Jump to content
hiflier

Poll: When Would An Announcement Of e-DNA Positive For Sasquatch Be Made?

When Would An Announcement Of e-DNA Positive For Sasquatch Be Made?  

49 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

ShadowBorn
BFF Donor

Or else we do the deed of retrieving a body to find out what they truly are by hunting one down.  The problem will be is who ever does do the deed will need a good lawyer  to stay out of jail if it does comes back as Human. The other best way is stay anonymous when one does get shot and brings it in for testing. No talk shows , no news shows and remain silent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Donor

Simple question, where is Disotell's report then--- in the degraded trashbin of Gozer, In the https://www.isu.edu/rhi/ ?  If not, where?

 

I don't believe this crew would deep six negative results or equivocal findings and defer to a podcast!?

 

Discussion of results on a podcast is lower than making up your own journal electronically, calling it defunct, then buying it and making it seem like you were doing an independent review because you were spurned by the world's best scientfiic journals.  Really? 

 

And not a gig but I did say that the project was right but Disotell was the wrong man, who is to say the samples were degraded without a report?

*crickets*

Edited by bipedalist
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
southernyahoo
1 hour ago, Bluegrassfoot said:

You’re right southernyahoo.  I didn’t phrase that well.  What I was driving at is that after 20 generations, a single ancestor’s nuclear DNA contribution and phenotype influence/expression on an individual is miniscule, while the mitochondrial DNA contribution of that individual 20 generations later can still be exact.

 

I knew what you were driving at, just wanted to point out that the nuclear DNA wouldn't be like some alien never before seen kind of stuff. I'm tired of people who think BF DNA couldn't be detected in testing like this because we don't have a specimen to compare it to.  It's simply not true if bigfoot exists and it's not human.  If it is, then we'll get results like this every time and we'll have to find cause and funding to once again go deep into nuclear DNA studies and we would need fresh flesh to do that, but not necessarily a complete body. Find a fresh birthing bed and we'd be in business. We have computer programs to search through an entire genome,  but getting an entire genome from the sample and with confidence that it is complete and pure takes a lot of replication.  Science would then take years to suss out what all the differences are and what their origins could be.  The Y chromosome would be a prime location to target the most telling information from the paternal lineage. That's where the rainbow ends and the pot of gold sits.:D.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bipedalist
BFF Donor

Poll should have said when would results be reported in writing positive or negative.  

 

Big difference there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
southernyahoo

Or we could just say, when we know what positive is. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ShadowBorn
BFF Donor
57 minutes ago, southernyahoo said:

The Y chromosome would be a prime location to target the most telling information from the paternal lineage. That's where the rainbow ends and the pot of gold sits.:D.

The Target would be to retrieve the flesh of any male Bigfoot for testing  with out actually killing one. This would mean using any means of extracting a piece of flesh of any male bigfoot for study. But in order for the results to be properly tested . DNA would have to be extracted from two or three different male creatures  in order to retrieve positive results.

 

How will we be able to compare with an unknown DNA if there is nothing to compare with? If we have an unknown DNA and it is not added to the database and it shows up again and it has been discarded how will we know? When all those unknowns have been discarded and we are left with nothing to compare with because we cannot discern the results. Chances are we probability had true result but discarded them due to them not being reliable or believing contamination. DNA that should of been added and compared with other DNA but discarded.  We have to look at all angles and all theories .  I am still stuck with the theory of them being Autistic savant. Which can explain why they might be intelligent yet have not advanced enough to progress. Yet might have other abilities we might not have learned that their brains might have opened up too. Some thing that others have opened up to as well in theory.  Some thing that I am kind a of warming to since it does explain some thing about them. Again my opinion.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Catmandoo
BFF Donor
5 hours ago, ShadowBorn said:

The Target would be to retrieve the flesh of any male Bigfoot for testing  with out actually killing one. This would mean using any means of extracting a piece of flesh of any male bigfoot for study.

The way I understand your post is that you propose a point blank scenario. Good luck with that. Dart guns require close range operation also. Barbed wire?

 

I am going to stir it up here. You referred to flesh. How about blood? How about blood from Sasquatch lice, fleas or ticks? Can parasite loading be utilized?  An animal that comes to mind with a very specific parasite is the mountain beaver. A fury little rodent, not really a beaver, that carries the largest known flea in the world. One would have to comb Sasquatch hair to get a  lice/flea sample. Digging out a tick would be interesting.

 

Go for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
southernyahoo
9 hours ago, ShadowBorn said:

How will we be able to compare with an unknown DNA if there is nothing to compare with? If we have an unknown DNA and it is not added to the database and it shows up again and it has been discarded how will we know? When all those unknowns have been discarded and we are left with nothing to compare with because we cannot discern the results.

 

There is plenty to compare to " the knowns". That tells us what it is most closely related to, and that can tell us it is a great ape. We have the situation that the results turn up human. So that's what we compare it to. It just has to be more thoroughly done in the Y chromosome to find a unique and repeating paternal lineage.  Yes we do have to convince scientists to not discard anomalies and compare those to other anomalies from other samples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bluegrassfoot

Surely, there's another shoe to drop in regards to these nests!  They've been studying them for a couple years.  And on multiple occasions I've listened to some of the main players in the Olympic Project, stressing how they were doing it the right way.  They repeatedly said how they were keeping it close to the vest, and were not going to release or publish their results on social media, etc..  "Science", "scientific method", and "documentation" were the repeated words.  Surely, it didn't all culminate with them scraping together a measly $4,728.00 via a crowdfunding campaign, running a hand full of  eDNA tests on samples of questionable quality, and unceremoniously releasing the results without details or supporting documentation on a fledgling podcast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Old Time Lifter

After a while one has to seriously ask why do all things Bigfoot ALWAYS end up as such train-wrecks... and no, it's not the government...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NatFoot
BFF Donor
2 hours ago, Bluegrassfoot said:

Surely, there's another shoe to drop in regards to these nests!  They've been studying them for a couple years.  And on multiple occasions I've listened to some of the main players in the Olympic Project, stressing how they were doing it the right way.  They repeatedly said how they were keeping it close to the vest, and were not going to release or publish their results on social media, etc..  "Science", "scientific method", and "documentation" were the repeated words.  Surely, it didn't all culminate with them scraping together a measly $4,728.00 via a crowdfunding campaign, running a hand full of  eDNA tests on samples of questionable quality, and unceremoniously releasing the results without details or supporting documentation on a fledgling podcast.

 

That's exactly how this looks like it played out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
BFF Donor
25 minutes ago, Old Time Lifter said:

After a while one has to seriously ask why do all things Bigfoot ALWAYS end up as such train-wrecks... and no, it's not the government...

 

Because instead of working together we are a bunch of competing tribes all at each others throats...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NatFoot
BFF Donor
23 minutes ago, norseman said:

 

Because instead of working together we are a bunch of competing tribes all at each others throats...

 

I don't think anyone was at the throat of the OP until they pulled this stunt. I think most everyone thought it was an incredible looking find and were cruious to see such a find handled in a credible and serious way. Turns out it wasn't.

 

Not even upset at the results. Upset with how they handled the release of the results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gigantor

Are you guys sure the podcast was the "official" release?

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
norseman
BFF Donor
1 minute ago, NatFoot said:

 

I don't think anyone was at the throat of the OP until they pulled this stunt. I think most everyone thought it was an incredible looking find and were cruious to see such a find handled in a credible and serious way. Turns out it wasn't.

 

Not even upset at the results. Upset with how they handled the release of the results.

 

Why is that?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×