Erickson Project

[Guest]

Thanks for this important reminder and reality check Sallaranda, you are right. This is an uphill battle and nothing in science is ever definitive. The results may only open up the subject for more discussion and research.

which is not a bad thing.. more communication helps. Thanks for that

[Guest]

I am under an NDA but when I am able I will let you all know of information about the release.

NDA's are vary useful in these situations they are a great tool.

[Guest]

Sallaranda said:

A lot of you are getting ahead of yourselves. Erickon & Ketchum's findings may not be enough to result in species recognition. On a small scale, it may instigate further research projects and an increased funding, but it may not result in the large scale acceptance of the creature.

In other words, Susiq may still not be able to say "I told you so" to her hubby.

Susi says:

But I told him that Last night ~~~~~~~~~~~~

Should I take back my jumping around around and saying Yes, yes, yes!!!!!!!!!!!!! I Told You So!! .

I jumped the gun.

However, I read every piece of their information, and they have respected scientists doing the research.

Why are we not hearing more about this Major Headline Making News?

This news should be *Everywhere*.

Edited April 15, 2011 by Susiq2

[Guest]

NDA's are vary useful in these situations they are a great tool.

Ed, aren't you also in possession of some great unreleased footage or is this just rumor?

[Guest]

Why are we not hearing more about this Major Headline Making News?

This news should be *Everywhere*.

Look above to Proof's post #572. It's right on the money. The first paragraph should explain.

As for my exitement, it's not going anywhere. I've seen, so I believe. Period. The "proof" will just be the icing on the cake.

[Guest]

Xion Comrade said:

No person on this board, I say with confidence, would know how to make fire in the woods without having either first seen it done or been taught, we are pretty blank without a proper raising.

Susi says:

Well, I, even today, knowing what I know, would pretty much be helpless lost in the woods. I've been told to grab a tree and stay put should I find myself actually lost.Fire would be way beyond my abilities.

Xion Comrade said:

Seeing as how they are constantly on the move, have such demanding bodies, and that there are very few places that could sustain them for long periods of time for many reasons, I would say that things like fire houses and tools are just totally unpractical to them or any other critter living likewise.

Susi says:

You made an excellent point with this statement.

I had not thought about the fact that they will have to follow the food chain /source.If they have harvested an area out of larger wildlife they would have to move on, following the food so to say.

Would you want to carry around a spear all day every day? I wouldn't. I can sure as hell tell you that if I had the choice of killing something with a knife or my bare hands(Realistically) I would jump all over the opportunity to use my hands just for the entertainment and gameness of it, as big as the Forest Giants are, I am sure they have PLENTY of moxie to go around!

Susi says:

I agree. They are their own tools. Yikes. They run down to earth their prey, and just eat it.

I'm so glad I'm human.

Edited April 15, 2011 by Susiq2

[Guest]

Right now what is on my mind, is what went down at that conference? Wonder what Erickson had to say...the facebook page for bigfootology.com says it has it all recorded and will be uploading shortly. Anyone know more? Anyone care to expound?

Susi says:

Thank you so much for letting us know about that information being available.

Xion Comrade said:

Yes! And we will be one step closer to the question that is really on our mind, and to what we really want! When can we have a pet Sasquatch?

Susi says:

When it can be housebroken, or it would have to remain outside. Feeding BF could be a burden to your household expenses, not to mention the complaints from the neighbors because BF ate their pets.

There's a hint: Leila Hadj-Chikh wrote a lenghty foreword in Bindernagels "Discovery of the Sasquatch". Bindernagel is a proponent of the "nonhuman great ape hypothesis". It's speculation but I assume that she wrote the foreword after the first results of the DNA analysis came back. Would she really have written a foreword to a book that supports the Ape theory if she didn't support the overall claim of the book? I don't think so.

This happens to be my theory also. A different, but higher branch off of the species because BF eats meat, apes don't, correct?

Well, they could be a separate species from the great apes due to their differences, but it will be fascinating to find out the truth.

I can't wait!!! I'm so excited that we will finally know the truth.

Hubby will be so surprised. I've been telling him all along, now the truth will be revealed, and for once, I'm correct.

I thought Erickson was going to present. Did he not say anything about his project? Were the presentations all meant to honor John Green?

They need to release this evidence soon. It would be a shame if he passed on before it happens. However, they might have already showed it to him since he is in the documentary and a pioneer in the field.

I absolutely agree with you.I hope that they have shared the news with him. He certainly deserves it. However, At this point, I'm afraid I'll die before the truth is revealed! I also have been waiting since childhood for this news, and I'm thrilled to think that there will be scientific documentation of this species, and hopefully laws to protect them from trophy hunters.

Will that issue be addressed? Hunters need to know that BF is not available for trophy hunters. Yikes!!

Sas, As a female, I would think that some people will comb the woods for a sighting, but I suspect just as many may *Never* set foot in the woods again, and then there are groups that thinks we can camp, BF won't come here, but the campers will stay on high alert the entire time, IMVHO.

The reality of the species being revealed to the general public will cause a flurry, but it will settle down after a while, and hopefully people will continue to enjoy the outdoors as usual.

[Xion Comrade]

Xion Comrade said:

Yes! And we will be one step closer to the question that is really on our mind, and to what we really want! When can we have a pet Sasquatch?

Susi says:

When it can be housebroken, or it would have to remain outside. Feeding BF could be a burden to your household expenses, not to mention the complaints from the neighbors because BF ate their pets.

Well those damned dogs shouldn't have barked on days I was working! Good riddance! Nah, you just teach it to way-lay passing deer and other animals...maybe the occasional bratty kid To heavy to bring in doors, just keep him in the barn with the other livestock, be he would do a great job keeping predators away O.o Prancing around in a field playing with sheep...But in all seriousness, it would be ridiculous, even more so than the doosh keeping a pet gorilla, to try to keep one around...How are you going to control it? I bet though, they would do great in show business and such!

[Guest]

You, Sir, Are too funny! and on the money.... BF Lives!!

Would you slap their little hand when they did a bad thing, like kill a few people and eat them? Clear out the food by eating the entire refrigerator?

The insurance rates on a pet BF would be pretty high I suspect..

[Guest Bigfoot Proof]

They give out money so biologists can check if Great White Sharks are mate/sperm ready, yes they do... like a give a rats ass where a shark gets laid, ... so they can **** well give out a stipend to every citizen to feed the Sassy's healthy foods and maybe leave them some blankets & gifts for the youngins'.

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/shark-men/4587/Photos#tab-Photos/0

Haven't been this appalled in a long time.

[Guest]

Sas, As a female, I would think that some people will comb the woods for a sighting, but I suspect just as many may *Never* set foot in the woods again, and then there are groups that thinks we can camp, BF won't come here, but the campers will stay on high alert the entire time, IMVHO.

The reality of the species being revealed to the general public will cause a flurry, but it will settle down after a while, and hopefully people will continue to enjoy the outdoors as usual.

[Guest ajciani]

I was looking at exactly what constitutes peer review... and apparently the deal is, if any word gets out before the 'academic peerr' have studied, approved and published it (they will toss it out) now I can see the tight circle keeping everything so quiet.

That's not actually correct. Results are frequently presented and discussed before papers are written. The issue about previous publication involves contract and copyright. For example, if they published the DNA results in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology first, and then submitted a nearly identical paper to Nature, it would infringe on the copyright owned by Am. J. Phys. Anthro., and so Nature would refuse to publish it.

The reason for not releasing anything until the paper is accepted, is so that they can go to the press with an accepted paper in hand, rather than a roller coaster of reports. Most likely, the press conference will coincide with the date of the first online availability of the article. That way, the news people can read the article, and no one violates anyone's copyright. At least, that is what is typically done with major discoveries.

Also, when doing a search, I found the following which has some disturbing remarks from disturbed people. They are even questioning Melba's credentials... When we do finally get the results these are the same people that will claim contamination and makeup wild accusations.

If the paper passes review, then the question of contamination and error will have been addressed to the standards of the majority of the reviewers. I doubt that on such a major and controversial discovery, the paper will receive a lax review. Publication in a journal with a high impact factor will pretty well guarantee that level of review.

Those people currently questioning her credentials and alleging contamination are essentially counting their chickens before they have hatched. Those are allegations which presuppose that a paper will not be prepared, and that all of this is unwarranted hype. Allegations of contamination rely on results which demonstrate bigfoots as being fully H. sapiens sapiens, which I seriously doubt as being the case. A positive finding of H. not sapiens could never be the result of contamination.

[Guest]

NDA's are vary useful in these situations they are a great tool.

Hi Ed,

Glad to see you chiming in here on this subject. Are there any updates on "Thermal Hit: The Oklahoma Primate Project"?

To my records the final cut has been turned in 5 months and 6 days ago. Are we going to see a trailer anytime soon?

Patiently waiting,

Polypodium

[Guest Bigfoot Proof]

That's not actually correct. Results are frequently presented and discussed before papers are written. The issue about previous publication involves contract and copyright. For example, if they published the DNA results in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology first, and then submitted a nearly identical paper to Nature, it would infringe on the copyright owned by Am. J. Phys. Anthro., and so Nature would refuse to publish it.

Thank you for this correction, since there are no similar scientific peer review concerning Sasquatch DNA, (that I'm aware of) I was going by what I found concerning academic scientific peer review protocol usually to universities with professional peers in said field, and that's what I found.

Regardless I just want the results.

[Guest]

They give out money so biologists can check if Great White Sharks are mate/sperm ready, yes they do... like a give a rats ass where a shark gets laid, ... so they can **** well give out a stipend to every citizen to feed the Sassy's healthy foods and maybe leave them some blankets & gifts for the youngins'.

http://channel.natio...os#tab-Photos/0

Haven't been this appalled in a long time.

BP, I'm sorry that it has taken me so long to answer your post. I am also shocked at the cost involved to tag sharks. Seriously, besides terrifying the sharks, and endangering the crews lives and well being, a fortune was spent that no one has the money to spend any more, on tagging sharks. This will not help the world to be better nor safer, and no refunds nor returns on that spent money will ever occur. No human will be helped by that research.

I think we need to get our priorities in order.

Thank you for your very enlightening post.

ajciani, You are my new hero.

Your post, number 589, is so very informative, and I sincerely appreciate your thoughtful and carefully worded response to this intriguing issue.

I have found that the Members here are some of the brightest and best informed researchers that I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. I feel honored to be able to read about their/your research and the knowledge that research revealed that I doubt I could find posted anywhere else.

Thank you for being a part of their group, and for sharing your knowledge with us here..