What scientific campaigns are we missing?

[CryptidTalk]

We’ve seen a number of DNA campaigns run from various researchers and institutions. And I certainly agree this area should be the top priority in the search. We also have Meldrun doing a lot of work on the footprint and locomotion front. But what other areas could scientists and researchers really take a more in depth deep dive?
 

I know infrasonics has been a large area of interest, but has anyone performed any large scale studies? I know it’s a pretty difficult undertaking with the costs and equipment, but there could be some invaluable data to be collected if the infrasonic theory proves to be accurate. 
 

To stay similarly in line with infrasound, have there been any deep dive vocalization studies? I know whoops and howls are a popular thing with field researchers, but have any primate vocalization experts spent any amount of time thoroughly researching? 
 

What other areas could we attempt in depth research into that could, if nothing else, provide us a means of getting closer to obtaining the much needed dna sample?

[NorCalWitness]

For a long time, we accepted that there were 2 forms of life on our plant - animal and plant. Then, we advanced scientifically to the point that we could observe microorganisms. Microorganisms, in fact, have a biomass far greater than animal life. My suspicion is that to truly grasp the phenomenon, we are going to have to evolve our tools of observation past FLIR, trail cams and footprint castings. As our tools evolve, our ability to observe the phenomenon around us will evolve. Our current perceptive capabilities, even when enhanced with state of the art tech, are only giving us a tiny part of the picture of what is going on around us. 

 

[norseman]

  On 4/7/2025 at 9:54 PM, CryptidTalk said:

We’ve seen a number of DNA campaigns run from various researchers and institutions. And I certainly agree this area should be the top priority in the search. We also have Meldrun doing a lot of work on the footprint and locomotion front. But what other areas could scientists and researchers really take a more in depth deep dive?
 

I know infrasonics has been a large area of interest, but has anyone performed any large scale studies? I know it’s a pretty difficult undertaking with the costs and equipment, but there could be some invaluable data to be collected if the infrasonic theory proves to be accurate. 
 

To stay similarly in line with infrasound, have there been any deep dive vocalization studies? I know whoops and howls are a popular thing with field researchers, but have any primate vocalization experts spent any amount of time thoroughly researching? 
 

What other areas could we attempt in depth research into that could, if nothing else, provide us a means of getting closer to obtaining the much needed dna sample?

Expand  

Hunt one with a crossbow or a pneumatic dart gun. This is the quickest way to obtain DNA evidence short of killing one. And you may have to kill it anyhow depending on how pissed off it becomes. Bring back up! And I have posted this up before.

 

Pneumatic is expensive, but a recurve crossbow is cheap. And this approach would cut straight to the chase instead of sending labs misidentifications, I.e. hair, scar, saliva, etc.

 

You shoot the crossbow bolt, it hits the target, it has a a limited penetration depth, it falls off and you retrieve it when it’s safe. And the animal goes about its business unharmed.

 

It won’t be a small chore threading the needle though in dense cover. A biopsy dart is smaller. But hunters hunt with crossbows and compound bows all the time. It is possible!

[CryptidTalk]

  On 4/8/2025 at 4:54 PM, NorCalWitness said:

For a long time, we accepted that there were 2 forms of life on our plant - animal and plant. Then, we advanced scientifically to the point that we could observe microorganisms. Microorganisms, in fact, have a biomass far greater than animal life. My suspicion is that to truly grasp the phenomenon, we are going to have to evolve our tools of observation past FLIR, trail cams and footprint castings. As our tools evolve, our ability to observe the phenomenon around us will evolve. Our current perceptive capabilities, even when enhanced with state of the art tech, are only giving us a tiny part of the picture of what is going on around us. 

 

Expand  

I certainly believe we will learn a lot as eDNA abilities advance. 
 

But, I’d certainly like to see some funding to focus on some of these other areas to gather more data. 

[CryptidTalk]

  On 4/8/2025 at 9:47 PM, norseman said:

Hunt one with a crossbow or a pneumatic dart gun. This is the quickest way to obtain DNA evidence short of killing one. And you may have to kill it anyhow depending on how pissed off it becomes. Bring back up! And I have posted this up before.

 

 

Expand  

I believe eDNA will provide us with a lot of answers as it evolves. Getting close enough to one to fire off a shot with a cross bow would be a monumental task on its own, but that would certainly provide us with near indisputable proof for sure. 

[NorCalWitness]

  On 4/9/2025 at 1:09 AM, CryptidTalk said:

I believe eDNA will provide us with a lot of answers as it evolves. Getting close enough to one to fire off a shot with a cross bow would be a monumental task on its own, but that would certainly provide us with near indisputable proof for sure. 

Expand  

depending on who you believe, we already have DNA and its done nothing to further the conversation. It's just not enough. 

[CryptidTalk]

  On 4/9/2025 at 5:06 PM, NorCalWitness said:

depending on who you believe, we already have DNA and its done nothing to further the conversation. It's just not enough. 

Expand  

I’m not so sure we have multiple samples from the same species confirming something undiscovered out there. Unless, of course, it’s a government cover up but that’s a completely different topics 

[norseman]

  On 4/9/2025 at 1:09 AM, CryptidTalk said:

I believe eDNA will provide us with a lot of answers as it evolves. Getting close enough to one to fire off a shot with a cross bow would be a monumental task on its own, but that would certainly provide us with near indisputable proof for sure. 

Expand  

Well my plan isn’t messing with a crossbow or a dart gun. It’s gonna get smacked with a big chunk of lead breaking the sound barrier. This makes people squeamish. So be it. Use the non lethal approach then. Dental resin casts and video footage have gotten us no where.

 

eDNA is a horrible way to try to discover a new species. It’s a great way to detect known species in a given area.

 

Remember! Ask any scientist! For any newly discovered extant species? There will be a requirement of two type specimens.

 

One male and one female.
 

The only exceptions are extinct species. Then they will work with the fossils in their possession. So one way or another? Two Sasquatch are gonna end up as skeletons in a drawer at a University. Science demands it. We don’t make the rules. 

 

 

[CryptidTalk]

  On 4/9/2025 at 6:07 PM, norseman said:

Well my plan isn’t messing with a crossbow or a dart gun. It’s gonna get smacked with a big chunk of lead breaking the sound barrier. This makes people squeamish. So be it. Use the non lethal approach then. Dental resin casts and video footage have gotten us no where.

 

eDNA is a horrible way to try to discover a new species. It’s a great way to detect known species in a given area.

 

Remember! Ask any scientist! For any newly discovered extant species? There will be a requirement of two type specimens.

 

One male and one female.
 

The only exceptions are extinct species. Then they will work with the fossils in their possession. So one way or another? Two Sasquatch are gonna end up as skeletons in a drawer at a University. Science demands it. We don’t make the rules. 

 

 

Expand  

Yeah, I could never get on board with killing to prove existence. I’d much prefer they remain unknown than kill one. But I digress.

 

While having a specimen of each sex is helpful to prove reproductive isolation, it’s not absolutely necessary to prove existence. Being able to find multiple DNA samples from various locations around the country would be more than enough to show SOMETHING is out there. But you’re not wrong is the assertion that a body is likely needed to provide the final nail in the coffin. 

[norseman]

  On 4/9/2025 at 7:12 PM, CryptidTalk said:

Yeah, I could never get on board with killing to prove existence. I’d much prefer they remain unknown than kill one. But I digress.

 

While having a specimen of each sex is helpful to prove reproductive isolation, it’s not absolutely necessary to prove existence. Being able to find multiple DNA samples from various locations around the country would be more than enough to show SOMETHING is out there. But you’re not wrong is the assertion that a body is likely needed to provide the final nail in the coffin. 

Expand  

You’re missing my point.

 

Let’s say you as an amateur researcher finds DNA that absolutely proves a novel primate is roaming the hinterlands of North America. Whether you took a water sample from a pond, or whatever.

 

Once that moment happens and science begins a scientific inquiry? To become an accepted species to science? They will harvest two type specimens! This is the price that will be paid upon discovery. You didn’t pull the trigger. A scientist did. But your actions lead to an inevitable conclusion.

 

Now Dr. Mayor discovered a pocket Lemur in Madagascar. They eventually captured a male and female (because they are tiny) and upon their natural death in a zoo? They then become the type specimens of the species.

 

I don’t see that happening with a potentially violent 800 lbs primate. Your not gonna pluck them off a tree and put em in a bag.
 

Anyhow I highly suggest researchers study type specimens in known species. Get to know how science works. Because many of Bigfootdoms objections to certain methods is null and void. Science isn’t gonna make an exception for Bigfoot. In fact because of the stigma and myths surrounding the species? Science will definitely dot the I’s and cross the T’s.

 

Hopefully we find the type specimens in an avalanche or a land slide or a forest fire. I don’t need to hunt Chimps, Orangs, Gorillas or Bigfoot. I don’t need to be the guy on Oprah or sign book deals. But I do think what’s best for the species is acknowledging they do exist. And the faster it happens the better the chances are for it’s survival. 

 

 

[CryptidTalk]

What you’re thinking about here is reproductive isolation which is a completely different topic. Two specimens are not required to prove a new species exists. We just need conclusive dna evidence showing a new, unique undiscovered species. A video of the specimen leaving the dna behind would go a long way to establishing credibility. It’s not as good as a body, no, but the body is not 100% necessary. 
 

Now, if you’re wanting to prove they are a stand alone, breeding species and not an infertile hybrid, like a Mule, you’d be correct. But it’s not necessary to prove existence. 
 

Am I playing semantics a bit, sure. And wanting to prove reproductive isolation is certainly important if that’s your point. 

[norseman]

  On 4/9/2025 at 8:01 PM, CryptidTalk said:

What you’re thinking about here is reproductive isolation which is a completely different topic. Two specimens are not required to prove a new species exists. We just need conclusive dna evidence showing a new, unique undiscovered species. A video of the specimen leaving the dna behind would go a long way to establishing credibility. It’s not as good as a body, no, but the body is not 100% necessary. 
 

Now, if you’re wanting to prove they are a stand alone, breeding species and not an infertile hybrid, like a Mule, you’d be correct. But it’s not necessary to prove existence. 
 

Am I playing semantics a bit, sure. And wanting to prove reproductive isolation is certainly important if that’s your point. 

Expand  

No. Reproduction has NOTHING to do with it. And YES two type specimens are required.

 

https://museum.wa.gov.au/explore/blogs/museumcollections/what-type-specimen

 

Science works on testable and REPEATABLE scientific results. A type specimen underpins a new species to an anchor point other scientists can physically examine. A DNA hit on a novel new (supposed) species is great. But that’s just the start of where the real work begins.🤷‍♂️

[NorCalWitness]

There is no reason to try to get science to accept them. 

[norseman]

  On 4/9/2025 at 9:08 PM, NorCalWitness said:

There is no reason to try to get science to accept them. 

Expand  

Yes. There is many advantages for a species to be recognized by science.

[CryptidTalk]

  On 4/9/2025 at 9:08 PM, NorCalWitness said:

There is no reason to try to get science to accept them. 

Expand  

Going to have to agree with Norseman on this. There definitely are many benefits of them being recognized as a species. Habitat protections alone are well worth it.