Jump to content

Dr. Ketchum's Report And Explanation Of Sykes Dna Study


Guest

Recommended Posts

I can kinda see what you're saying.

I'm far (far) from a DNA expert but I still can't wrap my head around BF having human DNA would work. They have many nonhuman characteristics.

As do the Sentinelese people:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentinelese_people

 

The San, or Bushmen, are quite primitive, to modern culture:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_people

 

While a far cry from modern civilization, these are clearly human. Just mentioning, to show the vast gulf between modern humans and those closer to human primitive roots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking primarily of physical traits. My doubts about BF being human are not related to culture or level of sophistication. I can't get past the anatomy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on what anatomy you've seen. It doesn't take very much change in the genome to make huge differences in the physical form. Whatever BF is, we'll have to get past the obstacle of them having a human mitochondria, because they can't have that and not be human. The mitochondrial DNA is getting really easy to get from hair samples, so the real BF should be stepping forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking primarily of physical traits. My doubts about BF being human are not related to culture or level of sophistication. I can't get past the anatomy.

The *thing* that I saw was *not* human. HTG, How that creature can exist without being better documented amazes me. They do exist, they scare the "bejesus" out of me, and thanks to my sighting I am now afraid to really do any serious hiking or camping. Now that I know that things do go *bigtime*bump in the night I have stopped hiking and just forget camping ever again:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Southern Yahoo, It is wonderful to have someone posting who is a knowledgeable as you are about all of this stuff. Thank you for your input. :fan: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking primarily of physical traits. My doubts about BF being human are not related to culture or level of sophistication. I can't get past the anatomy.

And the hair...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking primarily of physical traits. My doubts about BF being human are not related to culture or level of sophistication. I can't get past the anatomy.

 

Here is a powerpoint slide that I posted elsewhere before. I found it interesting to note that from much evidence, the hairy ones seem to share five out of seven of these features. Perhaps they are the natural results of bipedalism. I don't know either, mbh, it's frustrating to think about at times, because the anatomy plus behaviors seem like such a mix.

 

Good info, thanks, SY.

 

 

Unique to Rare Physical Features of Humans
Compared to Other Primates (especially chimps):
 
1. Bipedalism
2. Cranial enlargement
3. Exaggerated secondary sexual
characteristics (loss and gain)
4. Hair Loss
5. Increased manual dexterity
6. Menopause
7. Long life span
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Area Geneticist proves Bigfoot to be real and moves on to write children's books.

Um yeah that is exactly what credible scientists do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moderator

And the hair...

 

In what way?   Do you mean the characteristics of the hair itself, or the amount and locations on the body, or something else?

 

MIB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Area Geneticist proves Bigfoot to be real and moves on to write children's books.

Um yeah that is exactly what credible scientists do.

 

Right. Because "credible scientists", of course, are incapable of doing anything else but science. 

 

These people (and/or their families) will be sooooo disappointed to find out how little credibility they have:  

 

Queen's lead guitarist originally had degrees in math and physics, and was working on his Ph. D when Queen finally took off, so he left his astrophysics to go embark on a musical career that would eventually get him named the 39th best guitarist of all time by Rolling Stone. He went on to complete that Ph. D in 2007, publishing a thesis whose abstract -- in its very first sentence -- uses the phrases "pressure-scanned Fabry-Perot Spectrometer," "photomultiplier and pulse-counting electronics" and "high-resolution spectra of the Zodiacal Light." Oh, and he's currently the chancellor of Liverpool John Moores University.

 
A well-known British television personality for decades, Sir Jonathan Miller started off as a medical doctor, then just sort of stumbled into success writing and producing theater and television (despite the fact that he sometimes had no experience in what he was working on), and he eventually became one of the leading opera directors in the world (despite the fact that he initially didn't even know how to read music). When not working in the public eye, he's had separate research fellowships in neuropsychology and the history of medicine.
 
Douglas Hofstadter's father, Robert, was a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, and Douglas pretty clearly inherited his father's intelligence. Our Hofstadter, who is a professor of cognitive science at Indiana University, is also the first in IU's history to have fellowships in the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the American Philosophical Society, while also having won a Pulitzer Prize. His two prize-winning books aside, he's an artist, calligrapher, composer, programmer, and physicist. He's fluent in three languages, and he's studied eight more.
 
John Michael Crichton was an American best-selling author, physician, producer, director, and screenwriter, best known for his work in the science fiction, medical fiction, and thriller genres. His books have sold over 200 million copies worldwide, and many have been adapted into films.
Edited by LeafTalker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Darrell

Now here is a crazy thought: get an actual bigfoot and then test it's DNA to see what you have. Can't find a bigfoot? Maybe that should tell you something too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In what way?   Do you mean the characteristics of the hair itself, or the amount and locations on the body, or something else?

 

MIB

All of the above. The creature I saw was covered with thick matted black hair, and I mean everywhere except his eyes. Hair covered, huge, black, and scary. Black eyes also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now here is a crazy thought: get an actual bigfoot and then test it's DNA to see what you have. Can't find a bigfoot? Maybe that should tell you something too?

Here is another *crazy* thought: Why are you here dissing believers at a Bigfoot forum? This is about Bigfoot. If you think they don't exist, why bother coming here?  Dissing believers who are posting at a forum for Bigfoot believers makes no sense to me:( 

Leaftalker: Plus 1 to you from me!  I like your style:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...