Time To Capture Bf

[Guest drtracr]

I never reccommended anything like that, never herad of it.

[Guest bobali]

drtracer;

Sorry, it must have been BFSlueth that referred me to it. I exchange posts with the two of you most of the time.

bobali

[ShadowBorn]

Instead of trying to catch them why not set up on long term observation.Taking those dart guns and turning them into a RFID insertion dart.This way if you are doing a long time patrol for these guys you can have that dart gun armed and ready to inject.Pretty simple and you can trace these RFID signal anywhere I believe.I rather observe them afar then try to capture and risk being killed.Collect DNA with footage would be the ultimate as well as with a body.

If I had the resources to carry out a way to capture these creatures, I would use the dart method of implanting a way to track them.Observation and learning from them would be a great asset to us all.I believe strongly that these creatures have alot of the old ways to show us.Forgotten things that are very primal.

[gigantor]

Assuming that your information is correct and they do have sufficient DNA, why do they need alive BF or a body? .... Please explain why a body dead or alive is important.

Bobali, I too thought that a DNA sample would suffice to prove that BF exists. Then I read more about the subject and was surprised to learn that DNA analysis is a statistical comparison of DNA sequences.

So if you get BF DNA but have no "type specimen", what are you going to compare it with? The answer is known DNA sequences. You can run tests and say: it's not human, it's not bear, it's not X... but you can never say, it's BF; because we don't know what BF DNA looks like because we don't have a body.

The DNA information is so vast, that it took years, many millions and a team with special equipment to sequence the DNA of one human being. The tests that have been developed are "shortcuts". For example, they know that humans have a piece of DNA that has a certain pattern at a specific place in the DNA sequence. So instead of sequencing the whole thing, they compare only that little pattern to the known sample and if it matches, hey, it's human. These are the so called "fast" DNA tests you read about, but they only work once you've mapped the entire thing and identified a specific pattern unique to that species.

Hope that helps.

Edited April 15, 2012 by gigantor

[Guest BFSleuth]

Gigantor, that's the most concise explanation of the situation I've heard. Thank you!

However, I believe with many of the samples that were submitted to Dr. Ketchum they may have photographic or videographic evidence to directly link their samples with BF. In this case it may very well be that we can make a much stronger link than just simply having the DNA alone.

When the research paper was published that established the existence of the Denisovan's, they based it on DNA taken from a finger bone and a tooth and established it's dating and overall context from the archeological dig in the Denisovan Cave. I believe this was the first species of hominid established with sequenced DNA.

It will be interesting to read Dr. Ketchum's report and see how the samples were collected and how they establish that they are from BF.

[gigantor]

I agree. I can't wait to see how Dr Ketchum is going to present the results and link them to BF, it's a very tall order IMO. I hate to bring it up, but in the Denisovans case, the hypothesis jives with the overall scheme of things accepted by mainstream science, so it's an easy sell.

In the case of BF.... not so much.

Edited April 15, 2012 by gigantor

[Guest BFSleuth]

However, there has been some discussion in science blogs and press talking about how the whole state of knowledge about homo sapiens sapiens and our relationship with the evolutionary tree is undergoing a revolution that started with the sequencing of Neanderthal DNA. Just last month we had the Red Deer People discovery announced. Couple this with the discovery of the Denisovans, and the fact that both Neanderthal and Denisovan interbreeding with humans have been found, there is speculation that we are on the verge of a revolution in how we think of ourselves and our place on the evolutionary chain. They note that there will undoubtedly be new discoveries coming that will shake up the status quo because of DNA research.

I think the time is very ripe for Dr. Ketchum's report and it will be explosive. For it will confirm that there are other extant hominins living with us today, we are not alone sitting on the top of the evolutionary tree, we have brethren.

[gigantor]

Maybe. Lets not jump to conclusions yet, the paper hasn't been released, so it wouldn't be prudent to assume that it will confirm anything. Maybe the paper will be flawed and incorrect.

I can't help but to draw a parallel to my favorite football team, the Redskins. Every year after free agency but before the season starts, on paper, we're the best team in the NFL. Then the games are played and reality sets in...

These are interesting times though, I'm glad to be living through it.

Edited April 15, 2012 by gigantor

[Guest BFSleuth]

Oh gosh! Pleeeease don't compare Dr. Ketchum to the Redskin's.... that's just heartbreaking to consider

I do suppose I should qualify my previous post to note that if the paper proves to be accurate it will be explosive et all...

[Guest bobali]

Much of the doubt is poorly based. There are DNA samples that were accompanied by photos or the word of a competent source of truth. Use these samples as the temporary BF real DNA and do the comparisons off of them. As you get the majority of the verifiable samples that match this temporary model, it will become more and more of a solid example. It is unnecessary to sit on our thumbs until the absolute is found for sure. Let porgress move forward.

[gigantor]

Lets say she has 5 samples: bear, BF, buffalo, BF and racoon. See the problem with your idea?

Edited April 15, 2012 by gigantor

[Guest drtracr]

Just capture and be done with it

[Guest bobali]

Gigantor;

I don't understand your mixture. I was referring to samples with photo proof that the samples came from a BF. That should eliminate your racoon, bear, and buffalo. ????????????

bobali

drtracr;

Show me your capture by next Sunday. My point is; lets work with what we have. These "gonabe" samples may not come for years.

bobali

[gigantor]

Are you talking about the Erickson photographic "proof"? that's all speculation...

[Guest bobali]

Gigantor;

I wasn't referring to any specific photography since I am rather new at this depth of BF analysis. Surely there is an acceptible photo level. Use this level to grade all of the sample/photo pairs available that has had the DNA produced. There are too many cases in this world where one evaluation has gone sour so it is assumed that all evaluations are certain to go sour.

bobali