Leaderboard

You are RIGHT ON! My recent eDNA findings indicate that BF is very close to human (one mutation away in 220 bases), and previous studies probably did not dig deep enough to realize that, instead just concluding "human." See my recent post with attached PDF slides on a presentation I made in October. Annotated PPT slides can be found on the FB Group "Coalition for Critical Thinking in Bigfoot Research."

No disagreement. One of the problems we face today is that in the past, the expectation was bigfoot was some sort of North American "gorilla", the DNA should reflect that, and anything not supporting that paradigm was contaminated and not worth the cost of completing testing. According to the lore of our interest some number of samples were started, then testing ceased, data discarded, and samples destroyed when the preliminary results didn't match expectations. I very much wish we still had those to retest with today's methods and technology by people more willing to spend the money to find the answer whether it fit their preconceived notions or not. Wishing does not make it so but maybe wishing will stop us from repeating the mistakes of the past. That said, people seemingly are pushing forward with testing of newer samples yet the puzzle remains unsolved. A potential implication is that maybe those older samples really were junk, really didn't include a solution. If so, maybe the puzzle is even harder than we think. Sometimes I wonder if the folks going down the woo rabbit holes, folks I often roll my eyes at, aren't closer to right than I am. Not a good feeling.

" it’s all just a educated guess." Primate cousin of humanity, giant form of known relic human ancestor. Heck I've even wondered about escaped pre civil war slaves. IDK. What I do know is right off the top of my head I can remember three stories of hunters shooting one and then standing over the body fearful of being accused of murder because of how human it looked like. And then burying it. Nobody ever stood over the body of a monkey and believed they might be accused of murder. Who knows maybe the stories are all BS. But what are the odds of nobody ever getting a shot off at one of them ? If not , then you veer off into some kind of bulletproof supernatural/interdimensional being ETA If one actually goes out to shoot one. One must be prepared for the possibility that they are human. And if so , most people won't believe you shot bigfoot. Better make sure you bring a shovel.

One would think that if we had all those different samples submitted down through the years, that we would surely be seeing groups forming from similar results/characteristics, and maybe some would indeed prove to be actually contaminated by the humans that collected them, but I'd bet baboons to bushbabies, that a good number of those discarded were in fact genuine unknown hominids, and of those there are bound to be clusters indicating either distinct species or populations that breed only amongst themselves, as well as forming a gradient in regards to how closely related to us they are.

I totally agree that results, if not samples, should be saved in raw data form. I have recently presented my eDNA results at the Texas Bigfoot Conference, and the slides are available to view on the FB Group Critical Thinking in Bigfoot Research. I am about to submit these results in more detail in a paper in Relict Hominoid Inquiry, Jeff Meldrum's online journal at: www.isu.edu\RHI.

Almost like there's a shadowy faction of the government doing their best to suppress and disinform. I mean, if there were samples that "might be a new manatee" I don't think they'd be getting swept under the rug. Please take that with a grain of salt coming from me as I'm no scientist. Still it reminds me of one of my favorite X Files scenes. Enjoy.