Hairy Man Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 I helped un-load the question. I would guess that if someone proves wood apes are in the Homo line, they proved it with a body. There would be no need to try to obtain another. I seriously doubt that they will be based on what both of you describe. What we saw was definitely not homo sapien.
Guest Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 I hope all of this goes exactly as theTBRC plans without a hitch. Just don't forget Murphy's law.
Guest Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 (edited) You have no idea how relieved I am to hear that!! Edited October 5, 2012 by CTfoot
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 How are wood apes going to be proven to be Homo sapiens? Through DNA of course lol
Guest poignant Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Drew it really sounds like you didn't listen to any of the Podcasts. Episodes 38 and 39. Download them off of itunes. Listen to them and then you won't have to go off on these tangents that are so extremely well-addressed in the podcasts. Exactly this.
Guest Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 (edited) This is in jest: http://emergency.cdc...dia/zombies.asp This isn't: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr6004a1.htm?s_cid=rr6004a1_w Edited October 5, 2012 by CTfoot
Hairy Man Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Through DNA of course lol So you believe that DNA will show that wood apes are human? Wouldn't a human result just suggest the sample was from a human? Or are you suggesting it's a relic human and DNA would show that (i.e., Homo something other than sapien)?
Guest Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Out of curiosity, are there people posting here that believe that sasquatches are genuinely 'apes', ie. they are some as yet undiscovered pongid? There is plenty of evidence of 'human-like' bipeds living as recently as 30-50K years ago, e.g. Neanderthals, Denisovans, Flores man, etc., and leaks from the Ketchum 'camp' suggest Homo DNA, so it would not be an absolute shock to science to learn of small pockets of a line/tribe surviving to this day. But I've never seen any similar evidence or theories to support a 'relict ape' theory. Just because a biped behaves in an 'ape-like' way doesn't mean it is genetically an ape. Just sayin'...
Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 Well we won't know until we get some concrete proof. We can chase DNA until the cows come home. What results do we have so far from that effort?
Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 In reference to CT Foots' zombie link, a humorous aside. I had a clinic visit with a neurologist of foreign citizenship, who had me trying different b.p. meds and such. On a follow up visit he asked how the meds were working. I replied that the side effects were bad, as it made me feel like a zombie. You should have seen his reaction. lol wow his eyes literally dilated and he was adamantly telling me I would be no zombie. He was serious, I guess I should have chosen a better metaphor, but obviously his culture takes zombies much more serious than mine lol
Guest Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 (edited) Well there are people who post on here who do know how the evidence they submitted to Ketchum tested. Perhaps they could post a view on the matter, without compromising their NDA's. Gigantopithecus is the only ape option, but was not thought to be bipedal. Moreover, there is no evidence of existence more recent than 100,000 years ago. Well we won't know until we get some concrete proof. We can chase DNA until the cows come home. What results do we have so far from that effort? Well there are people who post on here who do know how the evidence they submitted to Ketchum tested. Perhaps they could post a view on the matter, without compromising their NDA's. Gigantopithecus is the only ape option, but was not thought to be bipedal. Moreover, there is no evidence of existence more recent than 100,000 years ago. Edited October 6, 2012 by corvus horribilus
southernyahoo Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 Out of curiosity, are there people posting here that believe that sasquatches are genuinely 'apes', ie. they are some as yet undiscovered pongid? Yes, some here feel the wood ape is a convergently evolved ape that likely stems from Gigantopithicus Blacki. Though one of these proponents once told me they thought the DNA resembled human contamination. Go figure...........
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted October 6, 2012 Posted October 6, 2012 (edited) At the moment I can think of 5/5 Bigfoot DNA samples that have come back as human. -3 from Richard Stubstad -1 from Snelgrave lake -1 from David Paulides + Multiple leaks from Dr. Ketchum and support from Mr. Paulides. Unless "woodapes" are something different from "Bigfoot" or Sasquatch, I would guess their DNA would also come back as human. At least the on mitochondrial side I think the TBRC is dealing with wild and uneducated human beings and they probably don't even know it. Edited October 6, 2012 by OntarioSquatch
Recommended Posts