Madison5716 Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 (edited) On 1/4/2020 at 3:34 PM, hiflier said: It's the lack of interest in the use of e-DNA that keeps it in the realm of not being deployed in the field to look specifically for Bigfoot As always, it's about money. Specifically, mine. Or the lack thereof, lol! I can't even afford to fix my truck, much less pay for DNA testing, probably repeatedly. On 1/5/2020 at 8:22 AM, wiiawiwb said: How does it have 2/3 the number of reports as that of Oregon, a mecca of bigfooting? Because no one i know or have heard of reports sightings to the BFRO or anyone else. There are too many interesting people to contact and collaborate with! Why would I want to post on an anonymous data page when I could chat with an experienced researcher after a bit of networking? Really, I could name almost a dozen reports right off the top of my head, seriously, and I would bet real money that they aren't reported anywhere. I'm researching four of them currently! Edited January 22, 2020 by Madison5716 1 2
MIB Posted January 22, 2020 Moderator Posted January 22, 2020 ^^^^ Nail. Head. Hit. Bam-bam-bam!! MIB
hiflier Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 (edited) The professor I met with today was flabbergasted when I told him the DNA testing for the Olympic Peninsula nesting samples ran $1,000 a piece. He told me he sends samples out for $5 a piece. I was floored. But he was also protocoling for a specific species whereas the OP samples were being run with lots of species potential which is what a metabarcoding process is all about. So maybe doing metabarcoding is more expensive? Still though..... Edited January 22, 2020 by hiflier
wiiawiwb Posted January 22, 2020 Posted January 22, 2020 (edited) The average person who gets involved with all things sasquatch probably has no idea what DNA testing costs. I admit I haven't any idea. You could tell me it would cost $15,000 to test something and I'd probably say, "Ok, sounds a little expensive." Who, and why, would anyone have an idea what something like that costs. The only cost comparison we might have seen involving technology is if we've had a procedure done in the hospital and gotten a copy of what was billed to the insurance company. That's both instructive and enlightening. I think it would profoundly helpful if we could put together a list of DNA labs out there and the estimated cost for various DNA testing procedures. Many of us, myself included, have no idea where to send something or what it might cost....so we don't. If those were known, it would encourage people to take samples and send them for testing. It's not even on my radar right now even though it should be. If I found it to be affordable, I'd pack a DNA kit in my backpack every time I go out. Edited January 22, 2020 by wiiawiwb 2
georgerm Posted January 23, 2020 Author Posted January 23, 2020 On 1/14/2020 at 7:41 AM, DuneBeast said: I never speak about my belief in Sasquatch or my encounter that I experienced back in 1994 with others. The few times that I did try to talk about it in the past I was met with ridicule and disbelief. When I told my father, he laughed and asked me "what were you smoking?" I didn't even make a BFRO report for 10 years.... This is really sad and sorry this happened. My brother did the same thing and asked if we took some drug. 1
georgerm Posted January 23, 2020 Author Posted January 23, 2020 1 hour ago, wiiawiwb said: The average person who gets involved with all things sasquatch probably has no idea what DNA testing costs. I admit I haven't any idea. You could tell me it would cost $15,000 to test something and I'd probably say, "Ok, sounds a little expensive." Who, and why, would anyone have an idea what something like that costs. The only cost comparison we might have seen involving technology is if we've had a procedure done in the hospital and gotten a copy of what was billed to the insurance company. That's both instructive and enlightening. I think it would profoundly helpful if we could put together a list of DNA labs out there and the estimated cost for various DNA testing procedures. Many of us, myself included, have no idea where to send something or what it might cost....so we don't. If those were known, it would encourage people to take samples and send them for testing. It's not even on my radar right now even though it should be. If I found it to be affordable, I'd pack a DNA kit in my backpack every time I go out. If I found bf prints and some hair tufts, I wonder what it would cost to send it in and test for human DNA. Now if I know no human touched it, then it may be bigfoot DNA and cost much less to find out. Any way, family and friends can stifle your research goals so getting the smallest amount of ridicule from them is awful so leave them out of it. If you are spending two grand a month on DNA testing and your marriage partners is fuming, lighten up.
spacemonkeymafia Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 A coworker brought up the subject of bigfoot today. He's had some odd experiences that could be attributed to bigfoot. I didn't divulge anything consenting my bigfoot interest other than we talked a little about known stories and theories. He is certain they are real. It's nice to have someone not totally discounting the creature.
georgerm Posted January 23, 2020 Author Posted January 23, 2020 1 hour ago, spacemonkeymafia said: A coworker brought up the subject of bigfoot today. He's had some odd experiences that could be attributed to bigfoot. I didn't divulge anything consenting my bigfoot interest other than we talked a little about known stories and theories. He is certain they are real. It's nice to have someone not totally discounting the creature. If you feel the same way, confirm his bigfoot ambitions. It's a great subject to discuss with another person that has an open mind. Sasquatches are real and no doubt they are out there. Just be aware of ridicule from closed minded fake biologist.
spacemonkeymafia Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 A coworker brought up the subject of bigfoot today. He's had some odd experiences that could be attributed to bigfoot. I didn't divulge anything consenting my bigfoot interest other than we talked a little about known stories and theories. He is certain they are real. It's nice to have someone not totally discounting the creature. Sorry about the double post. I was in the woods 3 to 5 nights a week for a few years. I know they are real. I was doing it for my own curiosity, not out to prove anything. I just don't talk about it much.
bipedalist Posted January 23, 2020 BFF Patron Posted January 23, 2020 17 hours ago, georgerm said: If I found bf prints and some hair tufts, I wonder what it would cost to send it in and test for human DNA. Now if I know no human touched it, then it may be bigfoot DNA and cost much less to find out. Any way, family and friends can stifle your research goals so getting the smallest amount of ridicule from them is awful so leave them out of it. If you are spending two grand a month on DNA testing and your marriage partners is fuming, lighten up. Anywhere between 250-500 or so bucks plus or minus a hundred and a half through familytreedna. Autosomal dna much less; mtDNA can work for males and females. If you don't know gender you would have to chance it on Y-DNA testing but could go cheap and then upgrade if found to be male after initial testing.
hiflier Posted January 23, 2020 Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) My take on the DNA thing is that while it's easier to get and test mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) it only will show the female genotype side of things. That said most of what I've seen for mtDNA points to Human female, Nuclear DNA will show both male and female lineages but there isn't nearly as much of that kind of DNA in a cell's nucleus. That's why it's more expensive but, if one could afford it, it stands a better chance of showing both the maternal as well as the paternal side which really should be the route to pursue. Edited January 23, 2020 by hiflier
bipedalist Posted January 23, 2020 BFF Patron Posted January 23, 2020 (edited) That is not exactly true for mtDNA according to familytreedna literature, at least for genealogical purposes. That used to be what I thought, check out some of the informative genetics genealogy vids on youtube re: the matter. I am not an expert but was shocked to learn this, as it was new info for me, sure it is MORE informative for maternal lineages. Autosomal dna is the family finder element on familytreedna and it is very helpful. I assume this would be some sampling of nuclear dna. It becomes very confusing after awhile. I am just now getting to the stage where I will be mapping overlapping dna from cousins on the basis of the amts of cM shared. Don't count on ancestry.com to give you a dna test you can do the same with though, it won't allow you to do it unless you somehow upload a file and download it to other software. Familytreedna allows you to directly use chromosome browser to see your results and what you want to compare graphically so that you can draw it out with pencil and paper and do the math on the marker starts and stops. That helps you see what segments are being passed down from whom in your genogram. I have some of the vids bookmarked if you want to send me a PM. Since this is not a DNA thread I really don't want to keep offtask here. You also have the ability to check X dna now specifically which is dna from one pair for females and the only one for males that hopscotches through generations in a predictable pattern. If you don't have two or more samples to compare some of this stuff is moot. Edited January 23, 2020 by bipedalist
Recommended Posts