layouts", mostly on ground but some elevated sculptures and branch hangers as well, some were one foot by one foot and some were large tree trunk overlays and stacks, some were intertwined within tri=trunked yellow poplars with a different species of long tree branch layed upright across and within. Most were equilateral triangles with multiple "A" shaped contellations emanating like spokes on a wheel when laid on ground. In my mind if the terrain allows and the researcher is observant it becomes diagnostic that you are among the culture of Bigfoot, YMMV but Robert Morgan would say "be more observant and less opinionated".

Yes. We are finding upright triangles made out of three downed saplings.

Well the DNA study shows what it shows... aside from what is said about the players involved and their apparent agendas and/or conclusions or shall we say opinions? The best ones (in my opinion) to determine (what they seem like) are the ones who have interacted with them... myself being among. First nations are spoken about all the time and they never refer to them as great apes... it varies from area to areas as to the abilities they possess etc but the common thread is that they are a tribe of brothers, a people, a community ... No one that I know refers to animals as a tribe or as people. The less talked about folks are the Amish, who also believe they (the SSq) are another nation of people... they are well aware also of what it is. They and many others believe... The Amish go back a long way with these things... Also not everything is a SSq... as we refer to it as such, there are other things connected and mingled in and around all of this....its big and complicated... cheers No they are not Alien, Nephilim, or the people that were here before us, or any of that... What exists today is a remnant of a people that HAS TO stay hidden, and has to stay a joke to the masses, and has to be fit into a very specific box (which they don't by the way) which is why under no circumstances can they be determined to be... ya dig

I think you're picking imaginary nits. Humans are primates. They did not mis-speak. That they could have been more specific does not mean what they said was incorrect. You're trying to play "gotcha games" twisting meaning of words to your purpose to trap people who aren't even here to address your questions. Even if you convince every person here, you've accomplished nothing, moved the needle not at all. So why waste your angst? If you want to know, go ask Disotell or Meldrum for clarification. If you don't want to know, don't want to make the effort, well, I guess that says enough. MIB

You missed much and are wrong in many regards. Ketchum is, or was, a veterinarian with a highly regarded DNA lab. She did the equine genome in the same manner that the neanderthal and human genomes were done. This is not a trivial accomplishment. Her lab was regarded highly enough to have been used by the FBI in identifying Sept 11 human remains. Earlier. She was brought into bigfoot research by David Paulides. Hers was the "mysterious" and un-identified DNA lab mentioned in either The Hoopa Project or Tribal Bigfoot, I forget which. Anyway, those were published in 2008-2009 and her involvement began several years earlier. I'm guessing 2005-2006. +++++++++++ There's more that I can't say. I sat in on calls Ketchum made to my old bigfoot research partner as a silent fly on the wall .. not sure Ketchum knew anyone was listening. That gives me perspective on things she said which others probably don't have. I'm not saying she's right, I'm not saying she's wrong. I'm dismayed by the apparent drive to ridicule and dismiss, to nit pick stuff to death, rather than to weigh the big picture. Most likely Ketchum is absolutely wrong .. but what if she isn't? Have the hecklers considered that? .. or is it fear she might be right which leads them to heckle?

LOL........that's almost signature material. I can see now the depth of your well. She had results. They were published. Did you read the peer reviews, especially the first two rounds? Uhhhm.........we're not talking about a botanist specializing in Africa violets studying this phenomenon. Veterinary science is almost precisely what we need looking into this. And, BTW, there were several labs involved, not just her, and they worked blind.......IOW, they were sent samples without telling them what it was and asking for their analysis. You really don't know what you're posting about, do you? Hmmmmm.......larryzed.........do we know you by another name?