Erickson Project

[Guest UPs]

Here is the link explaining recombinant DNA. Good thing it is not me who wrote the article for peer review as I may have forgotten to include the DNA....

http://www.answers.com/topic/recombinant-dna

I know the concerns that many have in reference to Carter and Green, but if Dr. Ketchum has DNA evidence, shouldn't that be analyzed on its own merits? After listening to the interview with her, I got the impression that the DNA she tested came from separate sources. Would these names be part of the article submitted for peer review?

If this paper is written, reviewed and excepted, how would DNA evidence of bf existence affect your own opinions of its existence? Would you still have doubts because there has not been a body found or would you try and become the first to discover a body? Would the responsibility for getting that first body be shifted to biologists? Would this free up public funding to study bf?

One last question and to me, its a big one. Who would get credit for the discovery and naming of a new species?

[Guest]

Well I think it would give people's claims more credence, but it takes a long time to establish a species based on DNA evidence alone.

You couldn't pay me enough to go find one, I'll leave that to someone else with more courage, youth, and stamina.

I don't think that it's anyone's responsibility to go out and find one, because I don't think the results of this paper is going to make a significant difference in anyone funding a search. Finding one with high tech equipment is one thing, killing or capturing it is a whole different story so good luck with that, I say.

I guess someone with a lot of time and money invested in the topic might get upset if they don't get credit for the discovery but if it is determined to be real ( body along with DNA evidence), wouldn't Patterson and Gimlin get the credit or anyone else that had good evidence that got pooh poohed? I think it would be hard to say who discovered Sasquatch. It would kind of be like the Christopher Columbus thing.

I think the names we are currently using will stick, a formal scientific name will probably be designated but I doubt it will be used in conversation.

[indiefoot]

Yeah, I'm on board with this. Erickson buys Carter's property and all of the Bigfoot activity goes poof. Maybe Fox, Blackie and Janice loaded up the truck and moved to Beverly.....Hills that is....

I don't believe he bought the Carter farm in TN, I understood he moved a double-wide in and gave it to Tom and Janice and gave them a bunch of cameras in exchange for any video they were to come up with. Didn't happen.

Now he did buy the "pancake" farm and maybe some other adjacent property in KY.

Here's what I got from the grapevine. After the original landowners got their proceeds from selling their farm, they went down the road a little ways and bought a neighbors farm. Lady of the house sets the pancakes out the back door and viola, the saga continues. Well that leaves Dr. Leila Hadj-Chikh and Dennis Pfohl out of the BF loop. My sources say that they started staking-out the approach to the "new" pancake farm and this is where they snag their video on the sly.

When Bindernagel spilled the beans, it's possible that the husband of the original pancake lady starts to put two and two together and wonder if he has been compensated fairly since it's his wife and not the property that is giving the access to the critters. All of this is conjecture and most likely fiction but what does seem clear is that no video came from the Carter place..... surprise.

[Guest believer]

Good stuff guys. I don't have as much time to devote as I wish but this keeps me goin.

Hopefully no one has killed one yet to validate its place in the world.

[masterbarber]

I don't believe he bought the Carter farm in TN, I understood he moved a double-wide in and gave it to Tom and Janice and gave them a bunch of cameras in exchange for any video they were to come up with. Didn't happen.

Now he did buy the "pancake" farm and maybe some other adjacent property in KY.

I think you're right.

[Guest Spazmo]

That's a heck of a gamble. He must have had high confidence in his potential results. Maybe a lease would have been safer financially?

[Sunflower]

I saw the pancake video, played it over and over. It was very poor quality and so pixelated that I wondered what the big deal was all about.

[Guest ChrisBFRPKY]

I don't believe he bought the Carter farm in TN, I understood he moved a double-wide in and gave it to Tom and Janice and gave them a bunch of cameras in exchange for any video they were to come up with. Didn't happen.

Now he did buy the "pancake" farm and maybe some other adjacent property in KY.

Here's what I got from the grapevine. After the original landowners got their proceeds from selling their farm, they went down the road a little ways and bought a neighbors farm. Lady of the house sets the pancakes out the back door and viola, the saga continues. Well that leaves Dr. Leila Hadj-Chikh and Dennis Pfohl out of the BF loop. My sources say that they started staking-out the approach to the "new" pancake farm and this is where they snag their video on the sly.

When Bindernagel spilled the beans, it's possible that the husband of the original pancake lady starts to put two and two together and wonder if he has been compensated fairly since it's his wife and not the property that is giving the access to the critters. All of this is conjecture and most likely fiction but what does seem clear is that no video came from the Carter place..... surprise.

Indiefoot, the info I got was that he also bought the farm in TN, Janice moved about 80 miles away and claimed the creatures followed her there to the new house. (I don't know exactly "where" it was she moved as I've never invested much time in her or her stories.) But anyway, the Bigfoot activity either stopped completely or never was at the TN location to begin with.

About the KY stuff, You've been alot more specific than I would have. I don't guess it matters at this point though. These cammied up/ghillied up researchers sneaking about the back of other people's properties looking for Bigfoot video opportunities, shameful! (he he) Makes you wonder if the money shot may have been made on someone else's land? The pancake video is questionable to me. I think about everybody with an internet connection has already seen that one so I don't know what the big deal was or why Adrian would pay $20K for it in the first place? I personally wouldn't have invested a dime in that one. I hope it's not featured in the DVD cause I'll bet some researchers have deleted better video that that. The video I wanna see is the money shot. We'll see, (I hope.) Whatever they got I'll be tickled to see it and I'll gladly part with some of my hard earned money to purchase a DVD, heck if it's good I might even give some as Christmas gifts to help Adrian out. I think the project is a stand up investigation but, I do find it highly suspicious that DR B. had a sighting when he went for the visit though, to me, that's alot of coincidence to sell.

Chris B.

[Guest ChrisBFRPKY]

Thanks Chris. Do you think this rDNA argument is valid? Is this why she is soliciting more DNA samples and would more separate DNA samples negate the rDNA argument? Although Mr. Erickson did not get into specifics, he did hint that they have a bone and other evidence. This is not a body, but wouldn't a bone be almost as good as a body? Even if a peer group uses the rDNA argument to deny publication of this article, would there be enough 'science' within the article to change minds of some scientists so bf existence would be at least seriously considered instead of treated as a myth or joke? This result alone could lead to discovery by bringing in funding and getting scientists to look at prior evidence objectively.

If this is rejected after peer review, would the rDNA argument (or another) further strengthen the argument that bf does not exist? How would politics within science affect the peer review process? For example, a scientist involved in the review process has openly discouraged evidence of bf existence in the past. This to me would indicate a bias within the review process. There appears to be plenty of scientists that have remained neutral as to the existence of bf and if they were involved in the review process, it would be difficult to argue any bias result. I would think a publication based on DNA evidence would be either black or white.

UPs, I think that's the argument that will be used to deny her (Dr Ketchum's) findings. You'll hear "Chimera" and "rDNA" over and over. The greater the number of samples, the better her chances of pulling it off. But, here's the thing: There's gonna have to be independent analysis by multiple labs, AND those labs will have to have collected "their" test samples independently and NOT from Dr. Ketchum. Chain of custody and all that. Hopefully, all the samples would show a new species and all would be "like" DNA. Even with the best case scenerio, we'll still hear "chimera" and "rDNA" is my bet. (it's easier for the scientific community to say fraud, rather than an admission of "We were wrong.")

Chris B.

[bipedalist]

Again, I think people are forgetting, that according to Erickson and others, the pancake video resolution was far superior in original format. The basis of the lawsuit was an inferior resolution was released in unauthorized form that jeopardized certain elements of making the original "valuable" footage the way I understand it. Granted the inferior resolution product that was released did not seem to have anything convincingwithin it when I saw it at the time several years back on a popular website. The chimera argument and rDNA will not stand up to the broad brush strokes if the article is as professional as it is alluded to becoming imho. Even independent confirmation of her remaining samples would be validating to most. If the chain of evidence shows the sampling occurred multiple places from multiple people though analyzed perhaps in the same lab, independent confirmation of the samples with strong chain of evidence should be enough in such a case if the original article/research was "deep-sixed". All jmho of course. Hope it doesn't get to that point though. Replication will always be part of this scenario for evermore though if gold is struck.

Edited November 21, 2010 by bipedalist

[indiefoot]

The lawsuit you are referring to that involved the showing of the Pancake video was settled way back when. I have heard there was a second legal wrangling that took some time to resolve prior to the release of the documentary. Of course my gossip may be of a lesser quality than someone else's gossip. The important thing to me is that everyone seems to have their ducks sufficiently lined up to proceed. I hope that it is at least good enough to put the PGF way on the back burner, 'cause, no offense intended, I'm tired of hearing about the endless details.

Stan Courtney's son worked on the original Pancake video in post production and Stan has always maintained that the original is very convincing. That does not sound like what, Bindernagel and others have described seeing though.

[masterbarber]

http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/lawsuit1/

[bipedalist]

Yes and yes, this is the one I was referring to: http://www.onpointnews.com/docs/bigfoot1.pdf

[Guest]

Retired investigator D.B. Donlon (The Blogsquatcher) was on site at that KY farm and gave the opinion that none of the videos he saw looked convincing. The only thing he found interesting was the terrified behavior of the family's dogs when the sun began to go down. The dogs actually dug burrows under their dog houses and would hunker down there until sun up.

[indiefoot]

I think you are referring to videos that were shot by the original landowner previous to the "Pancake" video. The videos that were reportedly shot by Dr. Leila Hadj-Chikh and Dennis Pfohl are what have a few folks excited.