Leaderboard

It also seems odd that when Ketchum came out with the possible mating of a 13,000 year old European female with some odd species of male that people automatically started looking at an Atlantic land bridge of some sort. Why not just default to a more sensible hypothesis that would point to a 13,000 year journey east across Europe and then into Asia and THEN through Beringia's land bridge? CHASED and persecuted my modern Humans most of the way for centuries, and maybe even through a couple of glacial cycles spanning the Neanderthal's 230,000 years of existence. Some "Zana's" stayed behind and found remote refuges in Asia, like with the Denisovan/Nanderthal matings and Zana was an offspring of that or some other more hybridized Asian remnant that had originated directly from Europe? Disotell's conclusion from the nest samples did NOT necessarily say only a Human primate in the form that we currently know and accept Humans to be in?

Like Hollywood's monster propaganda? And that's exactly why I'm bring this up! It also generates more considerations with what's going on with NAWAC as well. More on that later.....

Curious that Dr. Mayor hasn't issued a statement on the nest sample results? I've not seen one if she has. Th results might also mean that our Human researchers may not have contaminated the nest site with their own DNA? What was found wasn't new DNA in either case, so if samples weren't taken for several months then maybe the researchers did contaminate the site? Like the timber cruiser? Or Randles when he first got there? It kinda doesn't really matter though because the bottom line is that NO primate other than real-Human-not-just-close-to-Human was what the DNA uncovered. Hate to harp on this but it IS kind of an eye opener is it not? The question left to us then might be why hasn't this DNA outcome taken center stage on any Washington nest discussion since 2018? It is talked about at any conferences? On any podcasts since 2018? Has ANYONE here heard anyone bring up this critically important point? That genus Homo, not just close to genus Homo, was what was actually found at the site? We pick apart, reports and videos (especially videos!) like crazy, but not this? No speculations that a bunch of Zana's were birthing in Washington State in Mason County on someones remote private land?

Allow me to follow the above with a full apology to Dr. Disotell and this Forum for my error is stating earlier that Dr. Disotell said too degraded to show a novel primate. Because he said in the podcast that what he got out of the samples was DNA from only ONE primate and that that primate was Human. My ego isn't so big that I cannot admit and apologize for such a mistake. Solving this was important to me yes, but I still don't understand why it Dr. Disotell's findings didn't create large, wide-reaching, ripples in the Bigfoot community. Certainly didn't happen here anywhere that I could see. Disotell's announcement didn't also address the large footprints people find, the huge creatures reported bu witnesses, the super-Human feats we rad about in John Green's database, the amazing howls still caught on audio in the area around the nest site by Shane Corson and others, or the loud knocking sounds heard and recorder in the forests of North America. So there still is a mystery to solve: What KIND of Human is out there doing these things? What kind of primitive brain in these Humans leads them to live such backward existences? And is the fact that they could be very well Human be something that science already knows and so turns its back on anything else approaching either paranormal or something more ape-like? Is it because, like Dr. Disotell's results, the "creature" is Human and "not just close to Human"? There is still work to do, and I also don't think science is as in the dark as one might think it is.

Or Gorilla, or Chimpanzee (Mayor), or Orangutan, or man/bear/pig....or....or....or.... Degraded Human DNA. But if anyone paid close attention to Laura Krantz's Wild Thing's podcast that I posted? Then they would have heard TWO different PhD's describe the condition of that degraded Human DNA https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/wildthing/episodes/S1-E9-Why-We-Want-To-Believe-e2okn3 In that podcast Dr. Disotell said that the Human DNA in the samples were "fairly old and so SLIGHTLY degraded" and "real Human, not just close to Human." That was followed by Dr. Meldrum saying that the DNA was pretty old and VERY degraded. Disotell also said that no novel primate was found, the only primate DNA that was found was Human. Go figure folks. So do we have an answer on what made the nests in Washington State? Well, in truth, it seems the correct question is more like who made the nests, why, and why there. What this means is that the WHAT and WHO must be the same thing? If what we refer to as the Sasquatch was responsible then it would have to be not just close to Human...but entirely Human. So as far as the nest site goes? This conclusion of Human is a very important one...as this conclusion of Human can, according to the evidence, be the only one. Pretty much settles the issue as far as I'm concerned. But it STILL doesn't answer the question of what KIND of Human. Seems like killing one would be a huge mistake. Next question: Is Patty a Zana? And if so, Patty's clan must have been here long before Zana herself existed?

All of the eyeshine, tree-knockings, and tree toppling-incidents I've seen or heard have been at night between 9pm - 11pm.

His twin brother has a channel where he speaks to spirits in his kitchen sink. Not kidding. Channel name is "Optimal Frequency". Pretty sure they live in Ontario Canada near Lake Nipissing.

I went out Saturday afternoon to check out the location of a decades old sighting right in my city. The location is a large regional park that encompasses a mountain that is bordered by farms on the west and south sides, some light industry on the east side, and the Fraser River on the north side. The park covers much of the crest of the mountain, and the entire mountain is about 10km e/w and 5km n/s. The park itself is heavily forested in mature second growth timber and has a network of old logging roads and more recent mountain bike trails. The sighting story involves a small group of Cub Scouts who were on a camp out near a small lake on the mountain top. They were playing a game of hide and seek in the forest a few hundred meters from the campsite when they noticed that another being had joined in the game. They described the new player as a hair covered person about 5' tall, who would peek out from behind a stump or tree, then disappear, to show up again behind another bush or stump. This apparently went on for 15 minutes or so, before finally leaving the game for good. The weather was cool and damp for my trip up there, after weeks of extremely hot and dry conditions, so visibility was limited near the summit by a combination of clouds and smoke from forest fires in the nearby mountains. There were only a few vehicles in the park, probably bike riders using the trails that lace the area, as seen in the map screenshot below. I spent several hours driving and walking the old roads, but found no tracks or other evidence, but did spot a nice healthy looking blacktail deer, a young buck with his antlers just emerging in velvet, about 4" long, shorter than his ears. The orange line on the Gaia screenshot is my route, and the white dotted lines are the bike trails.

Correct. Also, buying a journal .. which has still not published another "peer review" article .. for the sole purpose of claiming her study had been peer reviewed .. when established journals rejected it because the presentation was invalid and she refused to fix it .. is not valid science nor valid peer review. It makes a mockery of valid peer review. As I understand the rejection, it was not based on it being about bigfoot, it was based on improper format: not sure how many of ya'll arguing this have actually done scientific research for presentation. There are sections of a paper and they must be connected. In specific, the lab results and the conclusions drawn must relate. Melba Ketchum did not do that, she presented SOME results, then went on a rambling essay in her conclusions which was not particularly connected to the data presented, it was just an opinion piece on her views about bigfoot, NOT what her data showed about bigfoot. She was given multiple opportunities to correct the mis-presentation, more than would have been normally given for a "regular" topic, but she refused to fix the problems. She knows better. She's been peer reviewed before. Nobody was out to get her. She did this to herself. That is FACT, not opinion. If she had limited her presented conclusion to what the data showed, her paper would have been published. Plain and simple. Anyone who doesn't "get" this has never done work in the sciences for publication. Understand this very clearly: I am not saying her WORK was wrong or the other labs' work was wrong, I am saying her PRESENTATION of her work was wrong and when given the chance she was unwilling to correct that. MIB

How do we account for H.floresiensis? All of a sudden a bunch of short people thought "you know, I ain't afraid of no 10'+ predatory lizard! Let's move to the Sunda straight!" Seems to me, by the location pressed up against a formidable obstacle to cross( the currents between There and Australia) that hobbits may well have been either pressed to relocate southwardly or that the Flores population represents the last vestige of the diminutive species, which had been overlooked or ignored by previous waves of larger hominid(or there is the possibility of scouts for that next wave imparting "no, let's not stop there, the lizards are REALLY REALLY big on those islands there") until a wave came through with sufficiently effective anti-komodo dragon technology who thought to stay a while and wiped the hobbits out(unless they're still there) Yet somehow the genetic reconfiguration that resulted in the little fellas occurred. I'd guess there were a number of intermediary species that arose during the progression to the form of H.floresiensis. And personally, it strikes me as unlikely they were the only such offshoot to arise. The main reason those were even found was due to them having some cave based behaviors, rather than finding fossils buried under forest debris. I think it pretty directly implies there were a whole lot more species, almost species, and "we could been a contender" species of hominid than our current models account for or might accept. Amongst lifeforms, countless species arise, or almost arise, "trying out" different features, traits and adaptations, only to fail in the short or longrun, leaving a hole in network of a habitat we've yet to even realize existed. I'd guess that the "Bush of Humanity" had a lot more branches, stems and offshoots, than we currently consider, and that most of those were either absorbed genetically(sex-monkey theory) killed off by other hominids, or taken by a shifting environment to which they couldn't adjust, or simply didn't.

Just read the post that suggested bipedalism might have arose twice, once in African apes, and once in Asian apes. This got me thinking ( "uh oh, here we go again... ") what would prevent African bipeds from hooking up with Asian bipedal relatives on route with the African outward expansion? God knows it was basically an after hours party with all the sex-monkeys(hominids) walking around. "Hey! Look who's standing upright these days!" Who can say just how many possibly viable offspring might come from such ongoing waves of contact and integration, or what forms might arise from generations of such " hybrids" comingling their hominid DNAs? Obviously we made it to the Bering straight, and I'd think it foolhardy to think it was only once. So this mandated our crossing considerable terrain on the way there, and since I somehow doubt abstinence was viewed as a virtue just yet, i'd think we/they were "hybridizing"(I think this is as good a term as any...)their way across asia, and then up the coast towards the straight. Then, if they reached that region during a nonglaciated period, and there was no land bridge/lowered sea levels permitting a crossing, they set up camp and figuratively plugged in the disco lights. "Let's Hybridize, baby! " if they reached those higher latitudes long before the next glaciation, they'd have good opportunity to gain size and mass as the habitat cooled, especially if the population had a thing for tall "people" (since one must always include sexual selection as a a factor of evolution, just look at what male birds of paradise go through for a date!) All of which could result in any number of forms that end up crossing at the next drop of sea level. Repeat as needed, or possible in light of sea level cycles. If all the other hominids had perspectives similarly "open minded" to liaisons with "hey, she's mostly upright!" forms other than their own as sapiens has demonstrated, there's little question such things would arise at such bottlenecks/ blockades of locational progress.