dmaker Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, ioyza said: I highly doubt he'd publish private email correspondence regarding paper submissions, but I equally doubt he'd get to where he's at with the subject and not at least try to submit somewhere, so maybe at some point I'll do a little digging to see if he's talked about this anywhere. It won't be this weekend though. So, without knowing where or if anything was ever presented by Meldrum, you offer the lack of response to these phantom submissions as support of your point? LOL..ok. You should be more cautious waving the science banner while making demonstrably false statements like you have in this thread. Especially for one who claims to be a scientist. You sure don't come across as one. You seem to fail at grasping basic logic and critical thinking and I sure don't see any evidence of advanced scientific training in your comments. Edited June 1, 2018 by dmaker 3
hiflier Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 18 minutes ago, ioyza said: I highly doubt he'd publish private email correspondence regarding paper submissions, but I equally doubt he'd get to where he's at with the subject and not at least try to submit somewhere, so maybe at some point I'll do a little digging to see if he's talked about this anywhere. It won't be this weekend though. Let dmaker do the digging. 46 minutes ago, dmaker said: That is simply not true. 18 minutes ago, ioyza said: It simply is true Two blanket statements that do not pertain to a case by case investigation which would take months or years to accomplish. 14 minutes ago, dmaker said: ......phantom submissions....... Do you have any support for that statement? 15 minutes ago, dmaker said: You should be more cautious waving the science banner while making demonstrably false statements like you have in this thread. Especially for one who claims to be a scientist. You sure don't come across as one. You seem to fail at grasping basic logic and critical thinking and I sure don't see any evidence of advanced scientific training in your comments Don't know about anyone else but it sure looks like a personal attack to me. 1
dmaker Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 Just now, hiflier said: Let dmaker do the digging. Why? It's not my claim. 1 minute ago, hiflier said: Don't know about anyone else but it sure looks like a personal attack to me. Quel surpris! 2 minutes ago, hiflier said: Do you have any support for that statement? Proof of what? You really make no sense sometimes. Ioyza claimed no one had responded to Meldrums papers. I said what papers, submitted where? At which point, ioyza was left flustered and had no good response.
hiflier Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 3 hours ago, ioyza said: Meh. Again, Meldrum has it, show me where a single qualified expert has given any sort of real comment on any of his papers 1 hour ago, dmaker said: Show me where he has presented papers to any mainstream journal where they could receive the attention you mention Fine. Both of you dig then
dmaker Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 2 minutes ago, hiflier said: Fine. Both of you dig then So happy you could chime in and offer your approval.
hiflier Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, dmaker said: Proof of what? Your "phantom submissions" claim. What else? Stop faking ignorance. 3 minutes ago, dmaker said: So happy you could chime in and offer your approval Think nothing of it. Glad to help Edited June 1, 2018 by hiflier
dmaker Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 They are phantom because when asked exactly what papers ioyza expected responses to, ioyza could not point to a single one. So clearly when ioyza made the claim, it was more smoke than substance.
hiflier Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 (edited) 6 minutes ago, dmaker said: They are phantom because........ Because YOU said they were. 37 minutes ago, dmaker said: you offer the lack of response to these phantom submissions as support of your point? YOU called them that. You could have just said "submissions" but nope, Had to call them PHANTOM submissions. Now it is YOU who should back up the "phantom" claim Edited June 1, 2018 by hiflier
norseman Posted June 1, 2018 Admin Posted June 1, 2018 1 hour ago, hiflier said: Speaking of which, he's hot on the trail with the samples sent to him by Derek Randles' Olympic Project. The nest samples that were sent to him are supposed to go through the new environmental DNA process and I think Dr. Disotell was waiting for the right equipment to do that kind of analysis if it isn't already in his lab. Haven't looked for any recent updates though. Good news! I hope the DNA shows us a new species. And the hunt will be over for good. 1 hour ago, dmaker said: That is simply not true. It could be proven true beyond a shadow of any doubt? And it would change NOTHING. It doesnt matter. The only way to prove Patty real is if you had a piece of Patty or all of her. Or.....you had a piece of something that resembles her today... Science has spoken and the bar is set. Physical proof. And I concur..... I will never accept this creature real unless their is physical proof laying before me. No matter how much I respect some of the evidence and the sightings of friends. The fact that many do a tap dance around this issue and proclaim that shooting one would result in dead people, black helicopters, government MIB’s, etc? Is simply an excuse. Not that wildlife biology doesnt have politics involved....I know this from known animals. But if something is out there? They have no more control over it than we do. Unless all Sasquatch have a tracking beacon chipped in them? How in the heck is anyone going to know I shot one until Im banging on Meldrums office door? Anyhow Dmaker is right. If we had the evidence to prove this species? It would be proven. No scientific bias can withstand a bloody corpse on a autopsy table. They would be lined up around the block to look at it......your kidding me right?
Patterson-Gimlin Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 1 hour ago, ioyza said: I highly doubt he'd publish private email correspondence regarding paper submissions, but I equally doubt he'd get to where he's at with the subject and not at least try to submit somewhere, so maybe at some point I'll do a little digging to see if he's talked about this anywhere. It won't be this weekend though. It simply is true. When you speak of empty lottery tickets. That is exactly what evidence has been presented. You though I really like your enthusiasm have no case for reaching the conclusions you have reached. However, you did say that with this subject you don't take the scientific approach. I get that. You want it to be real. Just like the rest of us. I think you know as I do. It is wishful thinking and highly unlikely the creature exists. 1
ShadowBorn Posted June 1, 2018 Moderator Posted June 1, 2018 Quote It could be proven true beyond a shadow of any doubt? And it would change NOTHING. It doesnt matter. The only way to prove Patty real is if you had a piece of Patty or all of her. Or.....you had a piece of something that resembles her today... Science has spoken and the bar is set This is the circle that we are stuck on and still have not change. Patty is has nothing to do with what is happening today and it does not matter. Patty is just an observation that was filmed by some key witnesses and that's all. If she was never filmed there would be no one talking about this creature now. It is our thought process that needs to change and how we are to interact with these creatures that need changing. If we are stuck on the same thing and are seeing no results then we need to change to get the results that we want. This is what is happening to those who are getting results . They learned to change the way to interact with these creatures.In other words they have discovered what was needed to interact. Achieving results that others have not thought of trying cause it sounded to crazy. Only to believe that these creatures could be either Human /ape or just a new type of ape. So they used tactics that would only work on apes/chimps achieving zero results. Applying these methods do not work cause if they did science would be having interaction with these creatures in the now and they don't.. We need to learn from those who's methods are working and stick to them.Maybe then we will not need that body but have evidence of the way they live. Which is way better then murdering one of these creatures that might have played a big part in our evolution. The part that really scares the hack out of me. Since this can change a lot about our **belief** Maybe this is why they should remain elusive, myth, a long remaining mystery. I know that I can be happy with this even though I know that I have had my own encounters with them. But we all need to change the way that we search for them. 1
Twist Posted June 1, 2018 Posted June 1, 2018 3 hours ago, SWWASAS said: Having seen the pictures from the Olympic project of people picking through the nest, I suspect that a lot of human hair will be found. I cringed when I saw that picture. Every hair found that turns out to be human will just obfuscate or make it more difficult to find something not human and at the same time run the costs of testing way up. Even if something interesting is found, just the picture suggests contamination to anyone that sees it. QFT. I seem to recall this point being brought up as soon as the pics were on here. I appreciate the volunteer work put in to obtaining the supposed nests, but it’s all for nothing if all evidence can be considered tainted.
hiflier Posted June 2, 2018 Posted June 2, 2018 4 hours ago, SWWASAS said: Having seen the pictures from the Olympic project of people picking through the nest, I suspect that a lot of human hair will be found. I cringed when I saw that picture. Every hair found that turns out to be human will just obfuscate or make it more difficult to find something not human and at the same time run the costs of testing way up. Even if something interesting is found, just the picture suggests contamination to anyone that sees it. 23 minutes ago, Twist said: QFT. I seem to recall this point being brought up as soon as the pics were on here. I appreciate the volunteer work put in to obtaining the supposed nests, but it’s all for nothing if all evidence can be considered tainted. There is always a 'control'. DNA is unique to each and every individual. It is SOP that ANYONE that would have come in contact either with the nest site or the nest investigation would have by necessity been swabbed for their DNA in order to rule them out. The first thing would be looking at any hair morphology to rule out Humans and any already known animals. Whatever passes that filter gets tested. Any DNA found is compared to the "control" and if there's a match it is then ruled out. It doesn't matter if it is a crime lab or any other forensic endeavor there are protocols to address the possibility of contaminated samples. This process can take a few days to a few weeks to work through depending on the number of people involved, the quality of the sample, and the complexity of the environment in which samples were extracted from. One would certainly think that this time around NO mistakes will be made! Especially when considering where and how these samples were found and the potential magnitude of the results should the ultimate disclosure be the news that there is an hominid in the forest- and it ain't us.
Twist Posted June 2, 2018 Posted June 2, 2018 Do you know that these procedures were followed hiflier or just hoping/assuming?
hiflier Posted June 2, 2018 Posted June 2, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Twist said: Do you know that these procedures were followed hiflier or just hoping/assuming? It is standard procedure in ALL DNA labs where the complexity of the sample source is at issue, otherwise the testing is useless. Dr. Todd Disotell will do everything by the book. It's a pretty safe 'assumption'. And since I don't know whether or not the testing has been done yet your past tense may not apply? Anyway, just for reference on the process they are looking to do: http://cryptosightings.com/tag/dr-todd-disotell Edited June 2, 2018 by hiflier 1
Recommended Posts