My Perspective and questions for you all

[Pdub]

I agree Norse, definitely politics involved. Here in Minnesota, we have more wolves than the rest of the lower 48 states combined. The moose population has plummeted at the same time as the wolves have exploded. F&W have declared climate change as the culprit for low moose numbers. During this same time frame, 20 miles from shore out in Lake Superior on Isle Royale, they are near a record number of moose and were down to just 2 wolves. This lead the to recently, and controversely, reintroduce more wolves. Somehow Isle Royale is not affected by climate change, again only 20 miles of shore. My friends that deer hunt in northern MN see wolves all the time but it’s been slim pickings for deer hunting. Also hear rumors that the vastly under report the number of wolves so as to keep the wolf hunting season off the table. 

[norseman]

5 minutes ago, Pdub said:

I agree Norse, definitely politics involved. Here in Minnesota, we have more wolves than the rest of the lower 48 states combined. The moose population has plummeted at the same time as the wolves have exploded. F&W have declared climate change as the culprit for low moose numbers. During this same time frame, 20 miles from shore out in Lake Superior on Isle Royale, they are near a record number of moose and were down to just 2 wolves. This lead the to recently, and controversely, reintroduce more wolves. Somehow Isle Royale is not affected by climate change, again only 20 miles of shore. My friends that deer hunt in northern MN see wolves all the time but it’s been slim pickings for deer hunting. Also hear rumors that the vastly under report the number of wolves so as to keep the wolf hunting season off the table. 

 

Bingo!

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, norseman said:

........A major major part of Ketchums study failure isnt the DNA itself.

 

Its how its assembled into a “genome” and interpreted. Which cannot be blamed on anyone but Ketchum.

 

So, then, the samples, DNA, and tests were not flawed. Why doesn’t somebody else interpret them?

[NCBFr]

8 hours ago, NCBFr said:

Lets assume for the moment that BF has a mix of DNA from the Sapien and Neanderthal Home group as well as some other group that contributes to BFs size and shape.  Wouldn't all DNA samples look like they have been contaminated with human DNA?  

 

 

4 hours ago, norseman said:

 

No. They mapped the Denisovans genome from a single pinkie bone. They can tell certain groups of modern humans interbred with Denisovans. 

 

 

 

Good point and I agree the technology exists to make the distinction.  However, you go to a generic lab and are not a university tenured anthropologists and tell them to do a DNA test on a BF hair or turd, I wonder what chances they see the homo sapien elements in it mixed in with some other stuff and simply throw up their hands and say the sample was contaminated.  Lets face it, even with a perfect DNA sample, no DNA test in the world will return "Bigfoot" as the result.  

 

 

Edited November 7, 2018 by NCBFr

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, Pdub said:

Where do most of these “samples” come from?  I think there is a high probability of human contamination with many samples. How many people are out there researching with full sterile gear on? Are they wearing nitrile gloves, sterile tweezers etc? I’m an RN at a large, well respected hospital. I couldn’t count the number of times over the years that I’ve had to recollect samples from patients due to lab errors or contamination. True, fully sterile technique is a real pain the behind to accomplish...........

 

Huh? You’ve got quite a bit more than a pain in the Gomez there. All that is a non-starter. You’ve created all the BS that has surrounded the PG film even before the filming has started. You’re making it painfully clear that the assassination of a sasquatch is the only way the pointy headed experts are goin* to be forced on board. 

 

And I say screw ‘em.

[NCBFr]

5 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

So, then, the samples, DNA, and tests were not flawed. Why doesn’t somebody else interpret them?

 

My memory may be flawed here, but didn't Ketchum conclude that the mitochondrial DNA mtDNA was human which means that the carrier was a descendant of a female Homo Sapiens and the nuclear DNA was a mix of HS and primate?

 

It has been a long time since I reviewed the Ketchum Project but do recall concluding that it was an honest effort but just did not have the academic muscle, time, and/or funding to get over the finish line.  I never concluded fraud.

 

[norseman]

11 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

So, then, the samples, DNA, and tests were not flawed. Why doesn’t somebody else interpret them?

 

They have. And its not a real animal. Its a bunch of short sequences of known animals (like possum) and human all bundled together.

[Huntster]

2 minutes ago, NCBFr said:

.......... it was an honest effort but just did not have the academic muscle, time, and/or funding to get over the finish line.........

 

So we’re back to the old, unspoken adage of, “Sasquatches don’t exist until So And So says they do”, and nobody is willing to say who So And So is.

 

3 minutes ago, norseman said:

They have. And its not a real animal. Its a bunch of short sequences of known animals (like possum) and human all bundled together.

 

I find all of this impossible to believe. How can I not walk away from this sure that either fraud or coverup has occurred? 

[norseman]

13 minutes ago, NCBFr said:

 

 

 

Good point and I agree the technology exists to make the distinction.  However, you go to a generic lab and are not a university tenured anthropologists and tell them to do a DNA test on a BF hair or turd, I wonder what chances they see the homo sapien elements in it mixed in with some other stuff and simply throw up their hands and say the sample was contaminated.  Lets face it, even with a perfect DNA sample, no DNA test in the world will return "Bigfoot" as the result.  

 

 

 

Except that when they mapped the genome of the Denisovan? There was no Denisovan holotype to compare to? I see no way a good lab would sequence a Bigfoot sample and say its a human. They would most likely say its a “unknown primate”, place it into the family tree in relation to other known primate species and try and name it.

[norseman]

Just now, Huntster said:

 

 

I find all of this impossible to believe. How can I not walk away from this sure that either fraud or coverup has occurred? 

 

Pay the 30 bucks. Take her sequence and try to make sense of it yourself or pay a lab to? I hear its like a 10 page PDF file.

 

http://sasquatchgenomeproject.org/index.html

 

Or just look at Matilda on the front page of the website. I mean its an obvious hoax as far as Im concerned. Its kinda hard to get DNA from a Chewbacca costume. Even Todd Standing wasn't lazy enough of a con man to buy his Bigfoot costumes from a Star Wars online shop.

[NatFoot]

Maybe Bigfeets look just like Chewbacca?

 

[Huntster]

7 minutes ago, norseman said:

Pay the 30 bucks. Take her sequence and try to make sense of it yourself or pay a lab to?..........

 

I’d rather invest that $30 in a box of Sierra Gameking bullets. It looks to me like somebody already threw $500K away needlessly. My additional $30 is good money afte4 bad.

 

........

Or just look at Matilda on the front page of the website. I mean its an obvious hoax as far as Im concerned.

 

Looks that way to me, but people keep acting like DNA doesn’t lie, and I happen to know that’s a lie. Everything under the sun can be, wAs, and/or will be corrupted by people. Even a complete carcass can fail to confirm the existence of th3 species if the powerful are determined to kill it.

[norseman]

1 minute ago, Huntster said:

 

I’d rather invest that $30 in a box of Sierra Gameking bullets. It looks to me like somebody already threw $500K away needlessly. My additional $30 is good money afte4 bad.

 

 

 

 

Looks that way to me, but people keep acting like DNA doesn’t lie, and I happen to know that’s a lie. Everything under the sun can be, wAs, and/or will be corrupted by people. Even a complete carcass can fail to confirm the existence of th3 species if the powerful are determined to kill it.

 

You know me and where I stand on things like that. I do not believe that happened here. Ketchum was selling snake oil and got caught. And for the record she is one of these no kill “forest shaman” types. 

 

At least for me? The hunt continues....

[MIB]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

So, then, the samples, DNA, and tests were not flawed. Why doesn’t somebody else interpret them?

 

I would not say that.  

 

What I know about the samples' background is sparse / incomplete, but adequate to say with personal certainty that some of the samples were bigfoot and some were not.   Ketchum reported 109 out of 109 testing positive.    If so, the testing was flawed.  

 

The full data of the 3 complete nDNA sequences has never been released by Ketchum.    What she released with the paper uses less than 1/10th of a percent of the storage necessary to actually save the data she claims that it is.   She made some feeble excuses for that discrepancy, hedging her earlier claim with something to the effect that though incomplete, it included whatever was needed to prove her point.    I do not believe she will ever release the full data set because it will clearly invalidate her claims.

 

As a matter of record, that portion of her data which has been released was indeed examined / interpreted.   Two BFF members, Haskell Hart and another guy whose screen name escapes me, examined the data and found it lacking.   Certainly the subject matter experts peer reviewing the paper she submitted found it lacking.   

 

MIB

[NCBFr]

2 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

So we’re back to the old, unspoken adage of, “Sasquatches don’t exist until So And So says they do”, and nobody is willing to say who So And So is.

 

 

huh?  Not sure how that follows what I said but I will bite anyway even though you will not like the answer.  BFs will not "exists" until the government says they do.