Tired Of The Negativity, Cynicism And Backseat Researching? Read This.

[Guest]

Taken from here: https://sasquatchgenomeproject.org/qa/

It needs some further proof reading so that it correctly aligns with the data has been released but I very much enjoyed reading this.

The idea of them being a people is very exciting to me. It aligns with what the natives have told us along, you know the people who actually lived out in the woods and experienced it?

I'm tired of the cynicism towards the subject and the lack of respect for the native people stories. It is, plainly put, elitism and racist.

This is quoted from the Q&A page from the SGP website:

This Q & A addresses many of the initial questions expected as a result of the publication of the SGP’s research proving the existence of the beings commonly known in the U.S. as Bigfoot or Sasquatch.

It must be noted that the Bigfoot research community, while including many dedicated, well-meaning and enthusiastic people, has generally not learned from accumulated knowledge gained through sighting reports, eye witness testimony, Native American accounts, or the experiences of habituators and long-term witnesses. Instead, Bigfoot research has been held back by a culture of competition and contentiousness, and a pattern of cyclical debate that disregards the field’s own data and observances. It is the opinion of the SGP that this behavior, and the lack of adequate professional involvement, has prevented progress in the field, which is why the idea that Sasquatch were apes has been so pervasive.

While not intended to be a complete guide, the following questions and answers are based on common data and observances of the Bigfoot research community, the testimony of long-term witnesses and habituators, the knowledge of Native Americans, the received literature, and results of the Sasquatch Genome Project. E-mailed questions are welcome and may be answered here in the future.

The Q&A is divided into the following general topics:

A. Who and what are Sasquatch?

B. About the SGP study and its results

C. About samples and bodies

D. Sasquatch appearance

E. Sasquatch lifestyle

F. Miscellaneous

A. Who and what are Sasquatch?

1. What are Sasquatch?

The Sasquatch are an indigenous, aboriginal people. Their maternal lineage is human and their paternal lineage is an unknown hominin. Their genetics reveal no relation to homo Neanderthalensis (Neanderthal) or homo sapiens Altai (Denisova). Despite their often reported ape-like features, they have no genetic connection to apes. This means they are not related to the Pleistocene pongid, gigantopithecus blacki, believed by many in the Bigfoot research community to be a likely ancestor. More research is needed to further understand Sasquatch genetics.

The paternal lineage found in the nuclear DNA of Sasquatch suggests a distantly related hominin that evolved separately from humans, apes and other primates but evolved to the point where it could interbred with humans.

2. Why don’t we know more about the paternal lineage of the Sasquatch? Could the paternal species be homo heidelbergensis? What about other recently discovered human ancestors?

Sasquatch is a recently developed species. Haplotype analysis within the mitochondrial (maternal) DNA indicates that the species is only about 15,000 years old. Only a very small percentage of human remains in their nuclear (paternal) DNA, which is primarily of the unknown hominin.

The fossil record is incomplete. Fossilization happens only under special circumstances and fossils are challenging to locate. We simply have not yet encountered remains of the paternal species from which DNA can be extracted.

Homo heidelbergensis is a more recent suggestion for a Sasquatch ancestor, but this human species died out at 400,000 years ago, long before Sasquatch came into existence.

The human family tree has become more complicated with recent discoveries of other human ancestors, including the flat-faced fossil and the unknown hominin revealed through African DNA. More research is needed to learn more about the origins of Sasquatch.

3. How old is the Sasquatch species?

Genomic research indicates that the species is about 15,000 years old.

4. Why didn’t we already know about Sasquatch?

It may be argued that we’ve always known about them. In many ancient cultures, there are historical accounts, legends, artwork and stories about giants, hairy people, wild people, ogres, trolls and other beings fitting the basic description of the Sasquatch. In North America, the Sasquatch are considered to be a tribe by many native peoples. They are known by dozens of names, including Elder Brother, Boss of the Woods, Stick People, Momo, etc. U.S. settlers periodically encountered “wild men†and the accounts were published in the nation’s early newspapers. Even within the last century, people living in some areas saw wild people as just part of normal life.

At some point, the Sasquatch faded into mythology and seeing one became a reason to ridicule the witness. However, the 1967 Patterson/Gimlin film inspired relentless curiosity among volunteer researchers. The Internet later facilitated networking among people who shared this curiosity, and enabled formation of research groups and partnerships – some of which ultimately made the Sasquatch Genome Project possible.

It should be noted that many North American tribes have never forgotten their Elder Brothers. However, their knowledge, as well as that of habituators and long-term witnesses has generally been dismissed by the Bigfoot research community as lies, hoaxes or delusions..

5. How did the Sasquatch get to North America?

This is unknown at this time, and is one of the many questions that will require further research and attention from the scientific community.

6. Are Sasquatch related to similar beings reported around the world?

DNA samples from other continents must be collected and compared against those in this study to determine if there is any relation between the North American Sasquatch and similar beings reported in Asia, Africa, South America, Australia/New Zealand and Europe.

B. About the SGP study and its results

1. Is the SGP the first DNA study on Sasquatch? What made the SGP successful where others studies were not?

There have been several other attempts to test Sasquatch DNA. However, it is standard procedure to test mitochondrial DNA first, because it is more plentiful and easier to test than nuclear DNA. Of course, it was anticipated that Sasquatch DNA would be different from human DNA, so when these previous mitochondrial DNA tests came back as human, the results were interpreted as human contamination, inconclusive or unknown. These scientists and their results were not wrong, as Sasquatch mitochondrial DNA is human. The Sasquatch Genome Project simply went farther by testing the nuclear DNA, and that is where the species’ uniqueness reveals itself.

2. How did the SGP get started?

Dr. Melba Ketchum became intrigued with an alleged Yeti sample provided to her by television personality Josh Gates of the reality television series, Destination Truth. Because of her appearance on the show, she began to receive numerous potential Sasquatch DNA samples from the public. David Paulides of North American Bigfoot Search (NABS) subsequently sought her out for an extensive DNA project, and the pair appeared on the popular Internet radio show, Coast to Coast AM with George Noory, in the fall of 2010. In response to their public, on-air request for possible Sasquatch DNA, hundreds of samples arrived at Ketchum’s laboratory, many of which were not Sasquatch in origin. However, 106 of them were confirmed and used in the Sasquatch Genome Project’s study.

3. How were the Sasquatch samples confirmed?

Most of the potential DNA samples submitted were hair. All hair samples and were examined by a specialist who weeded out hair from humans, known animal species and synthetic fibers. Hair classified as unknown then underwent testing on its mitochondrial DNA. If the mitochondrial DNA on the unknown hair was human, the hair was identified as Sasquatch. Testing on the nuclear DNA came up as an unknown hominid.

Blood, tissue and saliva samples could not be screened in this manner, and went straight into DNA testing. The tests produced consistent results that identified the species.

4. How do you know the samples were not hoaxed or contaminated? How can you say they came from Sasquatch if collection was not documented on camera?

DNA cannot be faked, and forensic scientists are experts at dealing with genetic material that has been exposed to the elements. Contamination was managed per established routines commonly used in criminal cases, for example. Samples that were not viable were not included in the study.

The results were a hybrid human and unknown hominin, and were consistent across the study’s samples. If it was not Sasquatch, then there is another hairy, hybrid human species living in the wild.

5. How did the SGP make its case for the existence of Sasquatch?

The uniqueness of the DNA and its relationship to humans is the primary proof for Sasquatch’s existence. In addition, the SGP engaged the help of specialists in hair identification and pathology to determine the unique characteristics of Sasquatch hair, follicles and skin tissue. All indicated a species previously unknown to science.

C. About samples and bodies

1. If Sasquatch are so elusive, how did the study obtain samples?

The project’s samples were found in numerous ways. Most samples were hair, found on trees, fences, hair traps, in sleeping areas and even on a garage door. One sample submitter found an apparently very popular scratching post tree, based on the numerous hairs left behind. Some blood was obtained from objects apparently involved in incidents leading to Sasquatch being injured.

2. How do you know the samples came from Sasquatch and not some other species?

The DNA information provided by the genome clearly indicate a hybrid species of human and unknown hominin. Sasquatch is the only candidate. If it was not Sasquatch, then there is another hairy, hybrid human species living in the wild.

3. What about provenance and chain of evidence? How do you know these samples were not contaminated by the people who handled them?

Provenance is not a concern with the DNA itself because DNA cannot be faked, and forensic scientists are experts at dealing with genetic material that has been exposed to the elements. Contamination was managed per established routines commonly used in criminal cases, for example. Samples that were not viable were not included in the study. Human contamination would have resulted in human nuclear DNA, which did not happen.

Provenance did matter in terms of the state/province of sample collection. Sample submitters signed paperwork attesting to this information, as well as the specific circumstances related to collection.

4. What were the best samples included in the study?

A tissue sample from an alleged Sasquatch shooting was the best sample. It was about three inches long, about one-half inch thick and about one-half inch wide, with hair attached. It provided enough material for additional analysis, including pathological examination of the skin and underlying tissue. Other excellent samples included blood and tissue from apparent Sasquatch injuries.

5. What were the most challenging samples included in the study?

The hair was challenging in that Sasquatch hair has practically no DNA in the shaft. Only samples with follicles yielded enough DNA for the study. This meant that many of our hair samples could not be used for DNA testing, even though it was clear from the hair analysis alone that they were Sasquatch hair. Of course, we can now positively identify Sasquatch hair on its own, which may be useful for conducting population studies by hair traps, but without follicles the hair is useless for genetic research.

6. Aren’t the samples contaminated because they were outside in the elements?

Forensic scientists routinely deal with DNA in criminal cases that has been exposed to the elements, sometimes for many years. Forensic scientists have developed procedures for samples containing DNA from multiple sources, or which have a small amount of DNA.

Of the study’s samples, a tissue sample collected by Dr. Curt Nelson from a screw board booby trap at a cabin in the Snelgrove Lake area of Ontario, Canada, was probably the sample that had been exposed to the elements for the longest period of time. Collection of this sample was featured in an episode of the reality television series, Monsterquest. Even so, modern forensic analysis was able to confirm that this sample was Sasquatch in origin.

7. Is it possible to fool a DNA scientist by mixing human DNA with other DNA, producing test results that appear to be a different species?

No, a DNA scientist cannot be fooled in this manner. A mix of DNA samples would reveal the sources of the different types of DNA in the sample. For example, the two New Mexico samples submitted through Crypto Four Corners required that the Sasquatch DNA be isolated from skunk and rabbit DNA.

8. How can DNA prove the existence of the species without a body?

DNA is part of a body. By comparing a DNA sample with the DNA of known species, enough detailed information is available to determine a sample’s relationship to known species. Only one sample is needed to identify a new species. However, due to long-term skepticism regarding the existence of Sasquatch, the Sasquatch Genome Project intentionally went above and beyond what was necessary to confirm the species. Samples from 106 individual Sasquatch were analyzed by multiple scientists and laboratories over a four-year period in a double-blind study, all reaching the same conclusions.

9. What does double-blind mean?

Other laboratories and scientists were not told what they were testing when they were contracted to test the Sasquatch samples. This ensured the integrity of the replication of the findings from test to test to test.

10. Where are the Sasquatch bodies? Why haven’t we found any Sasquatch remains in the woods?

According to Native Americans, habituators, long-term witnesses and some researchers, Sasquatch bury their dead and have sometimes been witnessed doing so. We must also remember that Mother Nature does a quick and efficient job of disposing of remains.

11. Can a grave be excavated to obtain a Sasquatch body for study?

This may be a point of debate. Some may think it is unethical while others may think that such an excavation would be alright as part of an archaeological study.

12. What about digging in ancient mounds where Native American legends say Sasquatch are buried?

It is highly unlikely that an excavation would be permitted in burial mounds already claimed by Native American tribes.

13. What about the bones of “large†Native Americans said to be in museums throughout the country? Might they be Sasquatch and can their DNA be tested?

Reports of large skeletal remains certainly raise this question. If DNA can identify such remains as Sasquatch, then physical anthropologists would finally have some Sasquatch bones to examine. This would require more research, as well as permissions and access to such remains. The SGP encourages museums housing such remains to make them available for analysis. While the SGP would want access to small samples for testing, the Sasquatch Research Foundation would want to connect the museums with specialists for other analysis.

14. Why aren’t Sasquatch in the fossil record?

The fossil record is not complete, and fossilization is not common. It happens only under specific circumstances and mostly in depositional environments, not ones that are being eroded. Locating fossils is as much luck (or more so) as it is science. Perhaps someday, fossilized Sasquatch remains will be unearthed.

15. Why weren’t submitted teeth and bones used in the study?

Extracting DNA from bones and teeth require different procedures from hair, blood, tissue and saliva. It was decided to stick to one testing regimen to ensure consistency within the study. Tooth and bone samples can be tested in future studies.

16. Why haven’t hunters ever shot any Sasquatch?

One of the samples in the Sasquatch Genome Project is from an alleged shooting incident. Within the Bigfoot research community, there have been multiple reports of hunters shooting Bigfoot through the years. According to some stories, bodies were retrieved by other Sasquatch. Other stories indicate that upon closer inspection of the bodies, hunters were horrified to realize that they had killed a person and left the bodies. In addition, there are some groups of people who are said to hunt Sasquatch people as big game, and there are witnesses to these hunts. Some of this information may surface now that the results of the Sasquatch Genome Project have been announced.

17. Who owns the samples?

The sample submitters own their samples, although most were consumed by the testing process.

18. How much did it cost the sample submitters to have their samples tested?

Due to the generosity of SGP benefactors Wally Hersom, Adrian Erickson and others, no fees were charged to the sample submitters.

D. Sasquatch appearance

1. What do Sasquatch look like?

Descriptions of Sasquatch vary widely. This is easily explained by the fact that they are a hybrid species, which means they experience genetic recombination of traits. They range from looking very human-like to more animal-like, and everything between the two extremes. Based on witness reports, their behavior and body style also vary greatly. It is important to note that no witness can be said to be “wrong†in what they have seen … again, genetic recombination accounts for the tremendous variations seen in this hybrid species. So not only does the SGP validate witnesses by proving Sasquatch to be real, it validates the differences in what they have reported seeing.

Generally, Sasquatch may or may not have a “saggital crest†that gives their heads a slight cone shape. They have heavy brows, sometimes even distinct brow ridges. Their shoulders are often reported as very wide. Their hands are like ours, just much larger, but some report that the thumb aligns with the palm in a slightly different manner.

Their skin color varies in color. Their faces can look totally human, very ape-like, or anything between these two extremes. Their noses vary, but frequently look like the wide, broad noses of Australian aborigines. Sometimes, their canine teeth (or “eye teethâ€) are elongated. Their eyes are large and some witnesses report seeing no whites due to the large size of their irises.

Their faces might have a lot of hair or no hair at all. In fact, not all Sasquatch are hairy – some hairless or near-hairless ones have been reported. Most are covered in hair of a few inches in length, and can range from deep black to various shades of gray brown, red or tan to totally white. There have been sightings of “calico†Sasquatch, but it is unknown if this is an actual hair color or the result of efforts to camouflage themselves by staining their hair with mud and other substances.

2. How big are they?

Based on sighting reports readily available online, the average height of a Sasquatch man seems to be around eight to seven feet, but some tower over the crowd at 12 feet or more. Sasquatch women are a bit shorter. Many are barrel-chested, with thick arms and legs but in some areas, witnesses report that they have a wider waist..

3. Are their feet really big?

The name of “Bigfoot†came about because their large footprints are much larger than human prints, but their feet appear to be in proportion to their bodies.

4. Why are there so few images of Sasquatches?

Most sightings are fleeting, lasting only a few seconds before the Sasquatch disappears from view. People are usually simply not prepared with a camera in hand. And even if they are, they just don’t seem to be fast enough capture sudden, unexpected sightings. Adding to the challenge is that their typically dark hair makes Sasquatch difficult to photograph, as dark colors absorb light. Adjusting exposure for such a situation, in a hurry, is challenging for manual cameras and practically impossible for automatic cameras. Even lighter-colored Sasquatch can blend easily into the shadows of vegetation. Most Sasquatch images are shaky, blurred, dark blobs … hence the term, “blobsquatches.â€

Sasquatch also do not like having their picture taken. According to habituators and long-term witnesses, they know what cameras do and what pictures are. If they see a camera in your hand, they will hide. Sasquatch are known to avoid, foil, deactivate or destroy automatic cameras left in the woods by researchers.

E. How do Sasquatch live?

This section will be questioned by Bigfoot enthusiasts who are not familiar with the complete wealth of information available on the subject. This general information is based on the common knowledge of the greater Bigfoot research community, the knowledge of Native Americans, the testimony of habituators and long-term witnesses, and data from the Sasquatch Genome Project. If the information is unfamiliar, we can only suggest that you do more research into the wealth of information available online.

1. Where do Sasquatch live?

The Sasquatch live where they can find shelter, food and good water. Their habitat is not restricted to wilderness areas. Many have been found in the mountains, on farms and in swamps. They live in desert-like areas as well as in the forest. Sometimes living near suburban areas. Sasquatch appear to be able to adapt to many living different conditions.

In North America, Sasquatch have been reported in all 48 continental states and across Canada. Many Bigfoot research organizations maintain sighting report databases online. It is necessary to review all sources to obtain a well-rounded perspective of the available data and observances.

Other populations of what appear to be similar beings have been reported all over the world. In Russia, they are called Almas, Almasty or Snowman, among other names. In China, they are called Yeren and in Tibet, the Yeti. In Australia, they are known as Yowie.

2. How large is the Sasquatch population?

This is unknown. We do not believe them to be endangered, but more research is needed. The resistance of Bigfoot research groups to share information and the lack of a comprehensive clearinghouse of Sasquatch information has left the field’s data fragmented across a large number of sources.

3. Why don’t we see Sasquatch more often?

Encounters remain rare because the Sasquatch prefer to avoid us. They have a great fear and distrust of humans. Their skills of stealth have been perfected, and they seem to know the acuity of our senses better than we do. They use shadows, statue-like stillness and other strategies to trick our eyes. They are able to move in complete silence and despite their size, can be very graceful. They are not totally nocturnal, but they do tend to move around mostly at night, protected by the darkness.

Sasquatch communicate with bird calls, rock clacks, wood knocks, howls, whoops and other sounds to which we humans are generally oblivious. They build stick structures to communicate information to each other about territory, hunting areas, water sources, places to avoid, etc. Humans have trouble distinguishing these structures from natural formations. With these effective strategies and others, Sasquatch live around us while avoiding detection. Some long-term witnesses and habituators understand these communications. More research is needed to better understand these intriguing people.

4. What do Sasquatch eat?

Sasquatch are omnivores. Their diet includes fruit, vegetables, nuts, berries, roots, mushrooms, leaves, and even some tree bark. In some parts of the U.S., they seem to prefer deer but will eat a variety of other animals, birds and fish. They seem to rarely kill and eat livestock. They will kill aggressive dogs but are thought to rarely eat them. It is believed that they eat cats. They sometimes raid crops to a varying extent, but seem to be fond of corn.

5. What is their caloric need?

This is unknown and requires more research.

6. How intelligent are Sasquatch? Why have they not evolved like us?

We must not judge the Sasquatch by our standards. Long-term witnesses have reported that they are not interested in living our way of life and prefer living closer to nature. Sasquatch seem very intelligent despite their primitive lifestyle. After all, it would take human-like intelligence to avoid humans and our technologies for so long. According to some long-term witnesses, they not only possess spoken language, but written language, as well. At least two language studies are underway. Cultural and physical anthropologists need to devote attention to the Sasquatch, as there is much to learn about their culture and lifestyle.

7. Do they use fire?

There are some reports that some do use very small fires, to avoid detection. Other reports indicate a fear of fire. Perhaps this varies across their population. More research is needed.

8. Do Sasquatch talk?

Yes, Sasquatch talk. For years, Bigfoot researchers have reported “samurai chatter,†whispering and other vocalizations. The testimony of Native Americans, habituators and long-term witnesses that Sasquatch can speak English as well as other languages. However, linguistic research indicates that Sasquatch speak at a much faster rate than we do, making them very difficult to understand. Some long-term witnesses are able to easily understand them because of years of interaction. The North American Bigfoot Search Web site contains some details about ongoing Sasquatch linguistic research. And a book about Sasquatch language and culture is being prepared by a professor of anthropology at The University of Virginia.

9. Are Sasquatch dangerous?

Generally speaking, no. However, they are people – each individual has their own personality, just like humans. One should greet a strange Sasquatch with the same caution one would greet a strange human. Just like us, they are intensely protective of their children. Their rights to self-protection and the protection of their loved ones should be respected.

Typically shy and non-confrontational, their usual response when seen by humans, or when uncomfortable with a situation, is to simply leave. There have been no confirmed reports of a Sasquatch harming a human, but there are several stories of humans being attacked or harassed into abandoning an area. Some are more aggressive than others and that aggression should be taken very seriously. More research is needed to understand their culture and way of life.

10. Do I need to stay out of the forest? Do I need to stop camping or hiking?

No, that is not necessary. Sasquatch are not suddenly going to become less elusive just because we know they are real. You will likely never see one in your lifetime. Look how difficult it has been to prove they exist – with some people literally spending decades searching for them with no results. There are far more dangerous things in the woods than Sasquatch.

11. Where can I go to the woods to find Sasquatch?

We highly discourage a flood of people rushing into the forest to look for Sasquatch. Sasquatch do not want to be seen and will avoid you. They are elusive and you will likely never see one in your lifetime. Again, some people have spent decades searching for Sasquatch and have never seen one.

12. Is hunting Sasquatch legal?

The Sasquatch are people, not animals. They are a hybrid human. Killing one is murder.

13. What if I do see a Sasquatch?

Keep your distance. If they walk away, respect their decision and do not follow or chase them. If they hold their ground, they are expecting you to leave. When you are leaving, calmly do so. Do not be surprised if they escort you out of the area. There is no point in reaching for a camera. They will be gone in an instant.

14. What if I see a Sasquatch child?

Do not attempt to interact with the child. Calmly leave the area immediately. They are very protective parents.

15. How do I know if I get too close?

The Sasquatch use a number of tactics to make unwanted guests go away. They’ll throw rocks or sticks, sometimes very large ones. They won’t hit you, but they’ll get the message across that you are not welcome. They may create a lot of noise by breaking branches, shaking trees, growling, roaring or even bluff-charging at you to scare you away. If you experience any of these behaviors, calmly leave the area.

Sometimes, Sasquatch will escort you out of an area by shadowing your movements, just out of sight in the woods or darkness. If you experience this, do not assume it is a Sasquatch, as some bears have been known to do this. Calmly leave the area but do not run, as that may trigger a predator response from the bear.

16. Why do they have some animal-like behaviors and characteristics?

More research is needed to better understand their behavior, which could be necessary for their survival in the wild, or it could be genetic – or a mixture of both, since as a hybrid species, they experience recombination of genetic traits.

F. Miscellaneous

1. What is a habituator?

A habituator is someone who has nurtured a long-term relationship with Sasquatch either on their property or in a research area. This relationship is called habituation.

2. Why haven’t habituators obtained clear, convincing photos and videos of Sasquatch?

It is a popular belief in the Bigfoot research community that habituators are unable to substantiate their claims. This is not necessarily true. Many habituators simply choose not to try to obtain evidence out of respect for their Sasquatch friends’ privacy, or because they determine that there is no point in making the effort because the field will simply dismiss any evidence they offer. Many others do possess such evidence, but because of fear, distrust or even knowledge of instances in which hunters have trespassed on other habituators’ properties to try to kill a Sasquatch, they choose not to share their evidence. It is almost a unanimous attitude in the habituation community that protection of their Sasquatch friends is more important than helping to prove the species real.

3. Can I visit a habituator to see a Sasquatch?

Sasquatch are not animals in a zoo. They are people. Habituators are very protective of their extended families and with few exceptions, will not allow outsiders to visit just to see one because this behavior would be considered exploitive and disrespectful. Be cautious about anyone who openly invites strangers to their property to see Sasquatch for a fee, or even for free. A legitimate habituator will simply not do this unless it is within the framework of research and only under strict parameters..

4. Why do some people see them repeatedly, and others never do?

Long-term witnesses and some field researchers become known to the Sasquatch in their areas. The Sasquatch become comfortable and allow themselves to be seen by these individuals. Other researchers may devote incredible time in certain areas, increasing the chances for a sighting. Some people are more observant and know the signs of Sasquatch presence. And some people are just lucky.

It must be noted again that Sasquatch are people. As people, they choose with whom they interact. It has been observed by Native Americans, habituators and long-term witnesses that they simply like certain individuals more than they do others. And if they don’t like you, they will avoid you

5. Are there groups, organizations, blogs, discussion boards or books that would provide more useful information?

The SGP feels comfortable only recommending Web sites and books provided by its participating groups and sample submitters, and which are noted on the Groups and Submitters page. However, this must not be misinterpreted to mean that there are not other excellent materials available. Look for material that deals with Sasquatch as people.

As for groups, the SGP organization intends to facilitate research by forming collaborations between the scientific community and knowledgeable field researchers, habituators and long-term witnesse. The Global Sasquatch Foundation , is dedicated to ensuring that these wild people are not hunted, and that efforts are made to provide public education and research.

7. What is the future of the Bigfoot research community?

The Bigfoot research community must change its perspectives and incorporate more anthropological research methods or be left behind. However, it should be noted that anthropologists and other professionals will need the experience of field investigators who do understand much about the Sasquatch. This also includes people with continuous contact with these hominins. We are at a time, that putting aside our differences and working together will help us all..

8. How will future Sasquatch research be funded?

It is hoped that proof the Sasquatch’s existence will generate federal funding that has so far been denied to scientists pursuing this arena. Private funding also will provide critical resources.

9. What is next for Sasquatch DNA research?

The Sasquatch Genome Project will continue its genetic analysis as funding is available.

10. What do the Sasquatch call themselves?

In parts of North America, long-term witnesses report that they call themselves different things, such as “Shamoona,†“Nermanuh,†“Anyaki,†“The People†or “Our People.â€

11. Are the Sasquatch aware that we now know they are real?

Yes, we have reports from long-term witnesses that they do know. It concerns them greatly because again, they have a great fear and distrust of us. Yet all they want is to live with us in peace. We hope that this research lays the foundation for making that possible, as it is the best outcome for both our peoples.

The Sasquatch have no natural enemies. Their biggest threat that they have are us. They only want to be left alone to live their lives .

Edited February 14, 2013 by Cornelius

[GuyInIndiana]

I'm tired of the cynicism towards the subject and the lack of respect for the native people stories. It is, plainly put, elitism and racist.

I find it equally elistist and racist to assume that people who don't agree with Native American folklore as being "factual", are elistist and racist.

Once again, a VERY broad brush has been stroked here.

[adam2323]

I find it equally elistist and racist to assume that people who don't agree with Native American folklore as being "factual", are elistist and racist.

Once again, a VERY broad brush has been stroked here.

I have to.agree its a broad stroke and unfounded.speculation. I DO believe they exist but not as any kinda of a race of people but then again that's another thread

[Guest DWA]

^^^I might have to agree.

Native legends abound for the animals we know about. "Orangutan" means man of the forest.. And "orang pendek" - OK not so much "known" as in verified by the West yet - means little man or short person. But the natives are very clear that they aren't people.

Likewise, Native American legends I think make it rather clear that our "men of the forest" aren't homo sapiens.

Evidence does not seem to yield any signs that these animals are human in any way.

And to take exception, both to that and to the polite request that, well, if one have proof otherwise one share it, is, well...it kind of makes it hard to take the exception seriously.

[Guest TxNative]

Thanks, Cornelius....for posting this! Very interesting and a good read.

Edited February 14, 2013 by TxNative

[Guest]

Thank you for sharing this~

[Guest]

Yes thank you Cornelious

[TimB]

Excellent examples, gentlemen, of the point Cornelius was attempting to make...

[Guest]

The NA stories and the PGF are the only reasons I think they exist. I am sick of hoaxers and frauds who tell us to wait for them to "get their ducks in a row" and then never produce anything but press conferences. If you have a body or very convincing video, put it on the internet. Get your ducks in a row first, then show your cards. Hell, I don't even care if you want to charge for it, I am tired of debates over who has the most convincing fraud. Given all the frauds to date, where we are asked to wait for a press conference or DNA sequencing or we need a bigger freezer, it's not a surprise that they are all viewed with skepticism. My .02.

[bipedalist]

What these last two posters said ^^

[Guest]

Tired of the negativity: absolutely. Very interesting read, thanks.

Quote: "At least two language studies are underway.", "And a book about Sasquatch language and culture is being prepared by a professor of anthropology at The University of Virginia."

I was only aware of Scott Nelson's work on BF language. I would definitely love to read that book.

[Guest gershake]

Quote: "At least two language studies are underway.", "And a book about Sasquatch language and culture is being prepared by a professor of anthropology at The University of Virginia."

Oh wow, I missed that part.

[Guest PorkSol]

It's not racist. Europeans believed that Goblins existed. We're not even looking for goblins.

So Native American folklore is getting more of an investigation than European folklore.

[Guest DWA]

^^^^Funny you mention that.

I think a major reason Europeans on this continent have dismissed sasquatch is European traditions, which clearly depict the "wildman" as imaginary.

[Guest]

It's not racist. Europeans believed that Goblins existed. We're not even looking for goblins.

So Native American folklore is getting more of an investigation than European folklore.

Yeah I guess your right. But what I was getting at is the belittling of a people whose cultural story is intertwined with nature in a profound way. They shared the same environment. We have a cultural narrative that describes this. But it gets poo pooed to the point, where to me, elitism forms from the cynicism that is behind such thoughts as 'you don't know what you saw and your tales are a myth because we say so'. That's the sentiment I feel. And their narrative, arguably the most valuable piece of circumstantial evidence, is so universally ignored by many in this subject including believers and skeptics, that the cognitive dissonance and/or cavalier dismissal borders on racism.

PS: I am Che Cornelius btw. I got to lead the rebel brigade against imperialism.