Lake County Bigfooot Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 (edited) Wow were they quick to pull that down, too bad, I don't know how they would know, could anyone else retry. even though they are on to us...Hey this is where it's at, they should allow us the right to see and discuss this stuff, maybe they could post it for us and let us discuss it. I think they would find it entertaining if nothing else... Edited November 5, 2013 by Lake County Bigfooot
Guest Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 (edited) gone shortly after BFE posted it..I missed too.....but also, all Icon or Nat'l needs to do is put in search terms to discover... .and will b/c we have an air date ahead..what they don't realize is all of us would probably watch both.... this is audio for the conclusion, worth listening! leaves me entirely hopeful....well, even more than hopeful...... I lay my bet (and heart ....arrgg!) on "out of Africa as archaic"..in advance of 70k ybp certainly...maybe a few hundred thousand? and just revisited this source.. a really sad story to say the least http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/zana.htm Edited November 5, 2013 by apehuman
Drew Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 migrations were happening in both directions in Africa. This is why even Africans have Neandertal DNA in their genome.
Guest Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 (edited) I thought not all Africans show Neandertal percentages, some don't....the only groups of moderns that don't...or has that changed? I don't think so..but failing to find the graphic neandertal/denisova genome map I want.. this article is nice tho..http://discovermagazine.com/2013/march/14-interbreeding-neanderthals#.UnknbHBJOSo march 2013.... and the relevant paragraphs (but the whole article is interesting) He tried for a year, to no avail. Finally, Reich and his colleagues had no choice but to conclude that Neanderthals had mated with humans. They estimated that the DNA of living Asians and Europeans was (on average) 2.5 percent Neanderthal. They had to reject a pure version of the out-of-Africa model. Instead, their model was closer to out-of-Africa-and-get-to-know-some-Neanderthals-very-well. The patterns Reich and his colleagues identified can help narrow down when and where the interbreeding took place. Since Africans do not carry Neanderthal DNA, it would appear Neanderthals bred only with the ancestors of Europeans and Asians. One possibility is that when humans emerged out of Africa some 50,000 or more years ago, they encountered Neanderthals in the Near East. Edited November 5, 2013 by apehuman
Cotter Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 ^Not that I'm aware of. http://news.discovery.com/human/evolution/neanderthals-modern-human-121101.htm "The only modern humans whose ancestors did not interbreed with Neanderthals are apparently sub-Saharan Africans" Hmmm...sub saharan africans...where did we just hear that? @Drew - why the mis-information campaign? Not dis-similar to the 'all of Oklahoma was clear cut' stuff you used to post. C'mon man, let's just drop the semantics, OK?
Guest Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 migrations were happening in both directions in Africa. This is why even Africans have Neandertal DNA in their genome. "All Non-Africans part Neanderthal, Genetics Confirm" http://news.discovery.com/human/genetics-neanderthal-110718.htm
Guest Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 (edited) and many BFers would add... humans met BFs as well.... in China, Russia and here...and everywhere and still are...! oh I see replies while I was in edit vortex and pulling other links as well haha! thanks! so we are on the same page..and yeah! I think floating this alternative hypothesis along with the socially acceptable (yikes, what does that say?) answer she was a feral (?) hairy (?) slave, now, is very telling...and makes me extremely hopeful, b/c this aired in advance of publication...it just could not say anything controversial.... I bet he's bummed this is airing now.... Edited November 5, 2013 by apehuman
Guest Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 (edited) a lot easier to listen and get the significance of the method, etc for me than tackling some of the papers, many are free ...and I have read (tried anyway!) several... but still, I appreciate hearing the scientists involved too...there are many of these type lectures on youtube, ... Edited November 5, 2013 by apehuman
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 The Xana story is intriguing in my opinion. Personally I think the only explanation that truly fits, IF all that has been said of her is true, is that she was some type of bigfoot or yeti type creature. Of course, if some of what has been stated regarding her is not true, then the other possibilities start to look more promising. The entire idea of testing for bigfoot DNA is sort of flawed from my point of view, and here is why: there have been all kinds of samples tested, but how many of those are actually known to have come from one of these unidentified animals? Obviously zero. The odds of any random hair found in the woods being from a sasquatch are quite small. I suppose that it is still important to test anything that could have come from a bigfoot, since one might get lucky, but I also think it is painting the entire subject in a bad light, since many people will believe that negative DNA tests mean sasquatch is not real. But it is next to impossible to retrieve a sample directly from one of these animals, so what else can one really do?
Guest Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 (edited) Seems many of the self proclaimed serious research groups did not first run their hairs by any hair specialist first to filter out common animals unlike some of the other groups that did have their samples checked , were still unknown but werent accepted by Sykes... mmmm ? perhaps a stacked deck so no BF is found Edited November 5, 2013 by GEARMAN
Drew Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal_dna/1000-genomes-introgression-among-populations-2012.html No misinformation campaign, unless you call the truth, misinformation. Yoruba have substantially more Neandertal similarity than Luhya. This may seem counter-intuitive, because the geographic location of Luhya in East Africa might seem better placed for Neandertal similarity to appear, whether through ancient population structure and ILS or through recent gene flow or backmigration into Africa of Neandertal descendants. Instead, it looks like the Yoruba are the recipients of Neandertal genes, whether by means of ancient population structure or introgression and recent trans-Saharan gene flow. I personally think both factors are involved, but again their relative importance will be determined by comparing individual gene regions.
dmaker Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 The Xana story is intriguing in my opinion. Personally I think the only explanation that truly fits, IF all that has been said of her is true, is that she was some type of bigfoot or yeti type creature. Of course, if some of what has been stated regarding her is not true, then the other possibilities start to look more promising. The entire idea of testing for bigfoot DNA is sort of flawed from my point of view, and here is why: there have been all kinds of samples tested, but how many of those are actually known to have come from one of these unidentified animals? Obviously zero. The odds of any random hair found in the woods being from a sasquatch are quite small. I suppose that it is still important to test anything that could have come from a bigfoot, since one might get lucky, but I also think it is painting the entire subject in a bad light, since many people will believe that negative DNA tests mean sasquatch is not real. But it is next to impossible to retrieve a sample directly from one of these animals, so what else can one really do? How so? I watched the episode and Sykes in no way said that Zana was not human. Let's be clear about that, she is human. He mentions some long shot theory that he described as extremely unlikely that she may have been part of a migration from Africa that we're not aware of and may even represent some relict hominoid previously unknown. Again, he says this is extremely unlikely. But even if it were true, that does not leap to a "bigfoot or yeti" creature. I don't think Patty could pass for a type of human. And since Patty seems to be what most Footers hold up as the ultimate in evidence then we must hold her as some sort of template. And she does not look human. The stories of Zana were more than likely exaggerated through the years.
Cotter Posted November 5, 2013 Posted November 5, 2013 http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal_dna/1000-genomes-introgression-among-populations-2012.html No misinformation campaign, unless you call the truth, misinformation. Drew, again with the semantics. I agree, there are Africans that have Neanderthal DNA. My link (which was 10 months more recent) demonstrates that not ALL African have Neanderthal DNA. My link in no way makes your statement incorrect.....semantically.....but when semantics are removed, it quite possibly points misinformation due to the delivery of said statement. Not a big deal, I can recognize it, but like others, I wanted to point it out for those that may not be as in tune to the wordsmithing...
southernyahoo Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 How so? I watched the episode and Sykes in no way said that Zana was not human. Let's be clear about that, she is human. He mentions some long shot theory that he described as extremely unlikely that she may have been part of a migration from Africa that we're not aware of and may even represent some relict hominoid previously unknown. Again, he says this is extremely unlikely. But even if it were true, that does not leap to a "bigfoot or yeti" creature. I don't think Patty could pass for a type of human. And since Patty seems to be what most Footers hold up as the ultimate in evidence then we must hold her as some sort of template. And she does not look human. The stories of Zana were more than likely exaggerated through the years. This is Interesting that you say Patty doesn't look human,, for she has to be one or a real squatch, yet you don't believe they are real. Lets see you get out of that one.. ..............Just having fun.
indiefoot Posted November 6, 2013 Posted November 6, 2013 dmaker, I disagree that most BF'ers hold Patty up as the ultimate evidence. Do you have a source for that claim?
Recommended Posts