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

[hiflier]

18 minutes ago, Twist said:

but hopefully it moves the needle on awareness and thus leads to further research.

 

Right on point, Twist! And I am sure that the move to get the e-DNA process of the ground was done with the hopes that something found that is unknown DOES spark enough interest. Who knows, maybe if that happens then scientists in zoology as well as anthropology will pressure their supervisors and heads of departments to not be the last ones to look deeper into the matter.

 

I can see it now: "Well, I told so and so to jump on this but because of a fear of the department getting ridiculed and losing funding it didn't happen. Now we look like a bunch of  clique grubbing amateurs." So I think you are correct about a more robust interest that could generated further research.

[Twist]

7 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

 

I've always thought BF could and will be some big breakthrough for whatever researcher/scientist cracks the code.   Its going to be like a Goodall scenario, someone that goes down in history.   I would be jumping at the chance if I was a scientist.   Its something that will set you apart.   

Edited November 15, 2018 by Twist

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

........I don't think that the representatives from the Department of Natural Resources that went out and viewed the nest sites were laughing. I don't think the logging employee that found them or the company he works for is laughing either. But there is a certain amount of critical time pressure on this and so no one can waste one moment in getting the e-DNA results finished. And they all know it. According to Cliff Barackman's website they had been looking at the nests for two years. But he wrote that a year and a half ago. It could be that now there are only a matter of months left before the logging company gets to work? Could someone help me verify this before I comment any further regarding this potentially short time frame?.........

 

In 1998 a timber cruiser on contract to Alaska Native land owners found a nest on Prince of Wales Island. State forestry personnel and the ADFG Area Biologist were brought to the scene. The biologist actually said that it resembled gorilla nests he had seen in Africa. Hairs and scat were found in the nest. The biologist sent them to the Anchorage Crime Lab for DNA testing. At the time, that was his only real option. The resulting report came back that it matched nothing on file, and the lab threw out the samples. 

 

The nest was photographed by the timber cruiser with his ax in it for scale. Everybody, from the cruiser to the Native landowners, to the biologist knew what it was. The legends abound there, yet it all just died. The nest burned in a fire several years later.

 

Iteas alldocumented by Robert Alley In “Raincoast Sasquatch”.

 

http://alaskacryptozoologyinstitute.blogspot.com/p/the-alaskan-bigfoot.html

 

The bottom line? Nests and DNA tests don’t count. So I doubt that DNA testing of the soil in nests count, either.

 

 

[Twist]

11 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

In 1998 a timber cruiser on contract to Alaska Native land owners found a nest on Prince of Wales Island. State forestry personnel and the ADFG Area Biologist were brought to the scene. The biologist actually said that it resembled gorilla nests he had seen in Africa. Hairs and scat were found in the nest. The biologist sent them to the Anchorage Crime Lab for DNA testing. At the time, that was his only real option. The resulting report came back that it matched nothing on file, and the lab threw out the samples. 

 

The nest was photographed by the timber cruiser with his ax in it for scale. Everybody, from the cruiser to the Native landowners, to the biologist knew what it was. The legends abound there, yet it all just died. The nest burned in a fire several years later.

 

Iteas alldocumented by Robert Alley In “Raincoast Sasquatch”.

 

http://alaskacryptozoologyinstitute.blogspot.com/p/the-alaskan-bigfoot.html

 

The bottom line? Nests and DNA tests don’t count. So I doubt that DNA testing of the soil in nests count, either.

 

 

 

In 1998, we were still at the infancy of the internet.  It was not on your persons 16 hours a day on a smartphone.  This does not surprise me in 1998.  Now days, the laymen does have the opportunity, if prepared to do so, to reach out and spread information to the masses.   Things can spread like wildfire more now than ever obviously.   Will it work, we'll see, but the means to do so now are greater than ever by 100X or more than 1998.

[hiflier]

It makes me wonder for sure what will happen. I can sure be a cynic but in this case, with this relatively new 'designer' e-DNA fad? I think enough science and scientists have looked at the technology pretty hard.

 

23 minutes ago, Huntster said:

The biologist sent them to the Anchorage Crime Lab for DNA testing. At the time, that was his only real option.

 

And science has since found a better method. It comes down to this, too: How long can, and will, science continue to ignore a result of 'Unknown'? In the past 5 years so much 'new' has been discovered that one would hope that scientists are starting to get the notion pretty strongly that there is stuff out there both old and current that is constantly coming to light. Naledi, Denisova, Flores, it has been quite a ride.

 

The nest site obviously therefore has a precedent that is neither African or SE Asian. The precedent apparently is now North American. Maybe MORE than one precedent as far as the public knows. And the Olympic Project has been on the public's radar so much more than the Alaskan find. I don't know if that will help keep the microscope focused long enough to apply any pressure to the scientific community but I will bet that a greater percentage of that community knows about this find than the one on Prince of Wales Island. Heck, I didn't know, so thanks.  

Edited November 15, 2018 by hiflier

[ShadowBorn]

But this also leads to more questions and that is : why are only these nest found in these areas and not in other parts of the US or the world except for where Gorillas /Apes are found ? If we are seeing these creatures in different parts of the us then we should be finding more nest like these in other parts. Are there not more researchers looking for these nest in other parts. I know that I have not really search for them in my part and maybe I should. But I have no idea what I have in my part of the woods. The last nest or shelter I found was a crude shelter made up of  broken branches setup as a large lean too . Like  Huntser said that they had found an unknown and since it was a unknown they just tossed it to the curb.

 

How can science be so dumb to toss an unknown to the curb. Is not an unknown a discovery in it's own right since it is an unknown. Some thing that is unknown should have been studied more since it is unknown and catalog within the data base so in case it would ever be matched again. The same goes with Human contamination. If a DNA comes back contaminated the handlers should also have their DNA tested. So that they can be matched with the DNA and be excluded from the DNA that is contaminated.  This way we know if the DNA is contaminated or not. Will this not give us a true reading  and place contamination out of the picture and make the DNA pure for peer review.

 

A lot of mistakes were made and they should not be made again . We should learn from the mistakes that were made before and there is no need to mention names. DNA is hard evidence and has placed people on death row  because of their DNA.  So if it is done right then there is no reason why we should not have a living ancient Human/Ape living among us. So yes this would be an amazing discovery and  yoohaa moment that we will all get to see and know . Think about this we all played a part in this monumental  ancient discovery.  Screw the beer , bring out the most expensive scotch or wine with a big fat cigar and a very expensive steak. it will be party time for a discovery of a lifetime. 

[Twist]

^^^ To answer your question as to why we are not finding more nests, I point to the idea I have held to since the beginning,  they are of a small population.  Migratory and or nomadic depending on your theory on intelligence lol.   

[Arvedis]

To assume bf nests are exclusive to a geographic area would not be accurate. If this was a cataloged animal then it could be studied. It's just not possible to detect all abnormal impressions in the ground. Guess is they have numerous patterns of sleeping whenever they choose. I liked what the southern u.s research groups have discovered, bf likes to sleep in abandoned barns and other dilapidated structures.

[hiflier]

ShadowBorn, I am out of upvotes so I have been doing this: Here's to you.....++

 

3 minutes ago, Twist said:

^^^ To answer your question as to why we are not finding more nests, I point to the idea I have held to since the beginning,  they are of a small population.  Migratory and or nomadic depending on your theory on intelligence lol.   

 

To address both you, Twist, and ShadowBorn, Do we actually know that we are not finding more nests? I now wonder how many have been found over the years and decades and never mentioned because no one could figure them out and because they may have looked quite natural in the environment. It may also depend on who found them and whether or not they KNEW what made them. And too, if they are birthing places then they will not be anywhere but the most quiet, remote places that 99.9999999% of Humans ever go to- even hunters.

 

One thing may be of interest though. They may be in areas that are forested but with stands of growth more like shrubs or naturally growing plants that are 7-8 feet tall or less. That way many tops can be broken off at the right diameters for weaving. I don't know about the actual local terrain details regarding the one on Prince of Wales Island but the ones in Washington were on a sort off bluff that had fingers extending out almost like cliffs. There may have been some natural terracing but generally they were in an area overlooking a small river with a good flow of water. Could be at a headwater where the water is the best for drinking.

 

One might think they were in close proximity to such a location if there were a large area of plant material that has been broken off to about 5 feet in height. All in all the complete description of the site speaks to defense and being able to remain hidden, use the sound of water flowing to mask one's own sounds, hear intruders coming through the wall of broken off plants, and not only observe anything approaching from below but also notice when the broken wall of plants has movement. Wind will move all of the plants, An intruder will only move the ones they are moving through. Very clever indeed.

 

 

[Catmandoo]

^^^^^  Is there a pattern of location based upon sun exposure?  Southwest or Southeast or a cold ass northern exposure?

[hiflier]

Good question. Cliff Barackman may be able to answer that one. It would be good to know, and how dense the canopy was overhead along with the 360 degree view. Open? Dense and closed in on all sides? The reports said remote, quite far in,  and difficult to penetrate.

Edited November 16, 2018 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Out of almost 30 members polled about 46% have leaned toward an announcement NEVER happening. This is in light of an e-DNA result coming back as being positive for an apparent new species of unknown primate. It is interesting that so far there seems to be an undercurrent of suspicion among members of the BFF regarding this kind of an outcome. I have a question for you then: If the announcement of an unknowm primate will never happen, or be allowed to happen, would any of you take it upon yourselves to dig for the truth? I mean if an announcement is never going to happen how would anyone know what the outcome of the testing was? Do you think it will just end up with someone saying "inconclusive"? Or would someone simply say, "no evidence of a novel primate sequence"? Or maybe "the sample were Human contaminated"?

 

Would you trust that one of those kinds of announcements would be acceptable? If not would there be anything you might do to secure your confidence that the truth was being told? Or just accept that the truth is being kept from us and go on with life? Which IMO means that nothing has changed regarding maintaining a position of being powerless to find out what the results really were. Can one accept that, as far as the nests go, there are no novel primates to be found? A conclusion that would have its own set of large issues to contend with. 

 

What might those "large issues" consist of? The answers to these questions goes right to the heart of the BFF and its future and that of other Bigfoot endeavors so take your time in giving these questions some thought.  

[BigTreeWalker]

Hiflier, I think there are too many people involved in the nest project for everything to be covered up. I personally know a few of the people involved. What kind of a gag order would be used to shut up all involved? 

 

Since you mentioned the Wildthing podcasts here is a link to them:  https://www.foxtopus.ink/wildthing/listen

 

The specific one with Dr Disotell is this:

_EPISODE_05_FINAL_BEGGING.mp3

[hiflier]

Good links BigTreeWalker, thanks. Forgot to do that.

 

36 minutes ago, BigTreeWalker said:

I think there are too many people involved in the nest project for everything to be covered up.......What kind of a gag order would be used to shut up all involved?

 

The only gag order would be on Dr. Disotell? He is the PhD and the authority on the case after all. Everyone else, as much as I respect and admire them, could say whatever they wish. Anything below "Doctor Something Or Other" can, and probably will, be just swept aside. No one is going to peer review Derek Randles or anyone else. ALL of the pressure and focus is on Dr. Todd Disotell. But here's the thing too, any announcement favoring Bigfoot has to go through the peer review process AAANNND get published BEFORE it is publicly announced. The review boards really frown on such proclamations before the findings are published in a scientific journal.

[BigTreeWalker]

The peer review process is where the problem lies. But if it doesn't get approved it's doubtful the results would remain secret though. Too many people are going to know the results for them to remain a secret. Regardless of the peer review, that would put pressure on the scientific community to not be so biased if the results are in favor of an unknown primate.