Submitting A BF Sample To Science

[Arvedis]

2 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said:

I heard part of last night's Coast to Coast broadcast, an interview regarding bigfoot. Today I find this FB posting from Ms. Melba:

 

Stephanie J Little Wolf‎
to
 Melba Ketchum
9 mins ·

Outraged that Noory let ken Gerhard dis your work and smear it, claiming this tired garbage it came back as bear and that your methodology was suspect. URGH
1 Comment

Comments

    Melba Ketchum
    What's bad is when Sykes did the same thing, I called in and they wouldn't let me counter it. I am done with radio interviews and the BF crowd. I can't do this alone and though people say they support my research, I've asked for help before and only a handful stepped up to the plate. That was when WIKi let a reporter from Huffington Post dis it. The only way to help is to deluge C to C with complaints.If there are enough of you, maybe they will back off. It's bad enough with Sykes saying it is contaminated and more disgusting lies when he was on, but especially since I have the raw data to disprove contamination. I even did a video of how I could show that there wasn't any contamination on my YouTube channel, but this guy is no scientist and is no expert. This reminds me of the fake news. Lies and more lies and slander. That's one reason I haven't released some of the mindblowing data and corroboration I have as well. Why should I? They'd just lie and tear it apart.

    Like
     · Reply · 1m

 

This will never get untangled in the public domain. I'm not defending Ketchum in any way but the real problem here is finger pointing and not learning how things went of the rails. It is vital that this mistake is not repeated. Doubtful that Erickson will fund more genetic testing but if/whenever there is a chance for it and there are legit samples to test with, the BF community needs to steer clear of the usual suspects like Distotell.    I think Sykes meant well but he's in a different country.  I would want the chain of custody to go directly from the field to the lab. There has to be a strategy for getting the testing done with the right people or the testing will just keep falling on its face.

Edited November 26, 2019 by Arvedis

[hiflier]

12 minutes ago, Arvedis said:

There has to be a <covert> strategy for getting the testing done with the right people or the testing will just keep falling on its face.

 

There. Fixed it for you  

[MIB]

16 hours ago, hiflier said:

There. Fixed it for you  

 

Covert .. correct.  That means not posting your strategy online.   Y' never know who is listening.   

 

MIB   

[BlackRockBigfoot]

20 hours ago, Incorrigible1 said:

I heard part of last night's Coast to Coast broadcast, an interview regarding bigfoot. Today I find this FB posting from Ms. Melba:

 

Stephanie J Little Wolf‎
to
 Melba Ketchum
9 mins ·

Outraged that Noory let ken Gerhard dis your work and smear it, claiming this tired garbage it came back as bear and that your methodology was suspect. URGH
1 Comment

Comments

    Melba Ketchum
    What's bad is when Sykes did the same thing, I called in and they wouldn't let me counter it. I am done with radio interviews and the BF crowd. I can't do this alone and though people say they support my research, I've asked for help before and only a handful stepped up to the plate. That was when WIKi let a reporter from Huffington Post dis it. The only way to help is to deluge C to C with complaints.If there are enough of you, maybe they will back off. It's bad enough with Sykes saying it is contaminated and more disgusting lies when he was on, but especially since I have the raw data to disprove contamination. I even did a video of how I could show that there wasn't any contamination on my YouTube channel, but this guy is no scientist and is no expert. This reminds me of the fake news. Lies and more lies and slander. That's one reason I haven't released some of the mindblowing data and corroboration I have as well. Why should I? They'd just lie and tear it apart.

    Like
     · Reply · 1m

Gerhard has a new book to push.  He must be making the rounds.

[Arvedis]

3 hours ago, MIB said:

 

Covert .. correct.  That means not posting your strategy online.   Y' never know who is listening.   

 

MIB   

 

A strategy including who is going to do the testing AND what exactly that entails. It's work, resources and dollars to spend the time doing all of that. With that million or whatever he spent on the Ketchum debacle, Erickson would have done better to buy the equipment and hire someone dedicated to the testing. He had the right idea at first and did employ people to collect evidence. Then he involved Paulides and that's when things tanked.

[Photog]

I've just read through all the posts on this topic and haven't heard any thoughts on how the media may be leveraged to help test a specimen discovery, or at least help to protect from confiscation.

[hiflier]

Hey, welcome to the Forum  What are your thoughts on that? For myself the promise of an exclusive story could be enticing in exchange for a media contact to keep silent  while working behind the scenes to help secure proof of discovery?

[Photog]

Thanks hiflier, I’m an old BFF 1.0 member that lost his way and now reconnecting to the Community.  😊

 

This is a great topic to discuss and it has used up much brain power of many a BF searcher.  Most of us reading this forum have planned, or just daydreamed, on how we would react to a BF landing in our laps.  Setting aside the ethics issue, we’ve all wondered what our moves would be if we found BF roadkill, a natural death, or shot one.

Most of us have a gut feeling we need to get science involved early, but we seem to also want credit for the discovery and control of the specimen.  Now I’m not talking about scat, hair or dermal patterns on a cast.  I’m talking about a bulk specimen…a body, or at least a large part of one…a skeleton, or at least a skull.

 

So, what do you do when you have a bulk specimen in front of you?

 

Here are some choices I think you have:

1. Walk away.  You may or may not tell others about it, but you would have only your word as truth as many, many others have over the years.
2. Walk away with samples and/or photographs and/or video, public post your photos/videos, but never disclose the exact location.  Again, as many instances over the years have proven, this type evidence will always be questioned, regardless of the quality.
3. Walk away with evidence and report the GPS coordinates to law enforcement.  You might still have ownership of the discovery, but you will certainly lose control of the specimen.  This assumes the bulk specimen is still there when law enforcement arrives.  This also assumes law enforcement, at whatever level, doesn’t just make it all disappear, and hopefully not you too. 
4. Walk away with evidence, public post short clips of your photos/videos, and reach out to multiple local media with an offer to take them to the bulk specimen while always pushing to reach out to local/state university researchers to start validation...say it in your interviews.  Local law enforcement will become involved early but with multiple local media outlets also involved, the likelihood of disappearance is greatly reduced.  Be prepared for regional and national media to become involved and again, keep pushing for scientific validation.  You will likely lose control of the bulk specimen, but you will have evidence to support your discovery.  This route may also improve the chance for the specimen ending up in the right scientific hands.
5. Take control and remove the bulk specimen.  You will need the logistics to load, secure and preserve for a sustained period something as large as a whole, full-grown bull moose…up to 1,200 pounds and up to 9 feet.  Do you have those resources available now?  If not, we move into a whole separate topic…the process and ethics of a full dissection or at least, removing the head, an arm and a leg from the site.  Not that the other choices don’t have possible legal liabilities, this route will certainly require you to have a good lawyer.

 

There are certainly other options and variations to these choices.  Every BF searcher who takes to the field should think about this topic and generally know what they would do.  I lean towards involving the media early in the discovery.  It seems to have a greater chance for fast and public dissemination of information, and for public pressure to be exerted for appropriate and complete testing of the bulk specimen.

 

But, I will challenge my own position as we are still unsure of what agencies, labs, schools, professors, experts are uniformly recommended as BF resources.  Who is to perform this “appropriate and complete testing?”  We need to work on this.  Because at some point, someone is going to show up on your favorite news channel standing beside a BF body and you’re going to wonder, “Now what?”

 

 

[hiflier]

Excellent post, Photog. I have actually written a small manual on this very subject. The premise is basically entirely about generating a covert operation all the way through. I stress the primary goal of finding a dead Sasquatch carcass or skeleton as the first order of business. But failing that a team if six individuals with reasons for not going with less is put forth. A scientist and a facility is lined up in advance of the hunt with the idea that only after study and species verification would an announcement be made. Because of the controversy surrounding taking a life specimen I chose to self-publish the book.

 

I have followed this up with a novel (fully edited as of the middle of this month) about a guy who finds a dead Sasquatch. I am currently submitting the book to literary agents to see if I can get it to market. I have several goals in mind should the book get picked up. All geared toward discovery and obtaining proof.