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

[Guest Darrell]

^Its getting to be more than i can bear.

[Guest Stan Norton]

^ Is bigfoot really just another ape species? I thought they can mind speak yet still talk via language and code, they shapeshift and teleport. They are the smartest species on this planet. You dont have to be here long to be exposed to this BS. But yes we know apes exist. We dont know apes exist in NA. We know bears exist. We know bears exist in the Himilayan region. Is it a stretch of reality to think a new species of bear can exist in the Himalayas, no. Can a new species of bear exist in NA, yes. Does the Yeti or Bigfoot exist anywhere? Maybe, maybe not.

If you think the consensus on sasquatch has anything to do with such weird fringe issues then you need to read more.

Edited October 19, 2013 by Stan Norton

[Guest Llawgoch]

Darrell I can understand the issues you have with the telepathic/psychic/magical sasquatch. You are certainly not alone. The stuff I read on this forum makes we laugh and cry at the same time. There is no doubt this subject attracts some very special individuals who have their own take on all things BF, but I'm sure you can see beyond the lunatic fringe.

 

Lets not get too carried away with the bear/ape stuff just now. Sykes is hunting for 'other' types of humans. He is no doubt about what he thinks is out there. A man of his magnitude should be listened to and respected. Will he find what he's looking for? Only time shall tell.....

 

L-A-M-E

 

What makes you say this?  I would be very surprised if he thinks a traditional, hominid Bigfoot is out there.  His attitude was always "Let's get in what people say they have and see if there is anything interesting in it", not "let's prove Bigfoot".

Edited October 19, 2013 by Llawgoch

[BobbyO]

Mr Mullis from Bigfootology is in the Motherland right now according to himself, something to do with the filming ( although surely that's all done now ).

 

Can't see why he'd be there if there wasn't positive results to what Sykes has tested so far.

Bigfootology

about an hour ago

In the UK the Icon Films company is playing Bigfoot Files for Channel 4 starting Sunday, October 20th, and each subsequent hour will air on the subsequent Sundays. However, National Geographic has picked up the program and are editing it for a two hour program to be aired on November 17th on the National Geographic Channel. What I have not been told is how the US version will be edited. Icon Films owns the programs, Bryan and I do not, so they have full control of what is presented in these programs.

In fact, after re-reading it, the incorrect English at the start of the post may not mean he's actually in the UK after all.

 

The lack of apostrophe or full stop means it could have a couple of meanings.

 

If it was me writing ( and i know this wouldn't be correct English too ), i would write " In the UK " referring to myself being in the UK as opposed to the correct " I'm in the UK " so maybe i've read it wrong and with an English mindset, which this wasn't written with..

[Oonjerah]

Icon Films owns the programs; they have full control of what is presented in these programs.

 

National Georgraphic will edit it down to a 2 hour program, presenting what they deem best? 

 

The detective story by Dr. Sykes will be in the book. 

 

When I was a kid, we always got the book first and then the movie. And people often said,

"The book was much better than the movie." 

 

Does anyone have a publication name & date for the science paper? 

Edited October 19, 2013 by Oonjerah

[Guest]

If you think the consensus on sasquatch has anything to do with such weird fringe issues then you need to read more.

 

 

What do you think the "consensus on sasquatch" includes, and who/what is responsible for that consensus?  

Edited October 19, 2013 by apehuman

[JDL]

You missed a key step there:

 

We found hair. 

We claimed hair came from Yeti.

Hair is bear.

Yet is bear. 

 

If you intended to use the word "yet" as written in your last line, your logic is flawless, so I'll grant you benefit of the doubt.

[HOLDMYBEER]

What makes you say this?  I would be very surprised if he thinks a traditional, hominid Bigfoot is out there.  His attitude was always "Let's get in what people say they have and see if there is anything interesting in it", not "let's prove Bigfoot".

Yes.....Dr. Sykes was in the Oregon last weekend.....he visited Peter Byrne over at the coast and spent some time with folks connected to a wildlife lab in southern Oregon. I think you will find his interest is much broader than just bigfoot.

[Guest Stan Norton]

What do you think the "consensus on sasquatch" includes, and who/what is responsible for that consensus?

What do you think it means? The consensus, amongst those who are bothered enough to look into the subject and who feel there is something worth investigating, is that sasquatch is a perfectly normal animal, not some mind bending space monkey from the fifth dimension. Simple really.

[Guest]

 

Icon Films owns the programs; they have full control of what is presented in these programs.

 

National Georgraphic will edit it down to a 2 hour program, presenting what they deem best? 

 

The detective story by Dr. Sykes will be in the book. 

 

When I was a kid, we always got the book first and then the movie. And people often said,

"The book was much better than the movie." 

 

Does anyone have a publication name & date for the science paper? 

 

 

As it was mentioned that they dont know the airing of episode 2 and 3 just days ago, and that episode 1 will not compromise the paper, it seems likely that the paper passed peer review and is about to publish the next few weeks. Thats just my assumption, but I dont think they would spoil the paper. And the documentary for sure includes the abstract of the papers findings, if all this should make any sense. 

[dmaker]

"  It is, statistically, more likely that there are unknown primates out there than bears. "  Stan Norton

 

How, exactly, did you arrive at this fact?  Or did you just manufacture it on the spot?

[norseman]

Either way? Ape or prehistoric Bear? It's obviously not a Sherpa's over active imagination as scoff tics like to constantly point out as the probable explanation.

Anecdotal accounts....... For the win.

[Guest Darrell]

Bear with me for a moment. Im thinking that I may just wait to see the show first, lol. Im not sure its so exciting having Peter Byrne being involved. I met him once back in the 70's and he is quite a character but dont see him as really having anything to offer anymore.  He is good for stories and taking money but thats about it anymore.

[Guest Stan Norton]

" It is, statistically, more likely that there are unknown primates out there than bears. " Stan Norton

How, exactly, did you arrive at this fact? Or did you just manufacture it on the spot?

Did you read the bit before? There are more primate species on earth than bear species. There is a greater diversity of primate species than bear species. Ergo, it is , statistically, more likely that one would encounter an unknown primate than a bear. Its quite a simple concept known as probability. Would you take issue if I said it were statistically more likely that a new beetle would be found than an elephant? Actually you probably would.

[Guest Urkelbot]

You are comparing an Order(primates) to a Genus(Ursus) or Family(Ursidae).  To compare you would need to say Ursidae to Hominidae. Or Primate to Carnivora.