Has Bigfoot Science Stalled?

[SWWASAS]

^^^^One of the better theories I have heard advanced. Perhaps the highlanders made the Bering Sea land bridge trip one or two ice ages before the flat landers did? That would have geographically isolated them and promoted genetic and physical differences. When the flatlanders made the land bridge trip that would have pushed the highlanders deeper into the woods as neither group would have oral tradition knowledge of the other because of the long period of time since separation of the groups.

Edited February 20, 2016 by SWWASASQUATCHPROJECT

[Yuchi1]

I won't use the quote function to save space, really, I guess, so I hope I respond to the many aspects of this thread that resonated with me.

 

It's discouraging to think science is stalling just as I'm getting into this. I'm brand new to this business, so I'm virtually clueless, but I know a little science so I'll throw out some thoughts anyway. The first thing is that I don't see a lot of science. How do you do bf science anyway? Is it research that's stalling? How would you research bf if you don't have one?

 

In any event, the grunt work of science can be done by non-scientists. I don't think you need a card-carrying scientist to actually see bf. They need only to design a study and write it up. In fact, nobody's reputation should be besmirched in that way. (That sounds terrible, doesn't it?)

 

There are many people out in the field trying to get "evidence" that, to paraphrase some of the language in here, I think, won't hold the hard science water. Even the DNA is human, so, absent a previously classified hominid, hard science has no alternative but to declare it a contaminant, right? They may not be laughing when they say they need a body. There's just no other way to classify a cryptid.

 

So what more is needed? What needs studying? If you've got the scientist to design a study, I'll crunch the numbers or do whatever I can to help the cause. Is there a database of the DNA evidence that's been advanced as being from a bf? There should be one somewhere to allow a comparision and find commonalities among them. That's an interesting article right there.

 

You can always do a qualitative study. I have no idea how many of them are out there, but it doesn't hurt to have one more. Set some qualifications for witnesses, decide the most relevant information you'd need from them and develop questions to ask in interviews with them. It can only help until that irrefutable proof turns up.

 

Just don't stop woring on this. Not in order to get him protected. We'll understand ourselves better.

 

Hence, the conundrum in that killing one may well present the shooter with a host of unintended consequences, some of which could be life altering if not life ending, depending upon jurisdiction where the event took place.

[Guest freelygiven]

SB: Thanks for such a thoughtful response to my post. I thought I left this reply last night. Sorry for the delay.

 

Quote:
The evidence that has been collected by most researchers feel that their evidence is sufficient for the creatures existence. But as we are learning that this evidence is not enough to prove this creatures existence at all by science standards.

 

The evidence is certainly enough to convince me and apparently many others here, but, as difficult as the task may be, the simple collection of evidence isn’t actually research. That’s a very intricate, controlled, rigorous and specific process in any science, and it usually yields quantifiable results. Evidence may seem strong, but outside the context of “by the rules†scientific inquiry, it’s powerless to tell a story to a society of skeptics. Research design, especially with a subject generally perceived as mythical, has to be solid and as airtight as possible: exceptionally well thought out.
 

 

How do you do bf science anyway? Is it research that's stalling? How would you research bf if you don't have one?

 

Quote:

Yet, there are hundreds upon hundreds of reported sightings of these creatures by witnesses with evidence that proves they seen some thing out of the norm. But this does not prove this creatures existence but should show interest to science that there is some type of animal that is roaming with in our wilderness.

 

To us, this is common sense, but to address some of your later points, PhDs have to pay the bills, too. Whatever they do has to provide them with some tangible reward. That’s only fair. It could be someone only masters-prepared, too. They’re qualified peers. If well-versed in bf culture, they’d know how to design a solid study based on existing scientific literature and what evidence they know they could collect in that very controlled, scientific way.

Although there seems to be precious little scholarly literature, peer-reviewed or otherwise, whoever does this should be up to speed on it. They’d know how to write a grant to get that money for the equipment they might need to get out and collect the evidence and to support them as they design, implement and document the thing. This all takes massive amounts of time, and not many folks can afford to do it for nothing. Besides all that, PhDs often get their grad students to do their studies anyway. If you put a legit study together, some PhD might be eager to attach his/her name to it.

Who is actually out there trying to get research funded? They don’t give you money without knowing exactly what you want to prove and how you plan on proving or at least supporting your hypothesis.

 

Quote:

The research has been on going and has not stopped.

 

By this do you mean that people are out trying to collect photographic, audio or physical evidence? This is great, but unless this activity is attached to a specific study using those same rigorous methods, it’s not actually research but evidence collection, and possibly not admissible as such.

 

Quote:

It is science that has stopped or refused to research into this by not funding the proper people with reputable PHD to do the research. But I believe that this has been done in the 70's by a chosen few who wrote up a detailed report on these creatures. But the problem is that it did not fit with what there concept of what animal behavior is suppose to fit. So the funding stopped due to what was reported.

 

Who is writing the grants for funding?

 

Quote:

The best way to research these creatures is in the field and in a known area of fresh encounters that can be controlled and must be kept under wraps.

  

See above.

in any event, the grunt work of science can be done by non-scientists. I don't think you need a card-carrying scientist to actually see bf. They need only to design a study and write it upI. In fact, nobody's reputation should be besmirched in that way. (That sounds terrible, doesn't it?)

 

Quote:

It is already being done by amateurs who have no idea about animal behavior but are learning as they go. College or going back to school helps with writing up a study. But it will take a PHD for this write up to be accepted among their peers. But with out a body the evidence for the write up is weak and will be turned down, unless a well respected PHD can have a personal encounter to get a study started. 

 

I think John Bindernagle and Anna Nekaris, among others, are of the opinion that bf exists and, like me, don’t necessarily need a sighting. There are certainly others, no?

 

There are many people out in the field trying to get "evidence" that, to paraphrase some of the language in here, I think, won't hold the hard science water. Even the DNA is human, so, absent a previously classified hominid, hard science has no alternative but to declare it a contaminant, right? They may not be laughing when they say they need a body. There's just no other way to classify a cryptid.

Quote:

That's just it, there is no protocol of the proper handling  of the DNA, so they cannot narrow it down. Is the DNA contaminated by the handlers? or is this Human DNA found with in of the creature it self?. No channels exist of proper testing to see if the Human DNA belongs to the handlers or the creature it self. In other words they have not isolated the human strand of the so call contaminated DNA, nor have they gone onto details of the unknown strands of the DNA they have collected. It almost seems like they are refusing to research this creatures existence further and in my opinion I believe that they are scared. They are scared of that unknown strand that has mixed with Humans that does not match with nothing on earth. I am not saying that they are aliens , I am saying that they are refusing to add this unknown to the gen bank when ever they discover a new species. You can look this up your self if you do not believe me. They add new species to the gen bank every other month or even week with new species being discovered.

 

I’m actually aware of this situation based just on my limited exposure to the available information. A big problem, from what I’ve seen, is that samples are brought to a lab in good faith but with questions about their collection and without a study design into which to plug the results. For us, designing a study obviously starts with the hypothesis that bf exists. It then defines specifically what constitutes supporting or contradicting evidence. It includes, probably among other things, 1 the collection of such evidence with 2. a plan for its collection and 3. provides a vehicle for translating that evidence into 4. pre-defined data points aimed at answering 5. pre-determined research questions deemed relevant to supporting the hypothesis by the investigator (and his/her grantors). A broad question of bf’s existence should be supported by the conclusions reached logically by answering the smaller, more specific questions, in this case, what about this dna?

 

Is there a database of the DNA evidence that's been advanced as being from a bf?

Quote:

No, and nor will there ever be DNA ever entered into the Gen bank from this creature. Like I said they are scared of the truth and where it may lead them too. An open mind will lead to discovery , but a closed mind will only lead you to a locked door with out a key.

 

They may be scared of the government conspiracy surrounding this as well. I don’t have to see the black ops helicopter to be suspicious of that. Call me paranoid.

I may be too green to believe there will never be a database. GenBank is probably out of reach for now. A separate database imight be doable. I have faith that something’s gonna break.

 

Quote:

I hope this helped

 

Thanks again, SB. Quite helpful!

[Terry]

"You have a good point. Maybe small groups of PHDs in zoology could be taken out to research sites or habituation properties to see the evidence first hand. They would be selected, groomed, and invited to participate with the help from present day researchers and educators. This effort will help get bigfoot science unstalled."

 

The problem is finding those present day researchers and educators who are on the level who would be interested.  Even if you could find a small group of interested science folks, who would you send them out with?  Someone who tells them look, there's a portal over there, some orbs up there and oh, see those wind blown saplings?  Our hairy friends bent them all down.  How do I know?  They told me in mind speak...  

 

It's gong to be pretty difficult to get a scientific group to be interested in bf as long as that stuff keeps going on and it's getting worse every day!

 

t.

[hiflier]

Hello freelygiven,

As long as this is about the science, I have a several requests submitted to Dr. Ketchum through a third party. I think 99% of the people here think Dr. Ketchum is a quack. She is not. My request is about the DNA results she and her team came up with. I have asked if there is present an M/L opsin gene or an S opsin gene in those DNA results the presence of which will indicate whether or not the animal(s) the samples came from possessed a tapetum lucidum- the membrane allowing better night vision. Even though there was human DNA found I wanted to get her to follow a different line of thinking- that being eye shine. Many reports include the characteristic and we know pretty much what causes the phenomenon.

Even though there was evidence of creature DNA in the lab results that indicated other animal DNA who are nocturnal or even diurnal I still thing the search and investigation for the presence of these opsin gene indicators will be important.

[ShadowBorn]

"You have a good point. Maybe small groups of PHDs in zoology could be taken out to research sites or habituation properties to see the evidence first hand. They would be selected, groomed, and invited to participate with the help from present day researchers and educators. This effort will help get bigfoot science unstalled."

 

The problem is finding those present day researchers and educators who are on the level who would be interested.  Even if you could find a small group of interested science folks, who would you send them out with?  Someone who tells them look, there's a portal over there, some orbs up there and oh, see those wind blown saplings?  Our hairy friends bent them all down.  How do I know?  They told me in mind speak...  

 

It's gong to be pretty difficult to get a scientific group to be interested in bf as long as that stuff keeps going on and it's getting worse every day!

 

t.

Terry

It would have to start out fresh and from the beginning on the study. The thing about this creature is that there are way to many influences by way to many people, and this leads to bad judgment. That is why I keep asking for some form of protocol that could weed out the fakers and show the real true hab sites. There is way to much information on the internet that anyone can just see and hoax. So yes I see you point Terry !

 

I am not into the portal, nor am I into the mind , or any other things that have said. Yet , I have experience  this on a personal level so I cannot discount this, But for part of the study it would have to be ignored until it reached that point. The paranormal just clouds and distracts from the flesh and blood side of this creature. Unless we fully understand the flesh and blood side then the paranormal side of this creature should stay hidden with in the study. 

 

Now I did not know that one could actually get a grant  or even apply for a grant until now. If this is true then why has not one been applied for the research of this creature. If there are PHD's out there who are capable to write up a study and have it reviewed for a grant, why has one not been done. Also How would one go about to start one , to get this ball moving and place this creature on the books. What it sounds like that it must not be that difficult to create a study for a grant. Am I right? How would one put this package together? and where would one send this for approval? This would most definitely unstall  science. Does one need to be a PHD to write up a study or hypothesis for a grant? If one can prove their hypothesis with the grant will this peer review allow the grant? How would this study have to be written for approval for the grant? This is the kind of break though that is needed in the field.

 

It is not about who reaches first to the holy grail, but about learning some thing new of ourselves. We have all these research groups holding on to vital information about these creatures. All this info or intelligence that all leads to the tip of a sword. If it was all shared we would all see a living entity that exist and acts in the same manners as our selves with exceptions of environment. For myself IMO a real study would be these research groups and the evidence that they have came up with in a blind study involving all the groups. I would believe that this type of a study might be good enough as well for grant money for the opportunity for reputable PHD's long term team studies of these creatures. These PHD's May travel though out the USA tracking their own Hab site where then they may have a controlled environment. More of  a guarded large enough area where hoaxing can be prevented.

 

I am sorry if am saying way to much, it is just that I want the truth to come out. Science needs to come out of this slump or what ever it is doing. Cause at this stage of the game it has just stalled and there should be no reason for it. Especially if there could be a discovery of the century for everyone on earth. The paranormal needs to stay out of this until they can figure out the flesh and blood side of this creature. Once this has been accomplished  then start studying the paranormal side of these creatures. I really want science to prevail in this endeavor, it has always been science who has brought the truth. The truth always bring enlightment through science. Illumination is science.    

[georgerm]

Freelygiven welcome to the forum. It would be great to attract scientist to the forum more often. You sound like someone with science experience. What is it? Before we begin, and not to be smug or to make quality researchers feel slighted, it would help our conversation if each member posted their bigfoot related science experience and university training on a thread THAT I may start. A big science step forward is if we asked advanced degreed university biologist to write a peer review paper as Melba Ketchum and Medrum might have done. Any suggestions?

 

Your post was quite good and have some questions below to clear up some confusion.

 

 

 

from Freelygiven:  To us, this is  ( WHO IS US?) common sense, but to address some of your later points, PhDs have to pay the bills, too. (AREN'T MANY OF THEM ALREADY EMPLOYED AT UNIVERSITIES? )

 

Whatever they do has to provide them with some tangible reward.  (IF EMPLOYED AT A GOOD UNIVERSITY THEY SHOULD MAKE $150K A YEAR, SOME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED BY SPONSORS)

 

That’s only fair. It could be someone only masters-prepared, too. They’re qualified peers. If well-versed in bf culture, they’d know how to design a solid study based on existing scientific literature and what evidence they know they could collect in that very controlled, scientific way.( WHAT DESIGN WOULD YOU SUGGEST)

Although there seems to be precious little scholarly literature, peer-reviewed or otherwise, whoever does this should be up to speed on it.(IN MY OPINION, MEETING WITH JEFF MELDRUM AND OTHER QUALITY BIGFOOT RESEARCHERS, MEMBERS ON THE FORUM CAN POST SOME NAMES) 

 

 

They’d know how to write a grant to get that money for the equipment they might need to get out and collect the evidence and to support them as they design, implement and document the thing. (DO YOU KNOW OF ANYONE?) 

 

This all takes massive amounts of time, and not many folks can afford to do it for nothing. (AGAIN, WHEN EMPLOYED BY OSU, U OF O, U OF W AND MANY OTHER LOCAL UNIVERSITIES, THESE PEOPLE GET PAID FOR DOING THE FIELD WORK, WRITING UP THE PEER REVIEW PAPER, THEN TAKING THE HEAT)

 

Besides all that, PhDs often get their grad students to do their studies anyway. If you put a legit study together, some PhD might be eager to attach his/her name to it. ( OTHERS HERE AND I CAN WORK ON THIS. ANY IDEAS FOR A STUDY? DO WE WANT TO START WITH HAIR, FOOTPRINTS, OR LANGUAGE?)

Who is actually out there trying to get research funded? They don’t give you money without knowing exactly what you want to prove and how you plan on proving or at least supporting your hypothesis.  (I'M READY TO FOLLOW SOMEONE'S LEAD. MY ADVANCED DEGREE FROM GWU IN EDUCATIONAL. TECHNOLOGY QUALIFIES ME TO ASSIST, AND I CAN ASSIST WITH SKETCHES FOR A PEER REVIEW PAPER)

 

MANY TIMES I NEED TO BE TACTFUL AND AM MAKING PROGRESS HERE.

Edited February 21, 2016 by georgerm

[Guest freelygiven]

Quote:

As long as this is about the science, I have a several requests submitted to Dr. Ketchum through a third party. I think 99% of the people here think Dr. Ketchum is a quack. She is not. My request is about the DNA results she and her team came up with. I have asked if there is present an M/L opsin gene or an S opsin gene in those DNA results the presence of which will indicate whether or not the animal(s) the samples came from possessed a tapetum lucidum- the membrane allowing better night vision. Even though there was human DNA found I wanted to get her to follow a different line of thinking- that being eye shine. Many reports include the characteristic and we know pretty much what causes the phenomenon.

That’s what I’m talkin’ about! The existing studies that I know of as a complete newbie to bigfootology all (except the bear dna ones) seem to test human, but there have to be some markers common to bf among those specimens. Eyeshine sounds like a super one. Surely they don’t throw these samples away.

Quote:

Even though there was evidence of creature DNA in the lab results that indicated other animal DNA who are nocturnal or even diurnal I still thing the search and investigation for the presence of these opsin gene indicators will be important.

 

Eyeshine has been almost universal in the shows I’ve seen. Embarassingly, that’s about the extent of my knowledge of bf. I know only that all sciences follow the same basic rules. I had never heard of Dr. Ketchum and had to look her up just now. I’m trying to do my homework, but I’ve got a long way to go. She’s done an impressive work. I watched a Fox News vid from 2013 where she mentions the chain of custody for dna specimens. That’s what I was getting at. You have to document the chain of custody to validate any tests run on your specimens before you can expect acceptance of your work. You haven’t heard anything from her? Wonder why she’d be thought of as a quack. In any event, what little I know about genetics tells me that there should be ways to differentiate families from among species, if you know what you’re looking for. She should have valid specimens to test. Who knows? Maybe she’s working on that as we speak.

 

Quote:

Now I did not know that one could actually get a grant  or even apply for a grant until now. If this is true then why has not one been applied for the research of this creature. If there are PHD's out there who are capable to write up a study and have it reviewed for a grant, why has one not been done. Also How would one go about to start one , to get this ball moving and place this creature on the books. What it sounds like that it must not be that difficult to create a study for a grant. Am I right?

 

Actually, it’s a lot of work, and very time consuming, although the idea behind it is simple. You have a good idea and you tell people with money and interest in it how you intend to make it worth their whie to give you the money you need. When you sit down to write it, you’re not writing the study: just how you intend to do the study. It’s basically like pleading a case for your project. Who knows what science foundations are out there interested in the bf phenomenon?

 

Quote:

How would one put this package together? and where would one send this for approval? This would most definitely unstall  science. Does one need to be a PHD to write up a study or hypothesis for a grant?

 

You don’t need a PhD necessarily, but an advanced degree of some kind will stack the cards in your favor. Masters’ level education sometimes involves grant writing, but there are all kinds of resources online about how to write a grant for a science study.

Right now, I’m trying to get a little bit up to speed on what studies are out there. I recently got so frustrated with pseudoscience on TV that I joined this forum to try to get to the bottom of it…just for my own satisfaction. It was a bit disconcerting to see the frustration at a level where you can cut it with a knife. I had no idea how shockingly things were going for you guys on the ground. Bf science is new to me, though.

 

Quote:

If one can prove their hypothesis with the grant will this peer review allow the grant? How would this study have to be written for approval for the grant? This is the kind of break though that is needed in the field.

 

You just have to have a reasonable plan of attack for one problem you face in trying to prove the existence of bf, an idea of what it will cost you and a willing audience. You start building scientific validity into your proposed study there. Then you do your study according to the plan you lay out. Then you hope for peer review in a scientific journal: I would think anthropology or primatology.

 

Quote:

It is not about who reaches first to the holy grail, but about learning some thing new of ourselves. We have all these research groups holding on to vital information about these creatures. All this info or intelligence that all leads to the tip of a sword. If it was all shared we would all see a living entity that exist and acts in the same manners as our selves with exceptions of environment. For myself IMO a real study would be these research groups and the evidence that they have came up with in a blind study involving all the groups. I would believe that this type of a study might be good enough as well for grant money for the opportunity for reputable PHD's long term team studies of these creatures. These PHD's May travel though out the USA tracking their own Hab site where then they may have a controlled environment. More of  a guarded large enough area where hoaxing can be prevented.

 

I am sorry if am saying way to much, it is just that I want the truth to come out. Science needs to come out of this slump or what ever it is doing. Cause at this stage of the game it has just stalled and there should be no reason for it. Especially if there could be a discovery of the century for everyone on earth. The paranormal needs to stay out of this until they can figure out the flesh and blood side of this creature. Once this has been accomplished  then start studying the paranormal side of these creatures.

 

I completely agree. How do you eat an elephant??? One bite at a time!

 

Quote:

I really want science to prevail in this endeavor, it has always been science who has brought the truth. The truth always bring enlightment through science. Illumination is science.    

 

…and science is enlightenment! It’s just not always as simple as our intuitions, but it can prove our intuitions! You just have to submit to its rigidity. Even then, you have no assurance of societal acceptance. Looks to me like Dr. Ketchum’s Sasquatch Genome Project was pretty rigorous, yet it got little press. I’d never heard of it before. That’s how it is with proving what’s generally accepted as mythical.

 

 

Quote:

Freelygiven welcome to the forum.

Thank you, Georgerm! Let me just say that the frustration here about this subject is palpable. Ironically, as far from the front lines as I've been, I've shared it. What drew me here was the prospect of acquainting myself with like-minded individuals. You guys sure don't disappoint.

 

Quote:

It would be great to attract scientist to the forum more often. You sound like someone with science experience. What is it?

I’m a psych nurse out on workers’ comp. Trying to restrain a violent patient. I’ve got an MS in Community Health Nursing. My thesis was a longitudinal study of a nursing intervention (motivational interviewing) and its effect on medication compliance in patients from hospitalization through rehab to their optimal level of independence in the community. I wrote a grant as part of my studies.

I’m all but clueless when it comes to bf. If it isn’t on TV, and I haven’t read it since signing up here on 2/12 it’s news to me. I have 8 more orientation period posts and 5 more days before I’m cut loose to post when I want to here, but I’m working hard at educating myself on the subject of bf. One member gave me some tips on where to start. This became important to me when I got to the point where I couldn’t take the illogical and even nonsensical attempts to debunk what looked to me like reasonable evidence of bf to the otherwise uninitiated like me.

 

Quote:

Before we begin, and not to be smug or to make quality researchers feel slighted, it would help our conversation if each member posted their bigfoot related science experience and university training on a thread THAT I may start. 

There is nothing bf in my resume, except my husband , but I’m working on it. Truth is that science works the same way wherever it works. Bf is just not my area of specialty…YET!

 

Quote:

A big science step forward is if we asked advanced degreed university biologist to write a peer review paper as Melba Ketchum and Medrum might have done. Any suggestions?

I’m not sure exactly what kind of evidence you can get. I know about audio, photo/video, footprint and dna. Photo and video are easily retouched or hoaxed, but I’ve wondered about another kinesiological study of video evidence, like Ms. Patty. I remember a segment on “Legend Meets Science†where Meldrum and some other guy developed a 3D model of her walking, and they analyzed her gait compared to the human model. I think I remember that it was fairly conclusive that she was the real deal.

If there were enough video of bf walking, you might make a bigger study of it. You’d need Meldrum and that kinesiology guy. I don’t know. I’m still trying to figure out what there actually is out there, but I found out that that dna database already exists in the form of an entire Genome Project. Pull out the gene for night vision from the samples Ketchum has, per hiflier above. I thought that was brilliant.

 

Quote:

Your post was quite good

Thanks again.

 

Quote:

and have some questions below to clear up some confusion.

I tried to differentiate all sides of this conversation without kicking myself off. I've been trying to do that, and several of my posts were lost.

 

Freelygiven: 

To us, this is 

Quote:

 ( WHO IS US?)

Well, I was addressing ShadowBorn, but it could mean anyone who’d want to start from the premise that bf is alive and well.

 

Freelygiven: 

common sense, but to address some of your later points, PhDs have to pay the bills, too.

Quote:

(AREN'T MANY OF THEM ALREADY EMPLOYED AT UNIVERSITIES? )

Very likely, but they have jobs there that are full time already. Research is done over and above that.

 

Freelygiven:  Whatever they do has to provide them with some tangible reward.

Quote:

(IF EMPLOYED AT A GOOD UNIVERSITY THEY SHOULD MAKE $150K A YEAR, SOME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN SUPPORTED BY SPONSORS)

Well, they may be worth that, but they may be worth more. They’re probably there to teach. They may be expected to do research (publish or perish), but they usually get funded on their own. I don’t know of any case where the basic job pays for them to do their research except as like for a sabbatical. You understand that most universities doin't want to touch bf with a 10-foot pole.

 

Freelygiven:

That’s only fair. It could be someone only masters-prepared, too. They’re qualified peers. If well-versed in bf culture, they’d know how to design a solid study based on existing scientific literature and what evidence they know they could collect in that very controlled, scientific way

Quote:

.( WHAT DESIGN WOULD YOU SUGGEST)

So I’m trying hard here, but I’m not what you’d call well-versed in bf culture. I’m trying to learn what’s been done and what needs to be done, but I’ve only been at it for a week.

My feet aren’t even wet here to suggest anything. There are lots study designs, but you’d have to know what you want to study before you can figure out how to design the study. There are several mentions of getting a PhD to have a sighting, but that doesn’t make for a study in itself. Also, habituations seem understandably to be guarded zealously. It’d be hard to sell a grantor on doing, say, an audio study in such a place and tell them, “I can’t tell you where this study will take place.†I’d want to do a qualitative study of eyewitness testimonies: commonalties in environments and observations, emotional reactions. It’s probably been done. I’m just coming off the top of my head as someone who knows very little about the subject.

Freelygiven:

Although there seems to be precious little scholarly literature, peer-reviewed or otherwise, whoever does this should be up to speed on it.

Quote:

(IN MY OPINION, MEETING WITH JEFF MELDRUM AND OTHER QUALITY BIGFOOT RESEARCHERS, MEMBERS ON THE FORUM CAN POST SOME NAMES) 

Meeting is good. Sounds like this needs some serious brainstorming among you in the field and then between you and Meldrum or another researcher who could provide guidance in setting up a study and getting the money (which, imo, will most likely be needed).

 

Freelygiven:

They’d know how to write a grant to get that money for the equipment they might need to get out and collect the evidence and to support them as they design, implement and document the thing.

Quote:

(DO YOU KNOW OF ANYONE?) 

I’ve been involved in bf culture as much as one can on bff with 2 posts a day (and sometimes none) for one entire week. I know virtually nothing myself.

 

Freelygiven:

This all takes massive amounts of time, and not many folks can afford to do it for nothing.

Quote:

(AGAIN, WHEN EMPLOYED BY OSU, U OF O, U OF W AND MANY OTHER LOCAL UNIVERSITIES, THESE PEOPLE GET PAID FOR DOING THE FIELD WORK, WRITING UP THE PEER REVIEW PAPER, THEN TAKING THE HEAT)

 

Freelygiven:

Besides all that, PhDs often get their grad students to do their studies anyway. If you put a legit study together, some PhD might be eager to attach his/her name to it. 

Quote:

( OTHERS HERE AND I CAN WORK ON THIS. ANY IDEAS FOR A STUDY? DO WE WANT TO START WITH HAIR, FOOTPRINTS, OR LANGUAGE?)

You’re really putting me on the spot here. I have some ideas, but they’re based on mostly stupid TV shows, still. I’ll keep studying. Meanwhile, there are folks here infinitely better qualified than I am to answer that question. If you come up with something, I could look at validity issues for you. Anything I can help with, anywhere I can, I’d be happy to.

 

Freelygiven:

Who is actually out there trying to get research funded? They don’t give you money without knowing exactly what you want to prove and how you plan on proving or at least supporting your hypothesis. 

Quote:

(I'M READY TO FOLLOW SOMEONE'S LEAD. MY ADVANCED DEGREE FROM GWU IN EDUCATIONAL. TECHNOLOGY QUALIFIES ME TO ASSIST, AND I CAN ASSIST WITH SKETCHES FOR A PEER REVIEW PAPER)

Sounds like everyone is so ready. We’ll sleep on it.

 

Quote:

MANY TIMES I NEED TO BE TACTFUL AND AM MAKING PROGRESS HERE.

I'm certainly glad to hear that. So stop yelling at me! (just kidding).

[Guest freelygiven]

 

I won't use the quote function to save space, really, I guess, so I hope I respond to the many aspects of this thread that resonated with me.

 

It's discouraging to think science is stalling just as I'm getting into this. I'm brand new to this business, so I'm virtually clueless, but I know a little science so I'll throw out some thoughts anyway. The first thing is that I don't see a lot of science. How do you do bf science anyway? Is it research that's stalling? How would you research bf if you don't have one?

 

In any event, the grunt work of science can be done by non-scientists. I don't think you need a card-carrying scientist to actually see bf. They need only to design a study and write it up. In fact, nobody's reputation should be besmirched in that way. (That sounds terrible, doesn't it?)

 

There are many people out in the field trying to get "evidence" that, to paraphrase some of the language in here, I think, won't hold the hard science water. Even the DNA is human, so, absent a previously classified hominid, hard science has no alternative but to declare it a contaminant, right? They may not be laughing when they say they need a body. There's just no other way to classify a cryptid.

 

So what more is needed? What needs studying? If you've got the scientist to design a study, I'll crunch the numbers or do whatever I can to help the cause. Is there a database of the DNA evidence that's been advanced as being from a bf? There should be one somewhere to allow a comparision and find commonalities among them. That's an interesting article right there.

 

You can always do a qualitative study. I have no idea how many of them are out there, but it doesn't hurt to have one more. Set some qualifications for witnesses, decide the most relevant information you'd need from them and develop questions to ask in interviews with them. It can only help until that irrefutable proof turns up.

 

Just don't stop woring on this. Not in order to get him protected. We'll understand ourselves better.

 

Hence, the conundrum in that killing one may well present the shooter with a host of unintended consequences, some of which could be life altering if not life ending, depending upon jurisdiction where the event took place.

Sorry I missed replying the other day.

 

I know. Their DNA is human, so even something as simple as “informed consent†and endless other ethical issues around human subjects research creates uncertainty at the very least. Who might pop up to actually advocate for them from among the skeptics and nay-sayers? What irony. Ya never know. This research landscape is a mine field.

[ShadowBorn]

Thank you Freelygiven

[Guest freelygiven]

You're very welcome, SB!

[SWWASAS]

I have some thoughts on the supposedly stalled BF science.      I think we are just being too impatient.     Probably the most pertinent history in science to BF is the discovery of dinosaurs.  The Chinese were selling dragons teeth,  and everyone just thought that marketing for alternative medicine products.     Dragons and dinosaurs are pretty close to the same thing if you think about it.       Until the mid 1800s while teeth and bones had been found,   no one actually put two and two together that they were extinct creatures totally unlike anything living today.    When that connection was made in 1841,  what was known about dinosaurs exploded in the late 1800s and 1900s.   If and until that skeleton, fossil or body is available we are just waiting for that discovery to propel sasquatch from myth to science and everything that comes along with it.   

[Yuchi1]

Remember when medical science thought lobotomy was an appropriate medical procedure?

[norseman]

Patty's morphology is not human, I challenge anyone to show me a homo sapien female that is a match for her.

Which means if ketchums DNA is coming back 100 % human?

Either something is wrong with her study or the PGF is a hoax.

Speaking of hoaxes? Is she still backing Matilda aka the Chewbacca suit?

How is it that Ketchum can say they are human? When in star wars, chewie represents its own species?

Morphologicaly speaking nothing jives.

[southernyahoo]

Patty has always looked a bit masculine in build for a female to me, but as far as science is concerned, the DNA has the last word. The term human as I use it, includes presumed extinct members of genus homo, and of coarse i consider it a biological condition more than a behavior or culture of fire use and tool making. In this way Patty can fit within the definition, particularly if they can speak which is not just a behavior but an expression of sentience.