Operation Persistence

[Guest]

DWA wrote:

"Hey, if liking it infinite will get me off of like-one-post-a-day-that's-all-sonny, then knock yourself out!

I'm trying to get away from Ketchum Schmetschum and onto well, best case is that it might help. Might. But if you don't have that specimen, then, what did the DNA come from? Oh, and alcohol explains all sightings; Ray Wallace did all the tracks; and PG is Bob Hieronymous. Next?

And as to affecting the harvesting policy: well, actually, just said it. Where did that DNA come from? requires the answer: um, this. [sound of crane lifiting something pretty heavy] Maybe some scientists' eyebrows will go up and they'll start the electric slide over to the fence if they like the looks of the Ketchum results. But the feel right now is 1000 cats exiting a bag without clearance. When it comes to convincing the mainstream, well, circuses haven't worked.

Truth is, bipto, you guys sound like you're carrying the ball at the moment, unless a semi just hit something"

Interesting post. I eagerly await the translation...

[southernyahoo]

Well, no, actually, the results of the DNA testing will actually show the need for a body.

What will the DNA testing prove? Nothing, unless there is a type specimen, i.e., something known to be, or be from, a bigfoot.

If we don't have that yet we still need to get it, and I don't think we have that yet.

Science didn't need a body to recognize Denisovans. Personally, I hear the need for a body argument from the pro kill camp more than I hear it from science. They just keep confirming new species with DNA, and you can't have a body if they are human. The DNA can absolutely prove there is a new hominin out there and that will be a game changer. Some may still not come around, and cling ever so tightly to the Giganto theory, though it's on it's last leg I'm afraid.

[Guest DWA]

Science didn't need a body to recognize Denisovans. Personally, I hear the need for a body argument from the pro kill camp more than I hear it from science. They just keep confirming new species with DNA, and you can't have a body if they are human. The DNA can absolutely prove there is a new hominin out there and that will be a game changer. Some may still not come around, and cling ever so tightly to the Giganto theory, though it's on it's last leg I'm afraid.

Um, nope. I'm not talking about the pro-kill camp. I'm talking about what science will require to take this seriously. Everything else with this much evidence has been confirmed to exist. Unfortunately, the mainstream doesn't bother to look at it and says there is no evidence. Species get confirmed with DNA all right...from a type specimen. Period. You think they will not require for this species what they require for every other?

I think you guys are missing my point. She has made herself available for interviews etc., and I will say that there is a better than evens chance that she will be using the fora offered to her to push hard for species protection. I'm not saying she will get it, but the window of opportunity for bagging one without some kind of kickback/demonisation may be narrowing.

Not missing the point at all. I don't see the traction. This hasn't even gotten peer review yet. I'm not putting any eggs in that basket.

[Guest]

...she will be using the fora offered to her to push hard for species protection. I'm not saying she will get it, but the window of opportunity for bagging one without some kind of kickback/demonisation may be narrowing.

She can push all she wants. Personally, I doubt anyone will give her the time of day. If I'm wrong, we'll of course abide by applicable laws.

[Guest DWA]

DWA wrote:

"Hey, if liking it infinite will get me off of like-one-post-a-day-that's-all-sonny, then knock yourself out!

I'm trying to get away from Ketchum Schmetschum and onto well, best case is that it might help. Might. But if you don't have that specimen, then, what did the DNA come from? Oh, and alcohol explains all sightings; Ray Wallace did all the tracks; and PG is Bob Hieronymous. Next?

And as to affecting the harvesting policy: well, actually, just said it. Where did that DNA come from? requires the answer: um, this. [sound of crane lifiting something pretty heavy] Maybe some scientists' eyebrows will go up and they'll start the electric slide over to the fence if they like the looks of the Ketchum results. But the feel right now is 1000 cats exiting a bag without clearance. When it comes to convincing the mainstream, well, circuses haven't worked.

Truth is, bipto, you guys sound like you're carrying the ball at the moment, unless a semi just hit something"

Interesting post. I eagerly await the translation...

Sorry, carrion guy. English only spoken here. Birds go to JREF, which as they say is for them.

[southernyahoo]

Bipto, I've read that the TBRC would be first in line to push for protection with proof presented. It doesn't sound like you guys are ready to do that with DNA proof, but it begs the question why you might participate in such studies if that wasn't an acceptable outcome.

[dopelyrics]

Not at all. What we *all* need is a type specimen. The TBRC does not have to be the group to do that. We'd welcome news that a specimen had been collected for study. As far as agenda goes, I'm not sure what you mean by that

Thanks Bipto. What I mean is that hunters may not be interested in collecting just one type specimen for study. They may want to collect as many as they can for financial gain, perhaps. If they decimated the population of Wood Apes in Area X I'm not sure you'd be too happy with that after all the hard work you've put in there.

Best.

Lee

[Guest]

The discovery of Denisova has been proven with DNA from a tip if a finger and a tooth-- proven evidence.

This is a completely different scenario that does not address a living species that has zero scientifically acknowledged historical basis. Contact the worlds leading anthropologists and tell them that while you were hunting you looked down from your treestand and saw a Denisovan man chase down a feral pig and break it's neck by swinging it against a tree, or that a Denisovan threw rocks at you while you were quietly awaiting a trout to take your bait. "Hi, I was calling to let you know that while making s'mores I saw a Denisovan man screaming at me from the treeline." This is the type of scenario witnesses are faced with every day. In the eyes of science, we are all just kooks and liars until there is a body.

.

Bipto, I've read that the TBRC would be first in line to push for protection with proof presented. It doesn't sound like you guys are ready to do that with DNA proof, but it begs the question why you might participate in such studies if that wasn't an acceptable outcome.

What outcome? There is no outcome, just more of the teaser stuff. Unfortunately, alongside the legitimate investigators and enthusiasts, the "Bigfoot researcher" world is full of giant attention craving children, jealous shysters, sketchy grifters, and hoaxers. For the last decade (at least), we have been wading through almost constant claims of conclusive evidence that is only a day away. Now that the underbelly of the bigfoot enthusiast community have figured out how to pay their bills off of website traffic, this phenomenon will only increase exponentially.

I have a strong hunch that if we check back a year from now, we will still be waiting on Melba Ketchums peer reviewed evidence. Besides decoding their entire DNA, doesn't she also claim that for years they have been sneaking onto her ranch to braid her horses hair? And that she regularly interacts with a family of them? And that "all animals can sense you if they want, to tell if you are friend or foe"?

I will be very interested to see the findings of the work being done at Oxford University, as will the TBRC I'm sure. If anyone wants to continue to believe that they (the TBRC) have some hidden ulterior motives behind their expeditions, there is probably nothing anyone can say that is going to dispel your suspicions. If in fact actual Sasquatch DNA samples have been submitted, I would imagine that regardless of their findings (whether it is an ape or a closer relative to Homo Sapiens), the mere acknowledgement that the creature commonly referred to as "Bigfoot" actually exists, scientists around the world are going to be madly clamoring for a specimen. At least, at this time, only a few groups of Bigfoot researchers are trying to acquire ONE specimen. Upon the announcement that "Bigfoot" is some kind of actual animal, tens of thousands of hunters, bounty hunters, armed crackpots, etc. are going to be scouring every inch of forests on the continent trying to collect bounties. I say it would be better to present ONE specimen up front (as soon as possible) to possibly prevent untold numbers killed by folks who (at this point) never even think about Bigfoot. We need one specimen quietly submitted, and then we need harsh laws enacted IMMEDIATELY to protect the newly proven species.

Edited November 25, 2012 by AaronD
to remove inflammatory comments and language

[Guest DWA]

This is a completely different scenario that does not address a living species that has zero scientifically acknowledged historical basis. Contact the worlds leading anthropologists and tell them that while you were hunting you looked down from your treestand and saw a Denisovan man chase down a feral pig and break it's neck by swinging it against a tree, or that a Denisovan threw rocks at you while you were quietly awaiting a trout to take your bait. "Hi, I was calling to let you know that while making s'mores I saw a Denisovan man screaming at me from the treeline." This is the type of scenario witnesses are faced with every day. In the eyes of science, we are all just kooks and liars until there is a body.

.

What outcome? There is no outcome, just more of the teaser stuff. Unfortunately, alongside the legitimate investigators and enthusiasts, the "Bigfoot researcher" world is full of giant attention craving children, jealous shysters, sketchy grifters, and hoaxers. For the last decade (at least), we have been wading through almost constant claims of conclusive evidence that is only a day away. Now that the underbelly of the bigfoot enthusiast community have figured out how to pay their bills off of website traffic, this phenomenon will only increase exponentially.

I have a strong hunch that if we check back a year from now, we will still be waiting on Melba Ketchums peer reviewed evidence. Besides decoding their entire DNA, doesn't she also claim that for years they have been sneaking onto her ranch to braid her horses hair? And that she regularly interacts with a family of them? And that "all animals can sense you if they want, to tell if you are friend or foe"?

I will be very interested to see the findings of the work being done at Oxford University, as will the TBRC I'm sure. If anyone wants to continue to believe that they (the TBRC) have some hidden ulterior motives behind their expeditions, there is probably nothing anyone can say that is going to dispel your suspicions. If in fact actual Sasquatch DNA samples have been submitted, I would imagine that regardless of their findings (whether it is an ape or a closer relative to Homo Sapiens), the mere acknowledgement that the creature commonly referred to as "Bigfoot" actually exists, scientists around the world are going to be madly clamoring for a specimen. At least, at this time, only a few groups of Bigfoot researchers are trying to acquire ONE specimen. Upon the announcement that "Bigfoot" is some kind of actual animal, tens of thousands of hunters, bounty hunters, armed crackpots, etc. are going to be scouring every inch of forests on the continent trying to collect bounties. I say it would be better to present ONE specimen up front (as soon as possible) to possibly prevent untold numbers killed by folks who (at this point) never even think about Bigfoot. We need one specimen quietly submitted, and then we need harsh laws enacted IMMEDIATELY to protect the newly proven species.

HEAR, HEAR!

[Guest]

This is a completely different scenario that does not address a living species that has zero scientifically acknowledged historical basis.

I think that DNA confirmation would be a catalyst for scientific review of the thousands of sightings, print casts, audio and video recordings, etc. If you follow any of Kathy Strain's work, you know there is a very deep historical basis and if DNA evidence confirms the existence of a Sasquatch, that work will also have to be very seriously reviewed by "science."

Immediate protection/harsh laws, yep. Hopefully a quietly submitted specimen can get those things enabled.

The TBRC should maintain course and heading until something epic happens, and my gut says the TBRC will be the epic happening, not a kooky vet who talks about things he/she is (supposedly) legally required not to discuss... on facebook...

[Guest]

Bipto, I've read that the TBRC would be first in line to push for protection with proof presented. It doesn't sound like you guys are ready to do that with DNA proof, but it begs the question why you might participate in such studies if that wasn't an acceptable outcome.

We don't get to decide if DNA is enough to prove the animal's existence. "Proof" is whatever the scientific community accepts as such. If, at some point, DNA alone does that, then we'll move to the next stage. At this point, that has not happened since, whether or not DNA will ever be enough, I know for certain press rereleases will never be.

What I mean is that hunters may not be interested in collecting just one type specimen for study. They may want to collect as many as they can for financial gain, perhaps. If they decimated the population of Wood Apes in Area X I'm not sure you'd be too happy with that after all the hard work you've put in there.

Well, they can try. Wanting to do something and being able to do it are very different things (as we've learned through a lot of hard work and effort).

I will be very interested to see the findings of the work being done at Oxford University, as will the TBRC I'm sure. If anyone wants to continue to believe that they (the TBRC) have some hidden ulterior motives behind their expeditions, there is probably nothing anyone can say that is going to dispel your suspicions. If in fact actual Sasquatch DNA samples have been submitted, I would imagine that regardless of their findings (whether it is an ape or a closer relative to Homo Sapiens), the mere acknowledgement that the creature commonly referred to as "Bigfoot" actually exists, scientists around the world are going to be madly clamoring for a specimen. At least, at this time, only a few groups of Bigfoot researchers are trying to acquire ONE specimen. Upon the announcement that "Bigfoot" is some kind of actual animal, tens of thousands of hunters, bounty hunters, armed crackpots, etc. are going to be scouring every inch of forests on the continent trying to collect bounties. I say it would be better to present ONE specimen up front (as soon as possible) to possibly prevent untold numbers killed by folks who (at this point) never even think about Bigfoot. We need one specimen quietly submitted, and then we need harsh laws enacted IMMEDIATELY to protect the newly proven species.

Agreed. The timing of all this is very suspicious to me considering the schedule published by Sykes. It may be coincidental or it may not be.

[dopelyrics]

Well, they can try. Wanting to do something and being able to do it are very different things (as we've learned through a lot of hard work and effort).

So you are not too worried about hunters, then. That's good. I think after all the hard work and effort you have put in, then you "deserve" to be the ones to realise your ambitions at Area X.

Best,

Lee

[Drew]

A wood ape would never cross into Oklahoma because hunters killed large animals there back in the 1800's. That's just common sense. It's the same reason black bear would never cross the Red River out of Oklahoma into Texas. If there's anything wild animals respect, it's state borders.

Yes, I will concede that animals have no clue about State borders, if you will concede that a fraction of all large animals moving through areas with roads get hit by cars/trucks (including the most intelligent primate)

[Guest DWA]

Yes, I will concede that animals have no clue about State borders, if you will concede that a fraction of all large animals moving through areas with roads get hit by cars/trucks (including the most intelligent primate)

I won't concede that. There's no reason to concede it. That is making an assumption, which in science is dangerous if not deadly to do.

Given the body of the sasquatch evidence, two things are possible here:

1. No sasquatch has ever been hit by a car, truck, or any other vehicle;

or, what looks like the correct answer:

2. It has happened (there are reports of it happening, just as there are reports of hunters killing sasquatch), but none of them have resulted in a body that survived the chain of custody to scientific confirmation.

Tossing the sasquatch evidence on the presumption that "no one has ever" is something that no scientist can do. Any that do it have temporarily forgotten that they are scientists. That credentialed scientists frequently employ the "no one has ever" dodge is all the evidence one needs that they aren't paying attention to this topic.

[Guest]

Still, priliminary DNA report has been released showing 1/2 homo and 1/2 hybrid not to mention 5 years of ground breaking work, BUT it is still not enough to garner the respect due from the pro-kill camp. Shooting a close relitive, disregarding federal mandates agianst shooting non-game animals and ignoring, ignoring a living scientific discovery IMO is quite cavalier to say the very least. Some people will do anything to promote thier own agenda even in the face of overwhelming data to the contrary.