Why is Bigfoot still a joke to so many people?

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, bipedalist said:

Until a scientist with the stature of someone working at Max Planck Institute for. Evolutionary Anthropology dives into the fray, there will be no answers........

 

At this point, we don't need answers. We need cooperation. 

1 hour ago, Arvedis said:

What part of her dialogues convinced anyone of her legitimacy to present data to a scientific community to substantiate an unknown species?

 

What part of Krantz's, Sarmiento's, Meldrum's, Mionzcynski's, Bindernagel's, Napier's, et al dialogues convinced anyone of their legitimacy when presenting their arguments and evidence to this magical "scientific community"? Who are those guys, anyway? Got some names? 

 

If you do, I'll bet $10 to a single apple fritter that they wouldn't touch this subject with a 100' pole, and they won't be honest, either, when explaining why.

 

So you can forget about "answers" until Norseman punches a half inch hole through one and drags it in for your magic men to pontificate about.

[hiflier]

And besides that, no one has unzipped any suspected DNA strands and match it with a Human genome. Personally I don't care who's name is on that. It could be Santa Clause or Tiny Tim. Getting the data is what's important. So the elephant in the room is HAS the data been noted. Is the evidence already with us but no one dares to look at it? Here's a nice little quote from someone we are all familiar with. Bet bipedalist can guess who it is:

 

1. We did give these folks access to the genomes.
2. They only pulled random sequences and did not look at the whole genomes. The person from UT that did our analysis told me that he never got all of the raw data uploaded to the second lab due to computer problems on the receiving lab’s end.
3. I offered raw DNA to this lab so they could extract and sequence themselves. They would not even give the courtesy of a reply.
4. They refused to even speak with me on the phone. The entire thing was completely and totally unprofessional.
5. They never tried to check the analysis done at the University of Texas even though the bioinformatics person put himself at their disposal.

 

I gotta ask, me hiflier, I GOTTA ask, how the heck is there any possibility to repeat a scientific process or study (repeatability of the results, right?) if no one will touch the study with, as Huntster says, with a 100' pole.  

[SWWASAS]

2 hours ago, Arvedis said:

 

If he did say all of that then it marks a significant change in how Paulides discusses Bigfoot. He usually has no theories and nothing at all worthwhile to say other than this happened and no on. 

e knows why.  Sounds like it is worth a listen.

 

On one hand, the Relict theory has been out there for a while and pretty obvious for most people to understand. The problem is the Ketchum study blew it. It should never have been a Ketchum study at all and needed a legit scientist to direct the project. Involving Burtsev was a problem as well as the clown in his lab coat Webb Sentell, etc.

 

If Erickson or whoever was responsible for running the show wanted legit results then he needed legit people involved. It's not the data itself that is the entire problem.

Part of the problem with relic human theory is that Meldrum does not advocate it.  He hugs the gigantopithecus theory pretty close.    One of his reasons is lack of cultural artifacts which mankind has had for the better part of a  million years.    I disagree with that in that we know so little about BF daily life,  they may have and use cultural artifacts.   Just because we don't see them with spears or bows and arrows does not mean necessarily that they do not have baskets and other things for food storage.   Lets say that BF was part of the human ancestry and split off before humans got into producing and using weapons.    They would not have an ancient weapons production  and their size makes them capable of chasing down deer and elk and have less need for spears and arrows to hunt successfully.   .  Their hairy / fur covering  makes clothing less important than for humans.    So any cultural artifact use may be completely invisible to us until we get into one of their encampments.   

[Arvedis]

8 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

At this point, we don't need answers. We need cooperation. 

 

What part of Krantz's, Sarmiento's, Meldrum's, Mionzcynski's, Bindernagel's, Napier's, et al dialogues convinced anyone of their legitimacy when presenting their arguments and evidence to this magical "scientific community"? Who are those guys, anyway? Got some names? 

 

If you do, I'll bet $10 to a single apple fritter that they wouldn't touch this subject with a 100' pole, and they won't be honest, either, when explaining why.

 

So you can forget about "answers" until Norseman punches a half inch hole through one and drags it in for your magic men to pontificate about.

 

There's no carcass forthcoming under any scenario. That's a fact though I understand you are just making a point.

 

There is scientific bias but there is also professional courtesy. Meldrum may not have it only because he has been so active for so many years as the sole academic willing to hang out on the fringe. No one wants to openly back him for that reason. But, a quality sample could be analyzed just as any unknown species could if you have supporting data. If you don't have it then you need to position it as theory, not scientific reality, which is what the Ketchum report did. It doesn't hold up and that is why it is not taken seriously, even if there is some good theory out of it.

Edited August 6, 2019 by Arvedis

[Huntster]

It is clear that Ketchum made several critical mistakes. The first and most important mistake was any and all public comment before, during, and after her work, and the lack of excellent and aggressive legal lawyer/monsters throughout. 

 

If there is one monster who can tame academic/scientific mystery men, it is an aggressive lawyer. A small herd of them, and you might be able to prove that fairies can fly faster than the speed of light, because the mystery men would be as invisible as sasquatches for fear of raising their pointy heads above legal cover.

 

If there is no carcass forthcoming, it will be because somebody is actively ensuring that it never surfaces, and that is likely because they, too, fear herds of lawyers.

[SWWASAS]

Krantz, and Bindernagel were out there on the fringe before Meldrum.    Part of the problem with Ketchum's or anyone else's DNA samples are the way in which they were collected. stored, and transported.      You cannot expect much scientific credence when your DNA sample was collected off a barb wire fence or plucked out of a nest by bearded, maskless, and hatless researchers.    The only gun in use was the one in which they shoot themselves in the foot.  

[7.62]

If they are it doesn't explain the size of them . Nature and evolution  wouldn't have made them bigger over all these years it would be harder to survive .

 

400 , 500 or some people say 800 pound  need more of everything .  We have become bigger due to what ever we eat but it's not nature .

Edited August 5, 2019 by 7.62

[SWWASAS]

The polor bear became bigger by adaptation in that the larger body mass made survival in the arctic more likely.   That factor drove them to get larger.     If BF came from Asia on the Bering land bridge it must have had a lot of time to adapt.    Humans in all likelihood made the trip in skin boats fairly quickly and physically only had to adept their clothing, shelter, and hunting methods. 

Edited August 5, 2019 by SWWASAS

[hiflier]

26 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

or plucked out of a nest by bearded, maskless, and hatless researchers.

 

Whoa, whoa, hold on there a second. If your referring the nesting sight there were e-DNA samples taken by a scientist/Phd from UNDER several nests. The samples came back with the usual forest animals PLUS Human DNA. I think if you showed your post to Meldrum or Randles you'd be in for a fight regarding proper protocols, my friend. Besides, I still think the REAL study is being conducted behind closed doors as I speak.

Edited August 5, 2019 by hiflier

[SWWASAS]

3 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

Whoa, whoa, hold on there a second. If your referring the nesting sight there were e-DNA samples taken by a scientist/Phd from UNDER several nests. The samples came back with the usual forest animals PLUS Human DNA. I think if you showed your post to Meldrum or Randles you'd be in for a fight regarding proper protocols, my friend.

You must not have seen the picture of the process that I have seen posted on this forum.   Even if other protocols were used, that picture puts them in question.     This thread  concerns why science it not taking  the search for BF seriously.    

Edited August 5, 2019 by SWWASAS

[Huntster]

23 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

........You cannot expect much scientific credence when your DNA sample was collected off a barb wire fence or plucked out of a nest by bearded, maskless, and hatless researchers.........

 

???

 

The hair is found where it was left. One cannot expect a sasquatch to hand the scientific mystery men a clump of hair from a golden comb that has been washed in alcohol.

 

And this expectation of sterile "researchers" in the field is just more BS. As I posted just last month, I found a potential crime scene in the woods while searching for a list gun. I contacted the Alaska State Troopers and went to the site where a federal law enforcement officer met us. They started picking up bones and laying them out for a photo. No gloves, no washing their hands with alcohol, no surgical masks, no tools. These were potential murder victim bones.

 

How about sone honesty here, folks:

 

These mystery science Boss Hoggs simply won't allow any credible consideration that these creatures are out there.......alive or dead, today or yesteryear. You are kooks, plain and simple. These attitudes and platitudes from their ivy covered towers are as clear and undeniable as can be. Some openly proclaim them. If you bring in a skull, they will say it's a fraud or a diseased NBA players scull.

[hiflier]

8 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

You must not have seen the picture of the process that I have seen posted on this forum.     

 

Of course I saw it , along with all of the comments connected to it. It was not the e-DNA sample taking procedure that was done on site from the soil under the centers of the nests. What you're referring to is a triangular section of nest material that was cut out and brought in to collect hair samples from. Hair samples were also collected from the site as well.

 

May I add that the nests' soil samples were all of maybe 3 years old? Denisovan DNA is well over ten THOUSAND years old. So isn Neanderthal DNA. I'm telling all of you that this whole Human contamination excuse over the last 20 years is a bunch of BS. There's a pile of money and revenue the size of Rhode Island at stake here and that's what the problem is really wrapped around. 

Edited August 5, 2019 by hiflier

[SWWASAS]

You 

17 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

Of course I saw it , along with all of the comments connected to it. It was not the e-DNA sample taking procedure that was done on site from the soil under the centers of the nests. What you're referring to is a triangular section of nest material that was cut out and brought in to collect hair samples from. Hair samples were also collected from the site as well.

 

May I add that the nests' soil samples were all of maybe 3 years old? Denisovan DNA is well over ten THOUSAND years old. So isn Neanderthal DNA. I'm telling all of you that this whole Human contamination excuse over the last 20 years is a bunch of BS. There's a pile of money and revenue the size of Rhode Island at stake here and that's what the problem is really wrapped around. 

You are probably right.     I hope I did not step on any toes but impressions are impressions.   If false impressions spread from pictures maybe the pictures should not have been released.   LIke you say contamination is always a first reason to throw out DNA evidence.   ;For heaven sakes don't publish pictures that suggest it.      The only way to get science on board is dump a body on a lab table and have enough of the right people see and test it before it gets confiscated.   Even that might not work if factors are at play that I suspect.  

[hiflier]

Nope, All toes are intact there, bud  Hope I didn't step on any either. We are all here to Solve For Bigfoot in the best way we know how. Some avenues of pursuit are scarier than others, that's all LOL.

 

39 minutes ago, SWWASAS said:

......impressions are impressions.   If false impressions spread from pictures maybe the pictures should not have been released.   LIke you say contamination is always a first reason to throw out DNA evidence.   ;For heaven sakes don't publish pictures that suggest it.      The only way to get science on board is dump a body on a lab table and have enough of the right people see and test it before it gets confiscated.   Even that might not work if factors are at play that I suspect.  

 

A perfect response, SWWASAS, with all points on target. Yes, the photos of the nest search in that garage were worrisome and even with good intentions it raised flags here on the BFF so you're right as rain on that front. "Factors at play"? Yeah, I'm pretty clear on that part. Everyone has their own opinion on that and I know I sure do  

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, SWWASAS said:

........LIke you say contamination is always a first reason to throw out DNA evidence........

 

But, somehow, 40,000 year old DNA from slivers of finger bone from the dirt of a Siberian or Flores cave is as pure as the driven snow.