Guest Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 Although my personal knowledge of DNA sequencing and the conclusions that can be derived and inferred by the results does not really qualify me to even comment on the matter, I think JDLs' summary is spot on, and is and will continue to be the status quo of identification of this unknown species via DNA. From what I can discern, results which include 'human' will always be considered 'contaminated' whether arrived at by reputable laboratories or those considered charlatans, hoaxers, sensationalist or whatever. I see a matter where any skeptic or disinterested party can halt or prevent a deeper or broader study by advising those holding the purse strings to such academic issues just by showing the budget guy or gal previous studies and that one word-"HUMAN". That, coupled with the general belief that this is all a myth anyway, probably sends any funding request to file 13, or used to soak up spills at the office coffeepot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted September 24, 2015 Moderator Share Posted September 24, 2015 Agree with all of the above, and though you've each said it in context, the biggest potential obstacle is this: If bigfoot is in fact a hybrid, then the assumption that any human DNA appearing in samples is just contamination is fundamentally wrong and results in discarded evidence. The only safeguard against this is to publish proper sample collection procedures to the community and to carefully collect DNA samples from every person in the chain of custody. If the samples show human DNA that corresponds to that of anyone in the chain of custody, then it is obviously contaminated. If it shows human DNA that does not correspond to anyone in the chain of custody, and the sample itself is clearly not of human origin, then the sample must be analyzed under the assumption that a hybrid origin is possible. I am so with you on this , all our DNA can be matched with our own DNA. So if there was DNA found of this creature then DNA should be taken of the people who have handled it.This way they can be ruled out as contanimation and a genuine DNA can be had. It keeps happening over and over with the human being mixed with DNA of unknown so it gets discounted and thrown out. DWA you are on the right track but science does not want to accept that this could very well be a hybrid of our species. This species will prove them wrong and history will have to be re written if true DNA was to be found.These sciencetist would be Better to deny then come out with the truth and on top of that hide the true nature of this creature. I feel maybe they already have the data on this creature and are not willing to release this data since there is no need too. I am also thinking that these lab results are meant to fail so that the identy of this creature does not get revealed. Call it conspiracy or what ever, I do not care. This is just my inner feeling and I trust that inner one with my life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted September 24, 2015 Share Posted September 24, 2015 Interesting. Wonder why Jayjeti dropped out of the conversation when Hart joined us. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MIB Posted September 25, 2015 Moderator Share Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) Jayjeti did something interesting. He (I assume its a "he") announced a lack of expertise, then tried to control the conversation as if lacking expertise or understanding somehow excuses a person from the need to be correct and returns them to the same authority on the topic as someone who knows what they're talking about. The second thing Jayjeti tried to do was predefine the assumptions Hart was allowed to work from .. which failed. Disingenuous and dirty pool all around. You're right ... suddenly noticeably absent. Licking his wounds or asking Melba for a raise? MIB Edited September 25, 2015 by MIB 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted September 25, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted September 25, 2015 Interesting. Wonder why Jayjeti dropped out of the conversation when Hart joined us. Well, something about blowing smoke up............ never mind! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 A person who participates in a conversation becomes someone who tries to "control" it? If you don't agree with somebody, but ask perfectly civil questions, you're "playing dirty pool"? We have an "expert" screaming in capital letters, and that's ignored; but asking a question is "disingenuous"? Quite astonishing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayjeti Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Interesting. Wonder why Jayjeti dropped out of the conversation when Hart joined us. I've been reading and taking in the comments. I asked Dr. Hart a few questions and he answered. I can't say I appreciate whatever you're inferring about me dropping out once Hart joined. I would rather discuss topics and instead of things directed at me, like you and MIB seem inclined to do, or bipedalist with the blowing smoke up there comment. So no thanks for steering the conversation to a lower level. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Jayjeti, you and I had obvious differences when it came to Melba's study. I tried to assist by inviting Dr. Hart. I also did that because I felt that there was much misinformation getting posted that needed clarification. You were the primary one leading the conversation at that point. I was just noticing that you had gone quiet since Dr. Hart cleared things up. Anything else you are reading into my comment is on you. I'm not "inferring" anything. I have no problem coming right out and saying what I think. Who is doing the steering here? but asking a question is "disingenuous"? No.... MIB said to "predefine the assumptions Hart was allowed to work from .. which failed." was disingenuous. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 I rarely agree with MIB, but bravo on an excellent posting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted September 25, 2015 Moderator Share Posted September 25, 2015 A person who participates in a conversation becomes someone who tries to "control" it? Yes at times this is what they would like people to believe and it would be mainly to take the attention off them selves If you don't agree with somebody, but ask perfectly civil questions, you're "playing dirty pool"? This what they use when they are stuck in a corner and have no way out , they will distract and play off on not answering the civil question. We have an "expert" screaming in capital letters, and that's ignored; but asking a question is "disingenuous"? Here is where we have a problem since we have no idea on who is an expert, since everyone signs on this forum anonymously. So that does not answer who is a expert. Quite astonishing. This whole mess with the DNA of these creatures should have stayed secret until they had the right genome sequence figured out before they started opening up about their findings. The only right way would have been with a body on a slab and a lab that could keep its lips tight until it had all its info on hand so that it could be released with out issues. If a lab wanted to tested and see how real the specimen is it would be able to. Patents I believe would have to be made on the discovery of the specimen and the DNA would be entered into the DNA Genbank.or to a centralized super computer like the cloud where labs can then log on and match their DNA through out the world. It can then see how far this creature has evolved on our planet by matching its own DNA with other DNA found through out the world. The reason I say this is cause if they can use DNA in a court of law to match a criminal with a crime. Better yet match a victim with the member of a family member that is unknown . Then DNA can then be used by these creatures to see where they first started and in what part of the world they might have come from. More and More their ape theory is falling apart and more and more it is leading towards a human hybrid and I can see how that can scare people of the elite. As well as why they would want to hide it from people like us who have had history already in planted into us. History is a hard thing to change after years of it being taught to us in schools. To have a creature like this come out now and say that these creatures must have played a role in our human history is some thing that most of us cannot fathom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted September 25, 2015 Share Posted September 25, 2015 History is a hard thing to change after years of it being taught to us in schools. To have a creature like this come out now and say that these creatures must have played a role in our human history is some thing that most of us cannot fathom. Sad, but so true!!!! Have you guys ever heard of Robert Kryder? I hadn't, until the other day. Maybe this was the study Dr. Ketchum was referring to, and if so, I can see why she was so pleased: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayjeti Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 Jayjeti, you and I had obvious differences when it came to Melba's study. I tried to assist by inviting Dr. Hart. I also did that because I felt that there was much misinformation getting posted that needed clarification. You were the primary one leading the conversation at that point. I was just noticing that you had gone quiet since Dr. Hart cleared things up. Anything else you are reading into my comment is on you. I'm not "inferring" anything. I have no problem coming right out and saying what I think. Who is doing the steering here? but asking a question is "disingenuous"? No.... MIB said to "predefine the assumptions Hart was allowed to work from .. which failed." was disingenuous. Instead of asking me about the topic to get my take on it your comment wasn't making a statement or asking a question about the topic; it was just a blanket statement about me to the forum of which you leave open ended for others to fill in the details with their less than mature banter, which you repeat MIB's nonsense. When the conversation turns personal to focus on participants its digressed into a pettiness that should not be apart of adult discussion. You can deny it was an in my face comment all you want but you were championing Dr. Hart as someone who would clear the nonsense and set things straight; so, when you ask "Interesting, Wonder why Jayjeti dropped out of the conversation when Hart jointed us," other anti-Ketchum stalwarts ran with your inference. And I was part of the conversation with Dr. Hart. I asked Dr. Hart a few questions and thanked him for his response. Then he engaged in some interesting conversations with several, like Southernyahoo, about things I don't have the ability to ascertain right from wrong, but since I didn't wade into their jargon for two days you want to point out my odd absence in the face of your good doctor. I would prefer this discussion just focus on the topic. I joined myself to this thread asking this, "If this lab comes forward claiming to have duplicated her work will they be attacked with the same attacks, like it must have been contaminated to get those results, etc. as was done with Dr. Ketchum, or will this vindicate her, that her work was accurate? " No one seemed to want to answer the question if it would vindicate her, but mainly wanted to rehash how Melba messed it all up, and I became a participant in the discussion. I was a main participant but whether I was leading or controlling the conversation is a matter of perception. There were people, like you, wanting your facts put forward and bringing in participants in the discussion and I was answering your's and their comments. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeafTalker Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 (edited) Beautifully said, Jayjeti. Thanks for showing us what integrity looks like -- as you have with every post you've made (not just this one). Bravo. I have admired your posts for a long, long time, including the many posts you've made in defense of researchers and experiencers who have been loudly and unfairly maligned over and over and over.... It has been my great personal shame that I never joined you on those threads (or wasn't participating at the same time you were). Sometimes exhaustion and fear overcome me, and I'm unable to continue saying the things that need to be said. Thank you for continuing to say the things that need to be said, and in the most respectful way possible! And my profound apologies for leaving you to be the only one to be saying them in a few situations. Your courage and restraint are truly remarkable, and I'm so happy we have you to exemplify those things and teach us what they look like. Edited September 26, 2015 by LeafTalker 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayjeti Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 (edited) That's nice of you to say LeafTalker. Edited September 26, 2015 by jayjeti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted September 26, 2015 Share Posted September 26, 2015 (edited) ^^^ I think the point is Melba's study was fatally flawed from nearly the beginning. Even a broken clock shows the correct time twice per day and this would likely be the result of additional studies vs Ketchum study. Edited September 26, 2015 by Martin 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts