MarkGlasgow Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Aren't you concerned about your own credibility, hanging around in this thread where you're likely to rub elbows with some of the bad crowd? You can't be too careful when your credibility is at stake! That is a very good point Sas! I really need to be careful huh? As for credibility lets just remember this is a BF forum after all. Out there in the 'real' world our credibility would be severely diminished for taking this subject seriously at all. Doing my utmost to keep an open mind guys so please bear with me. I've heard the 'hair-braiding', 'angel DNA', 'forest people' stuff being used to beat Ketchum over and over. Even now that the 'science' has been released we don't really know what we have. If Sykes were to release similar results then there would be so much less debate, Sykes will focus on the science and not the subject. Ketchum has claimed that Sykes has been in contact and will review her work. If the samples have been tainted or cross contaminated then we'll hopefully get confirmation on that from a source that is 'credible' but also open minded. @apehuman - Many thanks for your response. I guess different folks will have issues with MK for a variety of reasons. In my view she could have kept these to a minimum. Regarding the GenBank question. MK stated that for a sample to be uploaded into GenBank then permission needs to be given by the 'donor' themselves. Of course this 'permission' is impossible to obtain so the samples won't be available via this source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) @apehuman - Many thanks for your response. I guess different folks will have issues with MK for a variety of reasons. In my view she could have kept these to a minimum. Regarding the GenBank question. MK stated that for a sample to be uploaded into GenBank then permission needs to be given by the 'donor' themselves. Of course this 'permission' is impossible to obtain so the samples won't be available via this source. I though that was her reason for the past, but not the future. Didn't she state several scientists had been in touch with her and would do that for her ? The reason given is itself controversial, an almost internally inconsistent statement as expressed...but I don't want to diverge here....and I have lost patience Mark, sorry, not with you, but MK! There is probably several pages on this one issue in that thread.... Would it matter if Skyes were saying all this? Not without peer-review. But even without,the difference in credentials and experience is significant, no comparison really between the two. Except they are willing to look at the crypto claims. I actually don't think we will get too much from Sykes lately, unless he looks into more than mtDNA, or MK was that far off and the mDNA is not human......any clue when he is to finish his work? Edited March 9, 2013 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 LeafTalker, your post gave me goosebumps. I do believe we are well into a societal (worldwide) collapse scenario, so I do wonder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 madison/Leaftalker - Just as an aside, I watched a Nova recently from last fall detailing the historic flips of the Earth's magnetic field...the average time between flips is about 200,000 years, this last span has been 700,000 already and geologists believe the weakening 'holes" in the magnetic field now are indicative of events prior to a full flip...how long that takes, and what impact no one really predicts, except there will be more solar wind....and many assume electronics will be affected....anyway.... the Hopi also have a bit of shared public mythology...(could have seen this on MQ..or AA..so haven't seen this by an anthropologist!) that BFs emerge when the Earth is out of balance..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 In that sense, it seems that the bond between bigfoot and the habituatiors is akin to a sacred trust. The bigfoot inherently understands that the habituators are not going to take advantage of the relationship for personal pecuniary gain by setting up camera traps or other investigative tools. I also respect that habituators will go to great lengths to keep the locations of their encounters secret. I used to think everything was all about a sacred trust, & being chosen & all that, but not so much anymore. After awhile it gets a little tiring to be constantly watched, tricked, & used. There was never any thought of getting my own proof as being a betrayal, because they knew every intricate detail of our lives, & us knowing about theirs didn't seem unfair. At first, I allowed researchers here because I didn't know anything about what was happening, or who these beings were, & mistakenly thought they could help. About all they wanted was proof to show the world, & after a few months, things were a lot clearer to me than to the researchers. They continued to be all for proving 100% flesh & blood creatures to science, & I had realized that science didn't have a prayer of catching up with these sneaky "paranormal" beings. I suppose that was the point of Ketchum's bigfoot protection initiative, but it does strike me as somewhat unfair to bigfoot (who has expended great effort to avoid recognition, except among a few trusted habituators) for the habituators to take advantage of the trust of bigfoot to collect samples in an effort to expose the creature to the world. Shouldn't the decision be left to bigfoot? There's no need to worry about us being unfair to Bigfoot. They know all about "unfair" & may have even invented it. If they are ever proven to exist, they won't be any easier to find. They can take care of themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 OHZoo, check this out. Cliff Barackman breaks down the Stacy Brown thermal footage in the way I wish all research is done! He did a great job. This is excellent thermal imaging. I think it's my favorite piece of evidence. Make sure to read all his notes at the link below the post. http://www.northamer...wn-footage.html Thanks madison. It will have to wait until monday when I am back at work. I have slow dial up at home Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted March 9, 2013 BFF Patron Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) Ketchum could have done fine on her on with or without habituators if she truly had something (or may still have and be too lazy to get it reanalyzed or provide valid peer review in progress). Habituators didn't sink her ship; what happened along the lines of all those cheerleaders encouraging her to focus....... keep your eyes on the prize and all that? What frustrates me is that no peer reviewer except maybe Sykes would touch her now that she made her bed and is lying in it so contentedly. Feel free to interpret the semantics behind the word lying anyway you so desire from a double entendre perspective if it suits your philosophical bent BTW. Edited March 9, 2013 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 they study us, not the other way around. They do things to us to see how we react. They have to do this to keep their edge. This whole bit about proving they exist so they can be protected is hogwash. Being off the scientific grid is better protection than being on it. My mentor went on record at a wildlife meeting saying, "If you want to get rid of starlings (an invasive species) put them on the endangered list and they will disappear!" Besides BF would not qualify as an endangered species. A population reduction of at least 50% over the last 10 years or three generations. An area of occupancy estimated to be less than 500 square kilometers. A population estimated to number less than 2500 mature individuals with clear evidence that this number is declining quickly. A total population estimated to number less than 250 mature individuals. Quantitative analysis showing the probability of extinction in the wild is at least 20% within 20 years or 5 generations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted March 9, 2013 BFF Patron Share Posted March 9, 2013 ^ Funny that yet we have the USFWS memo from Larry Battson that says otherwise. How to rectify the two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 As a zoologist who actually works with rare animals, I see no reason to think they are endangered. If anything they are increasing in numbers. They are found in all 49 states. In my county I have encountered them at 5 different localities. There are no large forests anywhere in this county. There is no way to accurately estimate their numbers. Just because they are rarely seen doesn't mean they are rare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 (edited) LeafTalker, your post gave me goosebumps. I do believe we are well into a societal (worldwide) collapse scenario, so I do wonder. .... the Hopi also have a bit of shared public mythology...(could have seen this on MQ..or AA..so haven't seen this by an anthropologist!) that BFs emerge when the Earth is out of balance..... I am by nature a scaredy-cat, so some of what I've heard scares me, too. But somewhere I am also coming to believe that it's important just to watch; and that understanding grows from watching; and that miracles happen when our understanding opens up. So, no worries. If we can just watch, and be open, a path will open for us. That's true for everyone, no matter who we are, or what we once thought, or what we think now. That is a very good point Sas! I really need to be careful huh? As for credibility lets just remember this is a BF forum after all. Out there in the 'real' world our credibility would be severely diminished for taking this subject seriously at all. Doing my utmost to keep an open mind guys so please bear with me. I've heard the 'hair-braiding', 'angel DNA', 'forest people' stuff being used to beat Ketchum over and over. Even now that the 'science' has been released we don't really know what we have. If Sykes were to release similar results then there would be so much less debate, Sykes will focus on the science and not the subject. Ketchum has claimed that Sykes has been in contact and will review her work. If the samples have been tainted or cross contaminated then we'll hopefully get confirmation on that from a source that is 'credible' but also open minded. @apehuman - Many thanks for your response. I guess different folks will have issues with MK for a variety of reasons. In my view she could have kept these to a minimum. Regarding the GenBank question. MK stated that for a sample to be uploaded into GenBank then permission needs to be given by the 'donor' themselves. Of course this 'permission' is impossible to obtain so the samples won't be available via this source. Awesome post, Mark. And I hadn't seen your post when I wrote what I wrote to Madison and Apehuman!!! But your post fits the theme so beautifully. Thanks for being such a fabulous theme-fitter (and courageous explorer)!!! Edited March 9, 2013 by LeafTalker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted March 9, 2013 Moderator Share Posted March 9, 2013 And how long did it take for people to start seeing the true nature of these creatures? Only a few chosen have now realized what they are about and now there are people getting on board . Enlightment comes only after it has been expieranced,well we have hit that threshold with these creatures. They do not need our protection when they already have it. Everything that we have they do not want and they do not care what we have. They live a perfect life on their own and if we enter it they know we will destroy it. So they choose who and where and when to make contact and on their terms.There rules and only their rules are we to live by with them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 That's right, Julio. They have no interest in humans at all except for the ones that can be useful to them. And they don't consider leaving Zagnut bars & pancakes as being useful. They might take them if they're there, but that's not what they need or want. They have an agenda, & it isn't in our best interest to be a part of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 Any idea on what their agenda might be SF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted March 9, 2013 Share Posted March 9, 2013 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts