Yeti vs Bear DNA

[MIB]

4 hours ago, LeafTalker said:

These disinformation people are getting desperate........ They've resorted to shouting to get the disinformation out. 

 

That's not disinformation.   It's not desperation, it is frustration that comes from having to coddle FOOLS.  

 

Quote

Bucking authority takes courage.

 

There are two kinds of authority.   You're (deliberately?) mixing them up.   There is authority from power and authority from qualified expertise.   Truly, bucking authority-of-power takes courage and is commendable when that authority is wrong.  However, you're attacking authority-of-qualification as if your personal subject matter ignorance excuses you from the need to get it right.   You are, when it comes to fact, WRONG.   What you're doing is either fundamentally dishonest and manipulative or it is rooted in the grossest of ignorance.

 

There is truth .. somewhere.   It's not in the bottom of a cool aid jug, neither proponent nor denialist.  You do more harm to others' search for truth when you treat everything like it is bigfoot than the scoffing denialists do when they try to get honest seekers to not look at evidence at all.  Their deception is confrontational while yours is insidious.    The path to finding that truth, whatever it is, is to ignore the extremists from both ends of the spectrum as the frauds they are and follow the data rather than the delusion. 

 

The bottom line is the test results came back bear because what was tested was bear.    Guess what?   Bears are real.   Yep, I've seen 'em.   That has no bearing on the existence of bigfoot at all.   It only needs to for the grossly insecure.

 

MIB

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2017 by MIB

[Cotter]

MIB - I like your last point.  So what was tested was from a bear.  I don't think that anyone claimed to have plucked the hairs from the back of a yeti, correct?  So, we found bear DNA, that has no bearing (pun intended) on the existence of the yeti.  We only know that what was tested was identified.

 

If it had come up unidentified, well that's another story, but the results would have still fallen short of proving it was yeti DNA.

[WSA]

Had more than one acquaintance send me the link with the same kind of '"YOU SEE!!!" message attached. "Meh" is my response. It seems thought-stopping articles like this one are just too enticing to pass up for anyone who has limited knowledge. Well, maybe that is the point.  Doesn't take much for an incurious population to be persuaded there is nothing to see, does it?

 

When I asked my crow-serving acquaintances if the study was looking at mDNA or nDNA, I got not a glimmer of recognition from them.  Right, just give me the Cliff Notes, I don't wanna read some big boring book.  Is it any wonder?  

  

[bipedalist]

Sometimes, it is not cool, to drink the kool-aid, great post there MIB.

[hiflier]

54 minutes ago, bipedalist said:

Sometimes, it is not cool, to drink the kool-aid, great post there MIB.

 

Most folks don't even KNOW they are drinking the Kool-Aid or that they have swallowed the Blue Pill. Makes me wonder what it is about a person DOESN'T drink the Kool Aid or swallow the Blue Pill. In a certain weird way the ones that don't drink the Kool-Aid experience a mildly miserable existence , especially where Sasquatch is concerned.

[WSA]

Let’s face it. What sells more copy? “Yeti proven not real by DNA analysis” or “Several relics alleged to be Yeti remains are not confirmed”? Frankly too, I am as tickled almost as much by the confirmation of an underreported ursine species out there. That is pretty dang cool if you ask me.

 

[norseman]

Yes, but does anyone get tired of the samples coming back as mundane animals!?

 

At some point we need to start coughing up some physical freakin evidence as a community!!!

[hiflier]

 

 

2 hours ago, norseman said:

Yes, but does anyone get tired of the samples coming back as mundane animals!?

 

Of course we do

 

2 hours ago, norseman said:

At some point we need to start coughing up some physical freakin evidence as a community!!!

 

Now, Noreseman. Don't start in with that "community" stuff in order to solve this thing. Take it from ol' hiflier who pushed pretty firmly on the idea- all I got was folks pushing back. They like their one or two folks In the field approach and so IMO, from my experience over the last couple of years. it just doesn't fly. I took a hiatus from here and came back strong for the group effort concept and got flayed for it. Now I'm just a meek (as meek as I can be anyway) member who learned this lesson from his peers the hard way: Leave the status quo alone. I've brought up the fractured nature of this community many times and suggested more or less just what you have put forth. Take it from me, won't work. 

[norseman]

Bless your heart hiflier dont take this the wrong way. But your problem is that your trying to be buddies with everyone.

 

Just pick a direction and push! Dont worry about being liked by everyone... Yah no one will ever weld this community together. Ok.

 

But nothing will ever deter me from hunting with a rifle or rubbing our noses in our own failures. People need to hear it...... dont blame science! Go get it! No excuses!

 

 

 

[hiflier]

Yep, that's me, Mr. Buddy. A real more-flies-with-honey kinda guy. Oh wait........I think there are portable heaters named that  So...nevermind.

 

34 minutes ago, norseman said:

People need to hear it...... dont blame science! Go get it! No excuses!

 

 

200% for that! I STILL think wider cooperation and presence in the field by pooling people and resources is a step in the right direction. And I STILL think pressure on authorities from a consensus of proponents will work. There, see? Some things never change.

 

[norseman]

Yes, some things never change. In reading the last two of your posts Im utterly confused. Will or won't work?

 

You know what will work? A dead Squatch...... Are you packing a rifle yet? Big bore with a weapons light? 

 

Eye candy:

 

 

Edited December 2, 2017 by norseman

[Incorrigible1]

Love the scout scope setup. I have an old Rem Mohawk 600 that I scouted a good while ago, now. Lightning fast and deadly medicine on Platte river valley whitetails.

[hiflier]

39 minutes ago, norseman said:

In reading the last two of your posts Im utterly confused. Will or won't work?

 

You know me well enough to know the first post was me being facetious, even cynical. My second post was dead on. Cool hardware Norse. And TBH no, not packing anything yet. It was financial decision encouraged by the so few reports in Maine and with it being such a huge state. Not interested in shooting anything since I gave up the bow. A pretty neat device but I'd never go after out Hairy Friend with one for two reasons: I could die and it could suffer long after it kills me. Believe me I do weigh these things. In the case of the bow I weighed it for bout 2 seconds and, to this day, have no idea why it took me so long.

Edited December 3, 2017 by hiflier

[norseman]

1 hour ago, Incorrigible1 said:

Love the scout scope setup. I have an old Rem Mohawk 600 that I scouted a good while ago, now. Lightning fast and deadly medicine on Platte river valley whitetails.

 

I bet! Thanks!

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

 

You know me well enough to know the first post was me being facetious, even cynical. My second post was dead on. Cool hardware Norse. And TBH no, not packing anything yet. It was financial decision encouraged by the so few reports in Maine and with it being such a huge state. Not interested in shooting anything since I gave up the bow. A pretty neat device but I'd never go after out Hairy Friend with one for two reasons: I could die and it could suffer long after it kills me. Believe me I do weigh these things. In the case of the bow I weighed it for bout 2 seconds and, to this day, have no idea why it took me so long.

 

Ya no..... no bow hunting bigfeets.

 

But you need a guide gun for your Maine Woods. Getting mauled or stomped to death ain’t good!

 

A guide gun running good ammo will flatten anything you encountered in NA. And then tuck you in at night safe and sound.

 

Moose, Black bear, Bigfeets, Zombies, Raptors, Mastadons.....it’s all good. 

 

 

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, norseman said:

But you need a guide gun for your Maine Woods. Getting mauled or stomped to death ain’t good!

 

How true that is. There was also a guy who said if one can't be safe in the North Woods where can one be safe. Black Bear is the only concern here and intimidating them does work........oh yeah, and then there's that mama with cubs thing. It's not like I haven't considered the exact firepower you are talking about and I know it only takes once to be in real trouble. If I were to pack anything I think I would pack something more personal for use as a last resort. In other words, I wouldn't plan on shooting anything outside 20 or 30 yards.

 

I'm gettin' a bit long in the tooth to think climbing a tree is any good at all (oh ya, I still climb pretty well) and I carry windproof high grade bear spray (just kidding about the windproof part). I figure it this way, unless I surprise a Black Bear, it's going to find me on its own because I'm upwind of it in which I will have downwind advantage for bear spray. And BTW, for anyone that doesn't know, there is a difference in how those products are labeled. They are labeled repellent or deterrent. Always purchase the one labeled DETERRENT. One will pay the big bucks for it over repellents but hey, it's your life so get the good stuff. Plan on $35-$40 and get the ten second model.

 

One more piece of advice, get a can of test spray to get used to using the real thing. Using the real thing around a camp to test with is in bad form because bear spray residue can actually ATTRACT bears. Be smart, be safe. OOOOOOOOORRRRRRRR get that guide gun!! Aw yeah, it's tempting for sure- and has been for a while.

Edited December 3, 2017 by hiflier