What Happened To The Farenbach Hair Collection?

[Guest]

Well, that might do it, and apparently all was mounted or tossed.  

At any rate, doesn't sound like we can discover if the resin does destroy the dna, imagine there is a mechanical way to scrap it off...and short is not an issue with PCR (?)  but...we will just have to collect more...and test it, and type it...haha  for $189...quite a deal really... 

Did I see Mike Ruggs tooth is being tested by BFRO or something?

 

thanks for the answer. Yowie... (you ever see Walkabout?)

 

on hair collection.. Sykes model seems a little, obvious....  from above link (and nathafoot here!) the gun wire brush is a nice idea.. I think b/c it is discreet..

Edited November 20, 2013 by apehuman

[yowiie]

Walkabout? The movie

[Guest]

yeah..haha sorry, just flashed on it as I typed your name and allowed mental spill out...I saw it when I was about 17..had quite an impression on me.

[Guest]

I put on my Santa list up to $200 for a microscope...and find the specs really confusing..in terms of which way is best...  compound, yes...but single optic viewing, or binocular stereo...and digital camera/video I do want.....this one requires either adapter for my camera or a small digital cam..at another $150....(and the usb connect is preferable b/c I can see on monitor real time) 

but, if I drop down below this grade to get the digital camera in it...then I don't get the stereo..or the upper end magnification....

 

anyone up on microscopes and have suggestions? Seems glass optics a requirement...(and portable would be nice...so maybe not this one..there are battery models)

 

 Here is what I almost bought..at $200 yesterday, (cyber deals...) http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0094JTZOU/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_S_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=1VK8OSLAAMG9Q&coliid=I17UWI8KDNLG0T

 

and then this... from walmart...http://www.walmart.com/ip/iOptron-ST-640-LCD-Digital-Microscope/14119032

Edited December 4, 2013 by apehuman

[Branco]

Those new microscopes are awesome. Mine is one of the older AO Scientific Instrument's binocular series 150/160. It has a range of 40 to 1000 total mag. That range is all you need to identify hair samples. With a readily available animal hair reference atlas, anyone with good eyes and self-training through on-line data, can pretty well identify the sources of most wild and domestic animals found in the U.S. 

 

One thing that I cannot identify for certain is the hair from one of the "big red" Bigfoot, whether it is red, grey, brown or really dark. But, neither can one of the country's leading forensic hair expert. Their hair is practically indistinguishable from that of a modern Caucasian.  

 

That applies to two of the other types of BF as well. The hair from from one matches Asian (Mongoloid per forensic hair experts) human hair, the other matches African (Negroid per the experts) humans. (Zana ?)

 

I have great respect for Dr, Fahrenbach and his work. He has been of great help to me and other field people. He positively identified one of the "big red's" hair samples after a forensic hair expert could only say that it closely matched the hair from a Caucasian. Of course, that lab had no confirmed BF hair as a reference.

 

The only concerns I had when I sent hair to Dr. Henner: He apparently does not accept the fact that there are at least three types of these creatures. He admitted that his expertise was primate hair, and he did not even try to identify hair from some of the more common wild and domestic animals. For that reason he would discount any hair that did not closely match that of his references of Caucasian haired BF. 

 

No disrespect to Dr. Henner; He did good work in his specific area of expertise.

[Guest]

Thanks for the input.  I am kind of excited, and may not spring till after the holidays, and take more time understanding the various models. Video and photos already a part of the unit are valued, but the better cameras run the price up.  So, maybe starting with the higher end magnification and compound elements, but no camera but option for adapter....

 

What is the basis for selecting stereo/binocular or monocular..?  what limit/gain for binocular?  3d perspective only? 

[southernyahoo]

I wouldn't do binocular and opt for the camera and monocular instead if affordable.. The stereo is for comparing two different samples at once I think, which could be done later with photo's of the samples taken at the same magnification. I would pay attention to the megapixel given for the camera. Mine is only a 1.3 MP I think, and could be better.

Edited December 4, 2013 by southernyahoo

[yowiie]

Wh

 

Those new microscopes are awesome. Mine is one of the older AO Scientific Instrument's binocular series 150/160. It has a range of 40 to 1000 total mag. That range is all you need to identify hair samples. With a readily available animal hair reference atlas, anyone with good eyes and self-training through on-line data, can pretty well identify the sources of most wild and domestic animals found in the U.S. 

 

One thing that I cannot identify for certain is the hair from one of the "big red" Bigfoot, whether it is red, grey, brown or really dark. But, neither can one of the country's leading forensic hair expert. Their hair is practically indistinguishable from that of a modern Caucasian.  

 

That applies to two of the other types of BF as well. The hair from from one matches Asian (Mongoloid per forensic hair experts) human hair, the other matches African (Negroid per the experts) humans. (Zana ?)

 

I have great respect for Dr, Fahrenbach and his work. He has been of great help to me and other field people. He positively identified one of the "big red's" hair samples after a forensic hair expert could only say that it closely matched the hair from a Caucasian. Of course, that lab had no confirmed BF hair as a reference.

 

The only concerns I had when I sent hair to Dr. Henner: He apparently does not accept the fact that there are at least three types of these creatures. He admitted that his expertise was primate hair, and he did not even try to identify hair from some of the more common wild and domestic animals. For that reason he would discount any hair that did not closely match that of his references of Caucasian haired BF. 

 

No disrespect to Dr. Henner; He did good work in his specific area of expertise.

 

 

Who said that there are 3 different types of these animals, its only hearsay. Any wonder Henner didn't accept that

Edited December 4, 2013 by yowiie

[Guest]

gracias!

[Branco]

Wh

 

 

 

Who said that there are 3 different types of these animals, its only hearsay. Any wonder Henner didn't accept that

If the "Yowies" are not just "hearsay"; they are no doubt of Asian lineage. I doubt there are more than one type there. 

[yowiie]

So your not saying there are 3 types in the USA, but world wide.

[Branco]

So your not saying there are 3 types in the USA, but world wide.

No Sir. Just saying there are at least three types in the South and Southeastern parts of the U.S.

One of of those may  be of the same lineage as that of the Yowies. 

[Branco]

Henner has his collection but they cannot be reused once he examines them , something to do with the process

If he still has the hair it's no doubt mounting on slides. It can still be examined using an optical microscope. I'm not sure why the hairs themselves can't be extracted from the mounting medium with solvents that would not damage the hair. I believe that the good Doctor cut the individual hairs to fit the slide instead of looping the entire hair on the slide. Maybe he made several slides of the sections of the hair. I'm sure he inspected the distal ends of the hair; that can be meaningful.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Branco

[georgerm]

Very interesting reply and thanks. See comments below.

 

Those new microscopes are awesome. Mine is one of the older AO Scientific Instrument's binocular series 150/160. It has a range of 40 to 1000 total mag. That range is all you need to identify hair samples. With a readily available animal hair reference atlas, anyone with good eyes and self-training through on-line data, can pretty well identify the sources of most wild and domestic animals found in the U.S.  WHAT HAIR ATLAS

 

One thing that I cannot identify for certain is the hair from one of the "big red" Bigfoot, whether it is red, grey, brown or really dark. But, neither can one of the country's leading forensic hair expert. Their hair is practically indistinguishable from that of a modern Caucasian.  THE RED BIGFOOT HAIR IS NEARLY IDENTICAL TO CAUCASIAN HAIR?  HOW DO YOU TELL THEM APART?

 

That applies to two of the other types of BF as well. The hair from from one matches Asian (Mongoloid per forensic hair experts) human hair, the other matches African (Negroid per the experts) humans. (Zana ?) CAN YOU EXPAND MORE ON THE TYPES OF BFS PLEASE?

 

I have great respect for Dr, Fahrenbach and his work. He has been of great help to me and other field people. He positively identified one of the "big red's" hair samples after a forensic hair expert could only say that it closely matched the hair from a Caucasian. Of course, that lab had no confirmed BF hair as a reference.

 

The only concerns I had when I sent hair to Dr. Henner: He apparently does not accept the fact that there are at least three types of these creatures. ARE THEY THE SAME KIND OF BF BUT THEIR HAIR DIFFERS LIKE ONE RACE OR ANOTHER. ARE THEY A SUBSPECIES OR DIFFERENT SPECIES? He admitted that his expertise was primate hair, and he did not even try to identify hair from some of the more common wild and domestic animals. For that reason he would discount any hair that did not closely match that of his references of Caucasian haired BF. 

 

No disrespect to Dr. Henner; He did good work in his specific area of expertise.

Edited December 5, 2013 by georgerm

[Branco]

1. I purchased an animal hair atlas on a CD from the R.J. Lee Group, Inc. They have a forensic lab in Monroeville, PA.

 

2. As I said; I can't tell for certain the difference between the "Big Red's" hair from a Caucasian human's hair. Dr. Fahrenbach says he could determine BF hair by a slight variations in the medulla when compared to a humans. I have examined hundreds of human hair samples and compared them against some hair that undoubtedly came from some of the "Big Reds". I could not discern the differences. Although the unusual debris in the matted hair and the very worn and frayed distal ends of them were pretty clear indications the hair was not from a typical human.

 

Earlier this year, while working in the field with two newspaper reporters to investigate the sighting of two of the creatures by a  local resident, one reporter found a tight, short clump of grey hair on one of the barbs on the top strand of barbed wire on a pasture fence directly across a narrow road from where the two animals were seen. That section of fence was in a dense thicket, but was within a few feet of wire gap gate. When I looked at the hair under the microscope it was obvious the hair was worn and weathered to the point the imbricate scale pattern of the cuticle could hardly be seen under the microscope. The medulla showed a typical Caucasian pattern, and even though the hair was grey, a few red pigment granules could be seen in the cortex. Although the two BF seen in that area recently were both dark colored, there have been several sightings of a large, grey BF in that general the last few years. 

 

3. There are three types of these animals. There is a difference in their size, shape, foraging habits, hair and their feet and hands. Each type's hair closely matches one the three classifications of human  hair.

 

4. I don't know how science will classify them. The differences are similar to the differences in humans from different parts of the world. I believe they, like Zana, are simply surviving populations of relic humans that remain the least developed.

 

Here are some links that will help get you started on hair exams by optical microscopes. It in itself is very interesting when you collect animals hair sample. 

http://www.bsapp.com/forensics_illustrated/forensic_text_adobe/text_unit_5_hair_fiber.pdf

 

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/july2004/research/2004_03_research02.htm