southernyahoo Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 There isn't any DNA that can be directly attributed to Sasquatch. It's actually the provenance of the samples and repeated pattern of results that tells me the modern human result may be accurate. The more I look into it, the less likely it seems that no one has recovered a biological sample from a Sasquatch. If it's true that Sasquatch possess modern human DNA, then this field of research is in a predicament where DNA evidence won't work. The only way it can work is to have complete knowledge of the source sample and a definite repeating result from it. This would perhaps only work for those who are there to collect the sample after an encounter and follow through with the testing.
SWWASAS Posted May 11, 2015 BFF Patron Posted May 11, 2015 All about chain of custody and proper handling of the material from the moment of collection through lab testing. If you watch the lab techs in DNA labs they have masks, covered heads, are gloved, and pretty much follow clean room practices. Someone, including myself, in the field is going to have a difficult job collecting a clean sample. One of the classic videos I can think of in BF DNA annals is Dr Johnson, who should know better, blowing on a metal bowl trying to see if it has any fingerprints prior to it being swapped for DNA.
WSA Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) I may have held out the hope at one time that DNA evidence alone would crack this nut. No longer, and for a number of good reasons we've all seen. 1. The human contamination factor Randy and others mention. If it contains any known human sequence, you can forget convincing anyone it came from an unclassified species. (See: Dr. Melba Ketchum) 2. Many of the samples won't contain DNA at all (not all hair does) or it is too degraded and mixed with DNA of other organisms (e.g., presumed BF scat). 3. Incredulity of the labs asked to do the testing. To be invested in this outcome, a lab has to fundamentally accept the idea of getting an intriguing/unknown/biologically unique result. I've heard way too many stories of researchers having their submitted samples just disappear, with a failure to have receipt confirmed, and calls, emails and letters going unacknowledged. I don't ascribe this to any nefarious conspiracy. I just think some labs treat these requests as a joke, and their failures to follow-through reflect that. 4. Science has never done this, that I'm aware of. Until you have an identified organism, extract the DNA under sterile lab conditions and then publish it for peer review, no recognition of a species will be forthcoming. For all the hopes put on Sykes' expertise (and I am still one of those rooting for him) I don't believe even he has the clout to get that done by this route. Having said this, let me posit how you could indeed at least field results that might move the needle. IF you had enough independent researchers publishing results that show correlation between multiple samples, the implication might get the attention of others, who may duplicate those. At some point of critical mass...and I certainly can't say where that point lays...you will change the perception of the scientific community. After all, can EVERY researcher be contaminating EVERY purported BF sample? I temper this prediction with the awareness that the thousands of witnesses with congruent accounts have not seemed to have changed the perception of many at all. Edited May 11, 2015 by WSA
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I no longer subscribe to the idea that Sasquatch are relict hominids. They have physical features that they shouldn't have and behavior that doesn't match what you would expect from an ape that size. They seem to possess DNA that is almost identical to today's humans, except for maybe a few noticeable differences. Their shy and paranoid behavior doesn't seem to be there for the purpose of avoiding bears and coyotes. It's to avoid regular humans. I think these traits were somehow all added, not by god or natural selection, but perhaps genetic engineering.
Guest Divergent1 Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 What possible purpose would someone have for genetically engineering a sasquatch?
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 There doesn't seem to be any purpose except for maybe an advanced science experiment using humans as the template for the design.
Guest Divergent1 Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 And you think they would let the science experiment loose? Who incubated the sasquatch babies? Genetic experimentation doesn't have to get past the petri dish stage these days.
southernyahoo Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 If bigfoot were an experiment, it would have to have been done hundreds of years ago, and before we knew the first thing about genetics ,test tube babies etc..........
Guest Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 I think these traits were somehow all added, not by god or natural selection, but perhaps genetic engineering. Why you're being so shy over here? Just say it. OS is trying to imply that aliens made Bigfoot.
ShadowBorn Posted May 12, 2015 Moderator Posted May 12, 2015 but perhaps genetic engineering For what devil of a purpose would a entity with intelligence beyond ours be doing this? To have us believe that our species was crossed at one time with a being. A male being that mated with a human female and created what people and myself have seen and dealt with. The whole bad part about this whole theory is that I can not deny it. Maybe others can but I can not deny what I have encountered. There has to be some thing special in their DNA for it to stay so hidden from our prying eye's.
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 It's my opinion that they aren't hybrids. Traits such as night vision, heightened awareness and more efficient bio-mechanics all have genes for them that you can add to any living being if you know how to. Our knowledge and technology isn't anywhere near that level yet, but it will be one day.
Guest Divergent1 Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Bigfoot is a GMO.......well now I've heard it all.
Guest ChasingRabbits Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 What possible purpose would someone have for genetically engineering a sasquatch? Cheap labor. Bigfoot is a GMO.......well now I've heard it all. No hope to get that Certified Organic label, now.......
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) The idea will seem far-fetched to those who haven't attained enough knowledge on the available evidence, which basically means almost everyone. Edited May 12, 2015 by OntarioSquatch
Guest Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 ^OntarioSquatch, Can you provide the evidence for alien engineered Bigfoots, so the rest of us can get up to speed on your discovery?
Recommended Posts