southernyahoo Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Washington state samples (including a sample from the Olympic project): 1. Cow 2. Cow 3. Black bear 4. White tail deer 5. Canine, wolf or dog (olympic project sample submitted by Derek Randles) 6. Canine, wolf or dog (Marcel Cagey) 7. NOT STATED 8. Arizona sample: Racoon 9. Texas sample: Horse 10. Michigan sample: Porcupine 11. Sierra Kills Smeja submitted hair samples of a black bear. No steak as such. Boot was tested for blood and NO blood could be found on the boot. He looked a broken man and was in tears after hearing the results. 12. Placer County, Northern Cal. (Dan shirley and Garland Fields) Black bear DID ANYONE ELSE PICK UP THAT ONE SAMPLE FROM WASHINGTON STATE WAS UNACCOUNTED FOR? Sykes did state at the ens of the programme that the US project did not find a 'bigfoot' so it is somewhat perplexing.. Well those were the negatives apparently. They were still taking in samples until very recently as I understand from bigfootology, so it appears we haven't heard from all of them yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 the documentary purported to have tested 12 samples (only?)... it wasnt definitively stated that only those 12 were tested but that was the impression given throughout with statements like 'from the 12 samples tested...' etc. In an email i received from Sykes after I contacted him to find out more about the oxford-lausanne collaboration, he stated that all samples had been tested and results were being collated for peer review and consequent journal publication (date of which depending on journal). I posted the email on the forum previously. If anyone wants the original i can forward it to your email just PM me your email address. Fantastic news indeed if they are still taking in samples, but doesnt correspond with what Sykes himself said in the email. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 (edited) Washington state samples (including a sample from the Olympic project): 1. Cow 2. Cow 3. Black bear 4. White tail deer 5. Canine, wolf or dog (olympic project sample submitted by Derek Randles) 6. Canine, wolf or dog (Marcel Cagey) 7. NOT STATED 8. Arizona sample: Racoon 9. Texas sample: Horse 10. Michigan sample: Porcupine 11. Sierra Kills Smeja submitted hair samples of a black bear. No steak as such. Boot was tested for blood and NO blood could be found on the boot. He looked a broken man and was in tears after hearing the results. 12. Placer County, Northern Cal. (Dan shirley and Garland Fields) Black bear DID ANYONE ELSE PICK UP THAT ONE SAMPLE FROM WASHINGTON STATE WAS UNACCOUNTED FOR? Sykes did state at the ens of the programme that the US project did not find a 'bigfoot' so it is somewhat perplexing.. Yes, and it wasnt marked "out" (red) either. Nothing more about it said, very dubious practice. But than, I saw an Sykes interview on some other Yeti show where he stated that the DNA they tastet was mysterious. In an presentation at the weired weekend he mentioned this show, and told that as they filmed there, the tests werent made, and to streamline the production they, at that point, also made the interview for the tests conclusion. They made three versions. Ape found, nohting found, mysterious. After the tests the production company just edited the "right" one in. The incorrect map animation might point to some harsh reedit. Maybe because of the paper in peer review? How much review can it take to pass, if its just nice sequence with solid blast matches. Edited October 27, 2013 by Data Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stan Norton Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Can't imagine that the DNA results of common wildlife and farmyard animals would do much for Sykes' reputation. Would anyone really be interested in a 'we found cow DNA' paper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oonjerah Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 #7 - Not stated. That's a tease? It was a viable sample. But he's not telling us what it was at this time? So people will buy the book that changes our understanding of human history? I'm sure the project was expensive. I like that he's a successful author. Hmmm. ... OK. There was hype for blockbuster findings. Did he ever actually say that he'd reveal them on the TV show, or is Bigfoot Files just an advertisement for the book? I do feel misled at this point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 (edited) Can't imagine that the DNA results of common wildlife and farmyard animals would do much for Sykes' reputation. Would anyone really be interested in a 'we found cow DNA' paper? Well, the guy is testing what people send him. This is what they're sending him. For both yeti and sasquatch, what's being tested is corollary to the most compelling evidence, i.e., sightings and tracks. Sykes can't test Meldrum's opinion on the Shipton and Cronin tracks, for example. The biggest find he may come up with is the "Himalayan polar bear." He's right: now we need to find a specimen of that bear. And note ANYTHING else that the researchers going for that find. None of this "I'm not telling my colleagues I saw a yeti" anymore. Science needs to take the blinkers all the way off before I trust a biotic survey that, nope, didn't find bigfoot. Right Smedley...? Um, where's Smedley...? Edited October 27, 2013 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest zenmonkey Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 Link???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 the documentary purported to have tested 12 samples (only?)... it wasnt definitively stated that only those 12 were tested but that was the impression given throughout with statements like 'from the 12 samples tested...' etc. In an email i received from Sykes after I contacted him to find out more about the oxford-lausanne collaboration, he stated that all samples had been tested and results were being collated for peer review and consequent journal publication (date of which depending on journal). I posted the email on the forum previously. If anyone wants the original i can forward it to your email just PM me your email address. Fantastic news indeed if they are still taking in samples, but doesnt correspond with what Sykes himself said in the email. http://bigfootology.com/ UPDATE #2- October 2013 Most people know that the public submission of hair samples has been closed for some time, but some hair samples with excellent provenance were still being accepted and submitted through, Bigfootology, Bryan’s agent for samples. There were a few samples that were sent to Bryan that have potential and Bryan and I discussed which samples to still test in terms of high to low potential. Bryan told me this morning that he has made the decision on which of those last few samples he is testing now, which are samples that we have already submitted to him and he has current possession of because other factors have now come into play for us to stop testing for the project. So there are five last samples that he has put in for testing – pro bono. He has stated that he will go ahead and implement the plan that if anyone wants to submit samples they can but the submitter will have to absorb any costs for that testing (approximately $1500) and if the sample does prove to test as an authentic Bigfoot hair the fee for analysis will be refunded. We are putting together a package that will come out with the release of the paper detailing an incentive for people to submit samples and how to do that properly, so stay tuned for that. Many will find it interesting. It looks as though there was still behind the scenes submissions going on when publicly they had stopped, so it wouldn't surprise me if there are more that were not reported on in the program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 (edited) There is always next weeks episode. That is most likely where the human history angle will be revealed. Looking forward to that. Edited October 27, 2013 by dmaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TexasTracker Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 LINK.????? anybody.... anybody Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 (edited) "Bryan told me this morning that he has made the decision on which of those last few samples he is testing now, which are samples that we have already submitted to him and he has current possession of because other factors have now come into play for us to stop testing for the project." Does anyone else find this wording interesting? What does Mr. Mullis (if this post was made by Mullis) mean by "other factors"? Edited October 27, 2013 by LeafTalker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest crabshack Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 ^ why the "men in black" told him to stop........just kidding well maybe not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 27, 2013 Share Posted October 27, 2013 LINK.????? anybody.... anybody http://apps.channel4.com/app/4od/ you can try downloading the channel 4 app on your phone or google 4oD and watch it online through the channel 4 replay site, but not sure if you can watch it outside of the UK or Europe.. Cant see it posted on youtube yet either but keep checking as a kindly person uploaded part 1 online pretty quickly after it was broadcast . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Junior Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 They must feel there is something to it and its unfortunate they didn't meet the best candidates out there doing things in the best way. This program was good, I liked they pressed smedja..they also appear to be going about gettin the samples and testing the same way as they did on the yeti. There was no great result however they did show their academic science world this is a subject that can be taken serious with no stigma..all about answers. I just wish Brian and his team had been involved some how. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yowiie Posted October 28, 2013 Share Posted October 28, 2013 Just getting back to those boots. Wasn't it said on this forum that they were soaked in blood If so how could it be not possible to extract a sample? Why did Sykes go to the US to see Smeja? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts