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

[BobbyO]

My personal take on this is that this projects timeline is much too short. I would expect a serious project to obtain their owns samples along with requesting these other samples.

I highly, highly, highly doubt that after Meldrum's involvement in this field now for maybe more than a decade ( or around that time anyway ), there is no way in the world he/they wouldn't be submitting their own samples to it.

[Guest MikeG]

I'm of the mind that this report is actually nothing to do with Dr Meldrum, other than him being a possible contributor of samples. This is Dr Sykes' work.

This BBC report suggests that the major contributor of samples will be a Swiss researcher. Anyone have any idea on that?

Mike

[BobbyO]

I wonder if they're lumping in the Asian Yeti and Bigfoot words together, even though many would see them as one being Asian of course and one North American ?

That'd be my guess and i'd also think the Swiss Guy would be amassing Yeti ( Asian ) samples as opposed to Bigfoot ( North American ) samples, which would be where Meldrum comes in maybe ?

The more i think about it the more i'd say that'd likely be the case, geographical distinction on various levels of the project.

[Guest]

livesience.com

"While Sykes doesn't expect to find solid evidence of a yeti or Bigfoot monster, he says he is keeping an open mind and hopes to identify perhaps 20 of the suspect samples. Along the way, he'd be happy if he found some unknown species. [Rumor or Reality: The Creatures of Cryptozoology]

"It would be wonderful if one or more turned out to be species we don't know about, maybe primates, maybe even collateral hominids," Sykes told LiveScience. Such hominids would include Neanderthals or Denosivans, a mysterious hominin species that lived in Siberia 40,000 years ago.

"That would be the optimal outcome," Sykes said."

Well, this doesnt indicate anything more than a "monsterquest" style investigation. While Dr. Ketchum is after proofing a species, or subgroup or what have you. This study seems to only look for single anomaly samples. A single sample can not proof much. How many times there was a DNA result like unknown or unknown primate? I think there were many.

Its like UFOs. Although there are official studies with some percent realy unknown sightings, they still dont proof aliens, secret military craft, or anything else. Also the testing of just 20 samples that can be anything cryptozoological dont make me believe in any kind of big step forward.

The only thing to look foreword, is that if the Ketchum Report comes out this study might change an try to test Ketchums hypothesis. They might just jump on the train.

[Guest]

With the coverage and upbeat attitudes toward this study, you can be assured it's full on panic mode at a vet's office in Texas. Tick tick tick, December 2012 will be here for this crew quickly, and if the other project wants to be relevant they better get it out quick (I have no faith that they will.)

[BobbyO]

What have you got against her HF, and i mean seriously ??

Honest question, as it's as clear as anything.

[Guest]

I was all in for her until she started the fb page and twitter and "I have seen them" stuff. My opinion shifted to realizing this thing would never come out. It went from proving them once and for all, to conservation and protection. Standing people up at conferences doesn't make too many friends either. Pull someone's leg long enough, and they will finally kick you. Of course my hope all along has been with all this buildup and bigfooters infighting over whose best and who is the real deal, that someone would hit one in a semi, and an intact body would bs laying on an Oregon highway.

[Guest UPs]

Dr. Ketchum should be given credit for getting the ball rolling as far as DNA goes whether her paper is published or not. One of the more interesting tidbits in the BBC article was a reference to Dr. Sykes publishing is results in a peer reviewed journal. That tells me he certainly is not expecting routine human DNA results.

[southernyahoo]

This is actually a nice power play. All MSK can do is keep the ball in the journals end of the court. This puts the pressure on the Journal if they want to be first to publish DNA from a study of this magnitude. The Sykes study schedule puts a time limit on that. I don't expect a paper as lengthy as Ketchums from Sykes' but the primary substance will likely be the same. Thats my prediction.

[Guest MikeG]

One of the more interesting tidbits in the BBC article was a reference to Dr. Sykes publishing is results in a peer reviewed journal. That tells me he certainly is not expecting routine human DNA results.

I don't think you should jump to that....or any....conclusion.

This statement is from a man who is used to publishing the results of his studies, and would clearly be of the calibre that would attract a publication's interest. Even if his results show that there is no sign of sasquatch or yeti in the putative samples, they would still be of interest, and they would still be publishable.

Mike

[Drew]

I think Dr. Sykes is going to analyze samples, and list their actual DNA identity. This may not be the type of paper the Bigfoot hopefuls are desirous of.

Because he is a real scientist, he will not jump to any conclusions before the results of the DNA analysis are completed.

[Guest]

Anyone know if Erickson can release his vids with this study? Or is he hooked with the other? RL said a while back he was free to do whatever, but take that with a grain of salt.

Edited May 23, 2012 by Hoosierfoot

[BobbyO]

I was all in for her until she started the fb page and twitter and "I have seen them" stuff. My opinion shifted to realizing this thing would never come out. It went from proving them once and for all, to conservation and protection. Standing people up at conferences doesn't make too many friends either. Pull someone's leg long enough, and they will finally kick you. Of course my hope all along has been with all this buildup and bigfooters infighting over whose best and who is the real deal, that someone would hit one in a semi, and an intact body would bs laying on an Oregon highway.

Cool, thanks for clarifying and fair enough..

Because he is a real scientist, he will not jump to any conclusions before the results of the DNA analysis are completed.

A real Scientist who hasn't seen one as opposed to a wacko Scientist who believes they have you mean Drew ??

[Drew]

A real Scientist who hasn't seen one as opposed to a wacko Scientist who believes they have you mean Drew ??

Well, I was referring to UPs' statement

That tells me he certainly is not expecting routine human DNA results.

I am simply saying, he is not expecting any particular result, he is going to look at the results and develop a conclusion. He may have a gut instinct that the samples will all come back as Human or Gorilla or Cow or Bear, but he will look at the results before saying such things.

[Guest spurfoot]

I have concerns about the methodology of the Sykes project.

1) Hair is the preferred source for the study. DNA is difficult to extract from the shaft of the hair. Hair roots are easy. If from the shaft, at best only mitochondrial DNA is likely to be practicable. Even that will be difficult, and maybe impossible, according to Ketchum and others experiences doing so for BF. An FBI report about general human hair extraction indicates that the efficiency of extraction even depends upon hair color.

2) Mitochondrial DNA likely to be inadequate to establish a new species.

3) Simple DNA probes for polymorphisms will also be inadequate. I have reason to believe that only a full genome analysis will be adequate in the case of Sasquatch type specimens.

4) Effectiveness of the overall study is likely to depend upon lessons learned from previous studies. It is not yet clear whether the Ketchum and Meldrum results will be available to him in full. Her consultation might be incomplete for competitive reasons if her paper is not yet published. Of course, maybe Sykes is aware of all these issues, but, maybe not. The degree of information sharing is not publicaly stated. Most likely, there will be a complete degree of cooperation. That is what I would do, but not all people are alike.

It is very likely that both Meldrum and Sykes already have unpublished results. It is the publication process that is time consuming, less so, the lab work.