Implications of Hybridization - v1.1

[wiiawiwb]

4 hours ago, hiflier said:

 The surest way to that end is through a DNA program that looks for novel primate DNA. We have it now, though, there is still a pretty healthy resistance to do what it would take to initiate or follow through with the process. Still in all, there are those few that are trying, like the Olympic Project and a small handful of others.

 

Hiflier, are you speaking of DNA in general terms or eDNA specifically?  I think the reluctance by people in the field, like me, is I have no idea:

 

1) How to take a sample (does a lab provide an evidence kit and a procedures instruction?)

2) Where to send it

3) How much it is going to cost

 

Without that information, I'm not getting to the batter's circle much less to first base.

Edited November 2, 2021 by wiiawiwb

[hiflier]

• First off, thank you for responding.  And, LOL! Love the batter's circle analogy but I have to say have to say, if successful, it wouldn't be first base- it'd be the grand slam.
•  

• 54 minutes ago, wiiawiwb said:

  • 1) .......(does a lab provide an evidence kit and a procedures instruction?)

•  
• That depends. Some universities do, like UCLA, UC Santa Cruz, and the general University of Califoenia system through a program called CALeDNA. That particular program has been set up to train an outfit (for free!) citizen scientists with all of the necessary equipment for sample collection, shipping the samples back to UC, testing the samples and being informed of the results. I don't know about other universities that might do that. Curiously, though, Miroslava, Muringia Ramos heads up the California program. You remember her? She's the young woman who gave her statement on the Expedition Bigfoot's S2 findings on the soil samples collected by Dr. Mayor from under that wood structure in the forest of eastern Kentucky. The very samples that when tested came back as having genus Pan troglodyte (Chimpanzee) DNA. More direct to the part about procedures, I have a couple of good .pdf's. one from the Rockies and one from Montana. Both are mainly geared toward snow prints- which is my particular focus this coming season. 
•  

• 54 minutes ago, wiiawiwb said:

  • 2) Where to send it

•  
• Again, my suggestion is to work with a local college university zoology department, which easier than people think. OR even state F&W if one has the nerve and doesn't mind raising their head or hand. The key is to go into as an inquisitive, science oriented person. I do think that most F&W agencies like hearing from their residents who may have fishing or hunting licenses. What I did to start out was pop the big question via email to someone who happened to be the secretary. I popped the straight question of existence: yes or no, and as I got responses that didn't address that specific question, I kept asking that question and finally was put in touch with someone who would talk about it. Universities have labs, F&W have labs t, too, but probably more work with universities that have the right equipment for testing.
•  

• 54 minutes ago, wiiawiwb said:

  • 3) How much it is going to cost

•  
• For Dr. Todd Disotell? Back in 2015, when the Olympic Project found the first nesting site and had Dr. Meldrum extract the soil samples from under the nests, Dr. Disotell said the cost would be $1,000 per sample. When I mentioned that to a local professor that I gad contacted he was shocked. He said he could run samples for $5 each. He also said he would charge me nothing as he would my samples at the same time that he ran his. You know, it's this kind of outcome that has come from my research and outreach to academia that keeps me bringing up the eDNA subject here on the Forum. I'm not anyone special and no one that I've dealt with in my quest thinks I'm anyone special. And yet, to a person, even regarding my correspondence and follow up with F&W, NO ONE has been anything but cordial, respectful, and open to my dialogues. And even after a couple of years, it's STILL that way to this day. Getting over one's imagined fear of these people or agencies is fear that is misplaced. I am here to answer ANYONE's questions who has any interest in knowing, and learning more, whatever it is they are curious about. Thanks again, wiiawiwb.

 

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by hiflier

[Huntster]

21 hours ago, Solvedit said:

Maybe she was quietly used for labor on some farm to give her something to do and pay for her food.  

 

Zana was openly kept on an estate and used for menial labor and as a sex slave.

[Incorrigible1]

1 hour ago, Solvedit said:

Where did I say or imply that there must be a good place to obtain video evidence of bigfoot in the wild in North America?

 

Ok,then. Silly games. Probably time to rebait your hook.

[Incorrigible1]

On 11/1/2021 at 7:27 AM, Incorrigible1 said:

 

If the creature roams the wilds of North America, where do you propose one might most likely obtain video evidence?

 

For the record, this was the question posed.

 

Your silly semantics duly noted.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Incorrigible1

[hiflier]

^^^^ And I still concur with that. Maybe our "friend" should go track down someone with a case of hypertrichosis, force then to cough up some DNA, and see if they have the mystery genes. I wonder how any of those crowdsourcing investors would react to that?

Edited November 2, 2021 by hiflier

[Incorrigible1]

27 minutes ago, Solvedit said:

 

All right then, when did I say it roams North America?

 

You didn't. Nor did I.

 

Not really sure how many times I have to ask the question, or your reading comprehension, but let's try a fourth time:

 

(Quoting), "If the creature roams the wilds of North America, where do you propose one might most likely obtain video evidence?"

 

Is that a difficult question?

Are you capable of comprehending a simple question?

I'm not, nor have I been putting words in your mouth.

[hiflier]

24 minutes ago, Solvedit said:

Did you notice they don't have Patty's facial features? 

 

Says the expert on Sasquatch facial features. Of course I did, so what? Ever go through John Green's Sasquatch database? No? Well then you wouldn't know anything about not all Sasquatches looking like blurry little Patty. Or that their nose shapes aren't the same, or that virtually none of the reports place them in an urban setting living in a cardboard box or pushing a grocery cart full of plastic bags containing everything they own. I fact, there are virtually no reports of them owning anything at all.

 

You want to have folks believe that if someone, in your estimation, looks like they have a Patty face, but perhaps live in some institution, or are in jail, that they MUST be Human/Sasquatch hybrids. I thought you were being ridiculous then and I think you being ridiculous still, but your ego is grasping at anything to promote something that is completely assumed, simply on the basis of people you have pigeon-holed as being essentially the cast-offs of society and therefore are hybrids...based only on their LOOKS?

 

I suppose then that people with large heads that narrow down to pointy chins are ET Alien hybrids too? Where would categorizing people in such a manner that end?

[hiflier]

22 minutes ago, Incorrigible1 said:

(Quoting), "If the creature roams the wilds of North America, where do you propose one might most likely obtain video evidence?"

 

OH, OH! Pick ME, pick ME!! Um.... wow, that's a tough one. You're more than a match for me, Inc1, but I'll take a WAG.....in the wilds of North America? Am I right? What do I win? Is it bigger'n a bread box?

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by hiflier

[Incorrigible1]

10 minutes ago, Solvedit said:

How about if you're dead wrong and the creature doesn't roam the wilds of North America?

 

What's the very first word of the question you've repeatedly dodged?

(Hint: It's a two-letter word that begins with "i" and ends with "f.")

Edited November 3, 2021 by Incorrigible1

[hiflier]

I would like to clear up something here if I may. Zana, or the dialogues of the past about her origins is one thing. The research done that may indicate that she was what folks refer to in that part of the world as an Almasty, may be true. That her genetic markers show her genetic relationship to a now extinct group of western sub-Saharan people that no longer exist seems to have been well demonstrated by Dr. Sykes et al. So what the problem then?

 

There wouldn't have been one had this general section of the discussion been based on only the question of whether or not those ZANA genes are present in the current population, including the general population in North America. But the discussion wasn't based on that question. These past few pages were a discussion relating only to a certain specific demographic of society, which basically is a relatively small, marginalized community, and then putting forth the idea that they are marginalized simply because they are genetically in possession of these African mystery genes and so (wrongfully asserted) have a certain look to their faces.

 

This is a general Forum so I will not unload here in a manner that I think such a hypothesis, or what ever one wishes to call it, deserves. Is this being harsh? Absolutely it is. But it's a lot less harsh than promoting the idea that street people, or the jailed or institutionalized, are somehow in their particular social predicaments because they carry mystery genes which supposedly gives them a certain physical look. This more societal aspect didn't need to crop up. The argument for Zana and her possible mystery genes being in the Human population was enough in and of itself for good discussion. Bringing in the marginalized sections of society and using them as examples to support the argument for existing African mystery genes was an enormous mistake. I would very much, for the sake of the Forum, like to see that part of the discussion at least rectified if not retracted altogether for its way off-base social implications.

 

My opinion only and so am the only one responsible for it. I also don't think I am wrong.

 

 

Edited November 3, 2021 by hiflier

[hiflier]

13 minutes ago, Solvedit said:

I don't know where your talk of marginalization comes from, unless you're looking a little too hard for an opportunity to virtue signal.

 

Nope, you're not looking back far enough at what you wrote. I won't do your work for you.

[Incorrigible1]

21 minutes ago, Solvedit said:

What's the point of asking someone who doesn't believe the creature roams the wilds of North America, where to get a film of it?

 

Yeah. Why, on a bigfoot forum, would someone ask someone else their opinion about something related to bigfoot?

 

I'll not make that mistake again.

[hiflier]

9 minutes ago, Solvedit said:

Most families who have had "unusual children" have noticed it is especially important for them to avoid other such families, or cousin marriage.  When they slip up, they probably go to the abortion clinic.

 

Ah yes, the Roe vs. Wade thing. So what do you think should be the next move? Have them all sterilized? Like I said, this isn't the 1930's and 40's.

 

12 minutes ago, Solvedit said:

Every so often, maybe once per generation.......

 

 You moved the goal posts. Okay, I'll do your work for you, but just this once

[hiflier]

On 10/31/2021 at 1:49 PM, Solvedit said:

Suppose most of them live in somebody's basement, consigned to an endless monotony of daytime TV and Xbox.

On 10/31/2021 at 12:28 PM, Huntster said:

 

The Zana types. They lived in institutions during the era when they were commonly reported in the woods. Now they live on city sidewalks and are less commonly reported in the woods.

 

On 10/31/2021 at 12:40 PM, hiflier said:

 

Zana types? Bringing up the idea that they now live on city streets is entering some pretty dangerous territory for Bigfoot Forum don't you think?

 

On 10/31/2021 at 12:47 PM, Huntster said:

 

It's not my theory. It's Solvedit's, and supported by Dr. Margaryan's paper.

 

On 10/31/2021 at 12:52 PM, Solvedit said:

My theory is that people with small traces of Sasquatch DNA live among us.

 

On 10/31/2021 at 9:01 AM, Solvedit said:

It means the creatures' relatives live among us. 

 

It suggests a whole new angle to squatching.  

 

There needs to be a crowdsourcing effort to identify human individuals who look like frame 352.

On 10/31/2021 at 1:49 PM, Solvedit said:

Suppose most of them live in somebody's basement, consigned to an endless monotony of daytime TV and Xbox.

 

On 10/31/2021 at 12:39 PM, Solvedit said:

I am talking about people with traces of dna from extinct prehistoric hominids.  I have known of a few people with faces which reminded me of frame 352 of the famous Patterson-Gimlin film.

YES,YES, LET'S GO GET THEM!! FIND THEM! MAKE SURE THEY DON'T ESCAPE TO THE WOODS. OR ARE ABLE TO MAKE OTHERS JUST LIKE THEM!! THEN WE WILL HAVE Solvedit! (see what I did there?) LOOK, THERE'S ONE, IT HAS A FACE JUST LIKE PATTY'S, MUST BE ONE OF THEM HYBRIDS. Unless the DNA test comes back that the person isn't a hybrid after all. What then?