WSA Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Yes, there is that DWA, but we both know there are some who won't go there. So, I was trying to approach this at a purely hypothetical level, and see where it goes
Guest DWA Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 According to the NAWAC website, their Board of Directors is chaired by a "biology professor" and two others are described as "professional anthropologist" and "wildlife ecologist". I know you will say that you're only using quote marks in that sentence because you are quoting their website directly, but it still reads as if you are skeptical of these 3 titles. Do you doubt them? If so, why? Well, one could say - and many seem to, as we see - that *what they are doing* puts it in quotes.
Guest Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Isn't NAWAC yet another example of science investigating bigfoot? How can we keep complaining that science won't examine bigfoot in a thread about some scientists claiming to be doing their level best to collect one? We have people with expertise in related scientific areas, but we do not have the resources of, say, a university, zoological organization, or similar institution. Nor do we have the standing to apply for and receive grant money. We're part-timers doing what we can on a shoe-string. Less than a shoe-string. On whatever those plastic things are at the ends of shoe-strings.
Drew Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Drew, do animals leave tracks in all substrates? How often does a BF poop anyway? No. Are you saying that tracking mammals is not basic field biology work? You don't need them to leave tracks in ALL substrates, just one, typically on a dirt road or trail. of course, in the winter, when snow is on the ground, tracking is even easier. Then it is game on. Follow the track until you find hair or poop. DNA. They poop as much as any other mammal. Here is a way to collect hair samples on tiny mammals: http://www.jove.com/video/2791/a-noninvasive-hair-sampling-technique-to-obtain-high-quality-dna-from Here is how they collect hair samples from larger mammals: It's not rocket science. http://www.nrmsc.usgs.gov/files/norock/products/2008_06_27_HairCollectionBookChapter_lowres.pdf The bycatch hair samples alone should show Bigfoot at some of the locations.
Guest Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 WRT to scat, we've found some interesting samples but there are a lot of bear in the area. We've never found scat that we felt confidently had to have come from an ape.
Guest DWA Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Isn't NAWAC yet another example of science investigating bigfoot? How can we keep complaining that science won't examine bigfoot in a thread about some scientists claiming to be doing their level best to collect one? We have people with expertise in related scientific areas, but we do not have the resources of, say, a university, zoological organization, or similar institution. Nor do we have the standing to apply for and receive grant money. We're part-timers doing what we can on a shoe-string. Less than a shoe-string. On whatever those plastic things are at the ends of shoe-strings. Exactly. Mainstream science is a networked enterprise. People contributing to that networked enterprise - by doing research that it considers legitimate - get funded to do that research. They can do it as a full-time job, and not as their - right, bipto? - "vacation." The evidence says this, and few things I have ever seen in the field of zoology have been said louder: If the mainstream took this seriously, sasquatch would have been confirmed. Long ago.
WSA Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Ahem...at the risk of telling you more than you might care to know about my own scatological habits in the backcountry Drew, I can tell you: You'd be hard pressed to recover any of my...umm...evidence. It is not exactly a skill only known to higher-functioning animals either. A minimal amount of thought, and environmental knowledge is all that is required to do this quite effectively. And so what if you find bona fide (you think) BF scat? What then? You can keep it in your freezer as long as you want to, but eventually (like some day when you have a power failure) you lose your enthusiasm, even for what you know to be a true specimen. Not to discount though its value as a sure-fire conversation starter. ("Honey....before you get us all another round of drinks, show them your frozen Sasquatch turd, why dontcha?" ) DNA evidence possibilties are next to nil, as far as I can tell. Can you track an animal with only that? Doubt it. All it will tell you is something was here then. Where did it go? Your guess is good, but only a guess. Will it return to this same spot the next time? Some animals do, and some don't. And if it will, on what schedule?
the parkie Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) Also, don't forget the old saying "A turd in the hand is worth more than poo in the bush". Edited July 16, 2013 by the parkie
Guest DWA Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 (edited) Ahem...at the risk of telling you more than you might care to know about my own scatological habits in the backcountry Drew, I can tell you: You'd be hard pressed to recover any of my...umm...evidence. It is not exactly a skill only known to higher-functioning animals either. A minimal amount of thought, and environmental knowledge is all that is required to do this quite effectively. And so what if you find bona fide (you think) BF scat? What then? You can keep it in your freezer as long as you want to, but eventually (like some day when you have a power failure) you lose your enthusiasm, even for what you know to be a true specimen. Not to discount though its value as a sure-fire conversation starter. ("Honey....before you get us all another round of drinks, show them your frozen Sasquatch turd, why dontcha?" ) DNA evidence possibilties are next to nil, as far as I can tell. Can you track an animal with only that? Doubt it. All it will tell you is something was here then. Where did it go? Your guess is good, but only a guess. Will it return to this same spot the next time? Some animals do, and some don't. And if it will, on what schedule? Alleged hairy hominoid scat has been found, with virtually a slam-dunk signature: parasites previously unknown to science were in it. (Unknown parasite = unknown host. Not a law, so much. But still.) Ref here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeti Poop will do nothing. Gonna take a body. Edited July 16, 2013 by DWA
Airdale Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 WRT the Lytro Light Field Camera, here is a link to a test report by PCMAG: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2402522,00.asp
1980squatch Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Um, bigger critters are almost always harder to find, since they are in general so much less in number...
the parkie Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Alleged hairy hominoid scat has been found, with virtually a slam-dunk signature: parasites previously unknown to science were in it. (Unknown parasite = unknown host. Not a law, so much. But still.) Do you have a link for that at all please?
Drew Posted July 16, 2013 Posted July 16, 2013 Um, bigger critters are almost always harder to find, since they are in general so much less in number... OK, if you don't want to track a large critter, do a flyover with a FLIR camera. You are making this harder than it needs to be.
Recommended Posts