Guest Posted October 28, 2013 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? 4 people that submitted samples were given the results in person by Sykes (in the US). Smeja did state that the boots had blood from the juvenile he shot on them - he stated that on the doc and as we know it has been discussed here and caused a load of controversy and debate about the kill club and whether or not he was hoaxing etc. The lab could find NOTHING on the boots at all. Smeja submitted a clean pair of boots, he didnt even bother to smear them with a chop from the butchers. Why did he hoax and then submit samples? Maybe those here closer to him know. From my view he looks like a man that needs help. He broke down in tears when confronted by Sykes. Its all a very poor show for the BF community once again hoaxers making us all look like *****.
yowiie Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 That's for sure, you guys have your fair share of hoaxes in the USA, we have enough here in Australia The whole Smeja incident stunk from the start
BobbyO Posted October 28, 2013 SSR Team Posted October 28, 2013 4 people that submitted samples were given the results in person by Sykes (in the US). Smeja did state that the boots had blood from the juvenile he shot on them - he stated that on the doc and as we know it has been discussed here and caused a load of controversy and debate about the kill club and whether or not he was hoaxing etc. The lab could find NOTHING on the boots at all. Smeja submitted a clean pair of boots, he didnt even bother to smear them with a chop from the butchers. Why did he hoax and then submit samples? Maybe those here closer to him know. From my view he looks like a man that needs help. He broke down in tears when confronted by Sykes. Its all a very poor show for the BF community once again hoaxers making us all look like *****. You have to bear in mind that the boots had be worn for a year plus after what happened, they were then handed to Bart C after that kind of time and were obviously not worn any more until testing. Does that time frame rid the boots of enough stuff that can be extracted a year plus on when tested ? I don't know. But i do not for one second believe Justin Smeja is or has hoaxed anyone and i think you're out of order for suggesting he has just because Professor X didn't find any blood on boots without adding the context of how he obtained the boots and secondly, when we all know as Smeja has said himself, that the piece of " Steak " wasn't necessarily from what he shot. He has said numerous times that the sample was in no way certain to have come from what he shot. The only reason anyone would look like a " **** " is if they shout their mouth off about something they have no idea exists or not. I didn't, and i've seen one of these things and have no doubt at all, testing boots, hairs and tissue or not, that these things exist. 2
Guest ZeTomes Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 The force is strong with the power of denial.
southernyahoo Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 Something I wish for in these studies is paralell morphology documentation so it can be known what the samples are like in structure, length and appearance before they are destroyed. I hope Sykes is doing this, just in case he finds the "golden" hair. Knowing the morphology to look for would seriously help the bigfootologists.
LeafTalker Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 I agree with Bobby-O. I don't think Smeja hoaxed anything. And I also remember (when it was first reported either that the boots had been submitted somewhere for testing, or might possibly be submitted for some kind of test) many rounds of BFF comments about those boots. I remember 1) the doubtfulness that any material they might have contained could be retrieved after that material had dried up, and 2) the concern about the difficulty of isolating such material from similar materials from other hunting "events". As to his breakdown: Imagine you've been under the microscope for three years, with many, many people who have no first-hand knowledge of you and your circumstances claiming to "know" what you've done or haven't done, and calling you a "hoaxer"! -- and then someone with supposed top-notch credentials appears to give you one more chance to vindicate yourself, once and for all -- and says, Sorry, no dice. How would you feel?
MIB Posted October 28, 2013 Moderator Posted October 28, 2013 BobbyO - plused!! Some folks ought to go back and re-read the threads, re-read the questions and answers, and take them into account. MIB
Guest shoot1 Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 Just getting back to those boots... Why did Sykes go to the US to see Smeja? To get some "Reality TV" style footage of human drama for his mockumentary - and no, I didn't even watch it because it was so predictable. When will people accept that we need to organize and fund long-term expeditions with the goal of shooting one to get a type-specimen? Pursuing and promoting any other goal is a pointless, fruit-less waste of time - unless, of course, you're only in this for the money. If there is no Sasquatch then these will just be well-organized snipe hunts. If there is a Sasquatch then it can change our understanding of human history, genetics, evolution, and possibly lead to advances in gene-therapy. I agree with Bobby-O. I don't think Smeja hoaxed anything... As to his breakdown: Imagine you've been under the microscope for three years, with many, many people who have no first-hand knowledge of you and your circumstances claiming to "know" what you've done or haven't done, and calling you a "hoaxer"! -- and then someone with supposed top-notch credentials appears to give you one more chance to vindicate yourself, once and for all -- and says, Sorry, no dice. How would you feel? To me this lends even more credibility to his story. It's improbable that someone would fabricate a story that makes him look bad (for possibly poaching, killing a baby sasquatch, and for not collecting evidence), he clearly believes it, so I believe he is telling the truth.
chelefoot Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 In regards to the boots: We were also told that not only did Justin wear the boots for a while after the shooting, we also sunk a boat and stepped into salt water in those boots. I don't know how that would effect the ability to find the blood, but it couldn't have helped.
Guest Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 As to his breakdown: Imagine you've been under the microscope for three years, with many, many people who have no first-hand knowledge of you and your circumstances claiming to "know" what you've done or haven't done, and calling you a "hoaxer"! -- and then someone with supposed top-notch credentials appears to give you one more chance to vindicate yourself, once and for all -- and says, Sorry, no dice. How would you feel? I'd cry.
Guest Darrell Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 Hey I thought Sykes was going to prove how the proponents were right all along? BTW, I think more and more this phenomina has a religious cult type aspect that is totally being ignored.
Guest DWA Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 I actually don't think we are ignoring the religious cult aspect. Those of us who are serious about this avoid that as much as possible. I think it may be responsible for some of what Sykes has tested, which is why his results won't change what I think a bit. He's doing what any reasonable scientist who can do it should: testing what he receives. If that isn't bigfoot, the vast majority of the evidence remains to be explained.
BobbyO Posted October 28, 2013 SSR Team Posted October 28, 2013 Hey I thought Sykes was going to prove how the proponents were right all along? BTW, I think more and more this phenomina has a religious cult type aspect that is totally being ignored. I agree, sad but true. I actually don't think we are ignoring the religious cult aspect. Those of us who are serious about this avoid that as much as possible. . And I agree with that too, or at least I know I sure do.
southernyahoo Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 Hey I thought Sykes was going to prove how the proponents were right all along? BTW, I think more and more this phenomina has a religious cult type aspect that is totally being ignored. It lends Sykes credibility to present the negative results up front. This way it is clear that not every sample that is turned in is bigfoot. If he has anything positive to go in his paper, it will be much better received later on. He's doing this smart in terms of presenting a positive result at some point. BTW, I'm not expecting the Russian boxer to change our understanding of human history. LOL
Gotta Know Posted October 28, 2013 Posted October 28, 2013 In regards to the boots: We were also told that not only did Justin wear the boots for a while after the shooting, we also sunk a boat and stepped into salt water in those boots. I don't know how that would effect the ability to find the blood, but it couldn't have helped. I don't know if he hoaxed or not (who does?), but I do know that if his claim of killing two BF are true then he completely screwed up his responsibility to carefully protect and present the DNA evidence. Wearing the boots for a year under hard use including stepping in saltwater? Inexcusable. I am fully in the "kill" club, but only under the most planned, conscientious circumstances. This does not include wanton poaching of an unidentified species, failing to recover the specimens and then even screwing up the one vestige of hope that something could come of it. Whatever emotional distress he is under from this show is well deserved IMHO. Rant over.
Recommended Posts