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

[Oonjerah]

DNA is something I only know how to spell.

But I thought all the cells in our bodies contained the same DNA. 

 

No? 

[southernyahoo]

The mitochondria is seperate from the nuclear DNA in each cell and is inherited from the mother only. The Y chromosme nuclear DNA comes from the father only and is only present in male specimens. Sykes may attempt to identify the male lineage in some samples, if they are male, and that's where he could find what Ketchum found, or identify a more ancient paternal line.

This all assumes there is no non-human ape samples in the study and his findings are relevant to human history.

[Oonjerah]

The mitochondria is seperate from the nuclear DNA in each cell and is inherited from the mother only. The Y chromosme nuclear DNA comes from the father only and is only present in male specimens.

 

If only males have their dad's DNA, how come some girls look a lot like their fathers? 

 

In other words, eventho Sykes simplifies DNA principles for the lay person to understand, 

I'm still lost. 

[Guest]

NOW HEAR THIS:

 

FB - Mullis:

 

"if anyone wants to submit samples they can but the submitter will have to absorb any costs for that testing (approximately $1500) and if the sample does prove to test as an authentic Bigfoot hair the fee for analysis will be refunded."

 

If nothing to compare it to has been found, this sounds like the most unserious offer I ever heard. Like:

 

"Send in your Unicorn hair for just 1500 Dollars, and you will get refund if we find it to be Unicorn!" 

 

How can Sykes determine what an "authentic Bigfoot hair" is? 

 

 

And than:

"Bryan told me this morning that he has made the decision on which of those last few samples he is testing now, which are samples that we have already submitted to him and he has current possession of because other factors have now come into play for us to stop testing for the project. So there are five last samples that he has put in for testing."

 

 

Five new hairs, for what reason? The paper is in review, the book should by written by now, the TV series airs, the conclusion thus is already drawn. Very strange.

[dmaker]

"1.  Run off as many sighting reports as one can.

2.  Staple 'em together.

3.  Put 'em next to the crapper.  Good way to catch up on the evidence in one's spare time." -DWA

 

I can think of a better purpose in this scenario for several sheets of paper filled with Bigfoot fiction....

And what do you have to provide? Other than pure biased speculation.

I offered them stories about telepathic hobos and morse code...they laughed at me.  

[Oonjerah]

"if anyone wants to submit samples they can but the submitter will have to absorb any costs for that testing (approximately $1500) and if the sample does prove to test as an authentic Bigfoot hair the fee for analysis will be refunded."

 

If nothing to compare it to has been found, this sounds like the most unserious offer I ever heard. Like:

 

"Send in your Unicorn hair for just 1500 Dollars, and you will get refund if we find it to be Unicorn!" 

 

How can Sykes determine what an "authentic Bigfoot hair" is? 

 

 

This is easy.  Sykes & Mullis are hoping to get the Knowers to pony up their stuff. 

[southernyahoo]

I don't have the funds, and already offered my sample to them. I got the cold shoulder so I'll have to pass until other geneticists jump in.

[southernyahoo]

If only males have their dad's DNA, how come some girls look a lot like their fathers? 

 

In other words, eventho Sykes simplifies DNA principles for the lay person to understand, 

I'm still lost. 

 

The Y chromosome contains only the Dad's DNA but the rest of the nuclear DNA and the remaining 45 chromosomes is a combination of both mother and father. This is why the Y chromosome can tell you if you have a hybridized organism. Dad might be from another very closely related species or be from an ancient "thought to be lost" lineage.  Humans and primates are well studied in this area.

 

This is what Sykes does when he's not chasing Yeti's.

 

http://www.oxfordancestors.com/content/view/36/56/

[southernyahoo]

NOW HEAR THIS:

 

FB - Mullis:

 

"if anyone wants to submit samples they can but the submitter will have to absorb any costs for that testing (approximately $1500) and if the sample does prove to test as an authentic Bigfoot hair the fee for analysis will be refunded."

 

If nothing to compare it to has been found, this sounds like the most unserious offer I ever heard. Like:

 

"Send in your Unicorn hair for just 1500 Dollars, and you will get refund if we find it to be Unicorn!" 

 

How can Sykes determine what an "authentic Bigfoot hair" is? 

 

 

And than:

"Bryan told me this morning that he has made the decision on which of those last few samples he is testing now, which are samples that we have already submitted to him and he has current possession of because other factors have now come into play for us to stop testing for the project. So there are five last samples that he has put in for testing."

 

 

Five new hairs, for what reason? The paper is in review, the book should by written by now, the TV series airs, the conclusion thus is already drawn. Very strange.

Check this out.

 

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/31023-the-sykes-sartori-report-oxford-lausanne-collateral-hominid-project/page-9

 

 

Post 171

 

He's going to get hooked into this whole bigfoot thing, you watch. The right sample and sequence will likely slam the door behind him.

Danger Danger!!!

 

 

 

[JDL]

You know,

 

This reminds me of a couple of situations from my own life.

 

There was a time when a girlfriend pulled a long blonde hair out of the pillowcase, looked at me and said, calmly:  "This isn't my hair...."

 

On a battlefield, when you get a spot report (anecdotal) and want to further develop the information, you send out scouts.  Some come back and tell you they didn't see anything (anecdotal).  Some come back and report activity observed from a distance (anecdotal).  Some don't come back.  We never assumed that there was nothing there in the case where no one came back.  Nor did we assume there was nothing there in the case where we hadn't scouted an area.  We always had to consider that even when an area was scouted, there may have been camouflaged activity that was unseen, or observed activity that was intended to deceive.  We make life and death decisions on anecdotal information collected about people actively trying to conceal themselves or deceive us.  Just Sayin'

 

So with Sykes, the answer is pretty obvious.  The yeti must have been wearing a bear hide.

 

Just joking there, dmaker, don't go apoplectic on me.

 

Point is, no local is going to walk up to a yeti and take some of its hair.

 

More likely, they either:

 

Saw the yeti, came back after the yeti was gone, and collected the hair.  The tree could have been used by both yeti and bear, so honest mistake.

 

Found hair in the tree and jumped to the conclusion that it was yeti, so faulty assumption.

 

Misidentified a bear, doesn't mean yeti don't exist.

 

Intentionally provided bear hairs as a joke, hoax, or just to mess with the investigator.

 

None of these circumstances disproves yeti.

 

I'll also point out that the only information I have about skeptics as people is anecdotal, so I choose to imagine them as a yetis wearing bear hide bikinis.

Edited October 25, 2013 by JDL

[southernyahoo]

"if anyone wants to submit samples they can but the submitter will have to absorb any costs for that testing (approximately $1500) and if the sample does prove to test as an authentic Bigfoot hair the fee for analysis will be refunded."

^The more I think about this statement the less it sits right with me. One reason being that we don't know that Sykes knows what authentic bigfoot samples are like ....Yet. Two being that this feels like some sort of chain yank towards the wishful.

I'd say it's time they just show what they know first.

[Guest DWA]

 

 

So with Sykes, the answer is pretty obvious.  The yeti must have been wearing a bear hide.

 

Just joking there, dmaker, don't go apoplectic on me.

 

Point is, no local is going to walk up to a yeti and take some of its hair.

 

More likely, they either:

 

Saw the yeti, came back after the yeti was gone, and collected the hair.  The tree could have been used by both yeti and bear, so honest mistake.

 

Found hair in the tree and jumped to the conclusion that it was yeti, so faulty assumption.

 

Misidentified a bear, doesn't mean yeti don't exist.

 

Intentionally provided bear hairs as a joke, hoax, or just to mess with the investigator.

 

None of these circumstances disproves yeti.

 

I'll also point out that the only information I have about skeptics as people is anecdotal, so I choose to imagine them as a yetis wearing bear hide bikinis.

Right.

 

As I have pointed out elsewhere:   In strict logical terms, the skeptical (and media) take on Sykes is the exact equivalent of me going out to the Great Plains, asking for bison hair, getting pronghorn hair from a few hundred people…and declaring the bison mythical.

[dmaker]

Except we know bisons exist, so your comparison only works if we ignore reality.  I can go to a zoo and view a bison. I can look it up online and see plenty of photos and video. Bigfoot? Not so much.  

[Guest DWA]

Nope.  100% per centum, precise, logical equivalency.

 

Only those who need a course in logic fail to understand that.

[Guest DWA]

Or, you know, those trying to win an argument, rather than find out the truth.

 

Sorry.  If you are depending on a bunch of people who aren't scientists to bring you samples, none of which plucked them off an animal you can see, and then to say, based on those samples, that the thing alleged doesn't exist is as far from science as Bigfeet Saucer People.

 

Fortunately, like a scientist, Sykes is restricting commentary to the samples themselves and not to the phenomenon.