The Sykes / Sartori Report - Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project

[Guest]

lol yeah I see last year this discussion, works for me: http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/2787-ray-pinker-hair-analysis/page__st__90

[bipedalist]

A BBC report.

Mentioned is the dna barcoding that southernyahoo often makes mention of in his postings.

This snippet is interesting as well:

As Henry Gee, an editor at the respected Nature Journal, wrote in 2004 following the discovery: “In the light of the Flores skeleton, a recent initiative to scour central Sumatra for 'Orang Pendek' can be viewed in a more serious light.

He also argued that new species of mammal – including oxen - are still occasionally discovered by scientists. “If animals as large as oxen can remain hidden into an era when we would expect that scientists had rustled every tree and bush in search of new forms of life, there is no reason why the same should not apply to new species of large primate, including members of the human family,†he wrote.

Edited August 19, 2012 by bipedalist

[Guest Strick]

Bipedalist,

That BBC link is dead on my IPad.

A similar link was also dead on another site, so prolly not your fault.

Be nice to read though.

[southernyahoo]

The more DNA that is used, the more reliable the comparison.

Yeah BP, and this quote probably can't be stressed enough.

[bipedalist]

Bipedalist,

That BBC link is dead on my IPad.

A similar link was also dead on another site, so prolly not your fault.

Be nice to read though.

It's under Science-Environment/Future on August 16th, could be in-country links are different and makes a difference for those not in the USA or something. Here's the main page in case it matters: http://www.bbc.com/f...nce-environment

Edited August 19, 2012 by bipedalist

[bipedalist]

......

As Henry Gee, an editor at the respected Nature Journal, wrote in 2004 following the discovery: “In the light of the Flores skeleton, a recent initiative to scour central Sumatra for 'Orang Pendek' can be viewed in a more serious light.

He also argued that new species of mammal – including oxen - are still occasionally discovered by scientists. “If animals as large as oxen can remain hidden into an era when we would expect that scientists had rustled every tree and bush in search of new forms of life, there is no reason why the same should not apply to new species of large primate, including members of the human family,†he wrote.

Sort of like finding this rodent in 1866, the african crested rat or maned rat (looks like a cross between a muskrat, porcupine and skunk).

Edited August 20, 2012 by bipedalist

[Guest MikeG]

Naahh, BP that was discovered and described in the 1860's. Frankly, that is one of the more misleading headlines I have seen in a while!

Mike

[bipedalist]

Yah, I edited accordingly when I noted the ruse.

[bipedalist]

Well, September is nearing and you know what that means?!

"SAMPLE SUBMISSION PHASE May – September 2012

DNA ANALYSIS PHASE September – November 2012

PUBLICATION PHASE November – December 2012"

[southernyahoo]

Do we know of anyone that has successfully had a sample accepted for testing by Sykes? I seem to recall several people (here and elsewhere) commenting that he didn't seem interested in their samples. In other words, they never heard back.

I'm certain they'd have better luck if their evidence happened to test "positive" by Melba Ketchum.

Yeah, one would think from the statement below they would be interested in samples that have already pointed in a positive direction.

http://www.wolfson.ox.ac.uk/academic/GBFs-v/OLCHP

As part of a larger enquiry into the genetic relationship between our own species Homo sapiens and other hominids, we invite submissions of organic material from formally undescribed species, or “cryptidsâ€, for the purpose of their species identification by genetic means.

Perhaps there is a key in the terminology "formally undescribed species" or "cryptids". Maybe I'm not getting the message that my sample is no longer undescribed or from a cryptid.

[Guest slimwitless]

Perhaps there is a key in the terminology "formally undescribed species" or "cryptids". Maybe I'm not getting the message that my sample is no longer undescribed or from a cryptid.

That's odd. Why wouldn't they be interested? I speculated somewhere they may have cast a wide net for some very specific samples. It's hard to imagine but maybe they already have everything they need.

[Guest]

So what happens if the goverment ID'd bigfoot a long time ago, mapped their gene sequence, and stuck it in GenBank as some human Native American tribe or something? Sykes can be matching bigfoot samples all day and all we get is known human. Is that way too conspiratorial?

[southernyahoo]

That's odd. Why wouldn't they be interested? I speculated somewhere they may have cast a wide net for some very specific samples. It's hard to imagine but maybe they already have everything they need.

I don't know, and it's difficult to speculate. It could be that Sykes is busy verifying provenance of the many samples, and will not contact submitters until they've lined up their top twenty or whatever they feel is their target sampling size. Sykes has mentioned that his cost is about $1500.00 per sample so I'm sure with all the people who have contacted them, they want to be careful which ones they choose. Once thats done then I would expect some submitters to receive the collection kits.

[Guest TexasTracker]

I spoke with Meldrum about submitting an interesting blood and hair sample with a pretty strong story behind how they were collected. He told me that their funding was somewhat limited and that they were screening heavily on their samples. So, here I sit with an "interesting bit of DNA" and really nothing to do with it...

CG

[bipedalist]

Our parent organization here, Centre for Fortean Zoology has made it clear they would consider running samples for peeps on the forum, if they could swing it. If you have that kind of provenance, you might consider contacting Jon Downes through one of the FMT chiefs.