Guest Jodie Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 In the case of bigfoot, you'ld have to fall back on facts related to the theories of evolution, genetics , ecology, and biology. Whether hair, footprints, and such are evidence depends upon your POV at this point. I thought Dr. Ketchum's study might add more weight to the samples, such as hair, blood , and tissue, to be considered as evidence. Reproducible testing on these should support the theory of an unidentified something in North America, at the least, if it is interpreted correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Spurfoot I feel like you make a better argument them most as to how the human race may help BF if they are ever discovered. I don't necessarily agree with you though. Is it our place to say whether or not they are miserable. I find that some people in the most war torn, harshest countries in the world have been able to find more happiness in there lives then a lot of North Americans, even with all the comforts we enjoy. I don't personally believe our way of living is any better then BFs, or a lot of other mammals for that matter. It's all about perspective. No i'm not telling you to give up toilet paper, and if that's what your taking from this your missing the point. So what if they don't use toilet paper, scissors and soap, last time i checked humans are the only animals that do. Just because they are extremely elusive doesn't necessarily mean that they have the dexterity necessary to effectively use a tool such as a pair of scissors. I highly doubt domestication of BF will be possible, and if it was, to what end? Would our race seek to in slave this species? Maybe train them as a new bread of soldier? Do you really think the human race would do everything it could to help this creature, I'm one who believes a lot of humans would do everything in there power to hurt it. An extremely strong, bipedal, highly intelligent, domesticated creature would be very valuable to a lot of people in a lot of ways. Just don't name one after yourself or we'll have a whole Planet full of trouble! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kerchak Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Fact; giant Footprints have been found Hyp; These footprints come from a giant beast possibly a primate living in NA. Theory???? What's all this exaggerated 'giant' stuff? Bigfoot wouldn't be bigger than a large bear and we don't go around calling bears 'giant beasts' do we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 The evidence is factual, and based on analyses predicts bigfoots existence. We have factual evidence in the form of tracks, vocalizations, sightings and biological samples. True. You have facts in the form of tracks, sounds, sightings and biological samples. Also true: Such evidence is open to interpretation and not conclusive. This tribe of forest people or family of wood apes has never been verified concretely over the decades, or centuries, despite their alleged "tracks, vocalizations, sightings and biological samples" seen and found ever increasingly near human settlements, great and small. The state of affairs is also a statement of fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kerchak Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 ^ They have never been conclusively dismissed or shown to be impossible to be there, either . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Yep there are alot of things you can't prove don't exist..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 True. You have facts in the form of tracks, sounds, sightings and biological samples. Also true: Such evidence is open to interpretation and not conclusive. This tribe of forest people or family of wood apes has never been verified concretely over the decades, or centuries, despite their alleged "tracks, vocalizations, sightings and biological samples" seen and found ever increasingly near human settlements, great and small. The state of affairs is also a statement of fact. It is true that most of the evidence is percieved to be hoaxable, and thus inconclusive. Biological evidence is a different ball game, and I don't expect to hear that an entire team of genetics speacialists could get the interpretations wrong. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spurfoot Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 (edited) I had not intended my previous brief remarks to be a treatise on how to help the Sasquatch people. Let me elaborate a bit on how we can help them. 1. First education, especially in matters of health and sanitation. 2. Initially, provision of free hospitals specialized to their situation. I suggest we start out with one on the west coast, perhaps Oregon/Washington, and one on the east coast, perhaps Kentucky. Specialized tractor-trailer clinic/ambulances should also be provided to each hospital. The Sasquatch people are the poorest of the poor. Because of their frightening appearance, unavoidable sanitation situation, and lack of education as to human customs they are rejected by rest of humanity. Consequently they have no access to courts by those reasons and because of the difficulty of understanding their speech. Thus, they have not even elementary land rights, nor also access to education. Specialized compassion is appropriate to them more than any other segment of humanity. 3. Provision of appropriately sized specialized tools such as scissors. 4. No doubt controversially, introduce them to agriculture so that they can optionally lead a more settled lifestyle. A settled life style would immeasurably help the sanitation, education and health problems. A logical consequence of this is that specialized reservations must be established where it is forbidden for non-licensed persons to enter by land, air or by remote controlled drones. That provision is necessary because they are ashamed of their appearance and are shy. As to the nature and origin of the Sasquatch, the Ketchum study will settle the issue. Much more can be said about them after release of that study. In the meantime, those who know are quiet and should remain so for reasons that are known to the journal and to Melba Ketchum. It is possible that a special request by the government for cause temporarily constrains release of the study. Edited March 9, 2012 by spurfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 on the immediate conversation above: actually a thread devoted to what response/effort is apropriate would be timely...as "protection" has many meanings and some don't think protection is requied, while others advance some assimilation and others say "free roam" and "untouched." but, I am here to ask question on EP/ketchum study. the newest version of SasquatchQuest had removed Dr. Ketchum as a team member, anyone know why? Also, I reread the "species recognition" page and this does not sound terribly positive, or is it just me? It read to me that they expected additional scientists to join the effort as the evidence mounted (are they including their bio-samples here) and conventional scientists did not? Where does that leave their samples/Ketchum study relative? Maybe I have fallen off keeping up, but did I miss something? I thought the release of EP was tied to release of paper via mutual binding contracts? Of course, that's the rumor mill, however the public behavior of the parties this past year seems to support a great deal of those rumors, and we have promises of truths to be yet be revealed....and yet, the OP seems to be collecting various parties, and Dr. M giving how-to expeditions? it doesn't seem all are reading from the same set of data? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 What's all this exaggerated 'giant' stuff? Bigfoot wouldn't be bigger than a large bear and we don't go around calling bears 'giant beasts' do we? We compare them with humans and gorillas, not bears. Bill Munns is posing with GIGANTOPITHICUS, BF has been reported to be 13' tall and would have to weigh thousands of pounds. How can you possibly say that they are not Giants? It is called BIGFOOT for Pete's sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 the newest version of SasquatchQuest had removed Dr. Ketchum as a team member, anyone know why? She addressed this on her FB page. Question: I understand there are problems at the Erickson project now. Answer: There are no problems with the Erickson Project. I asked him to remove my name from the website as a "team member" because I am not a part of the Erickson Project's team per se. He is deeply involved with our project, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 It is true that most of the evidence is percieved to be hoaxable, and thus inconclusive. Biological evidence is a different ball game, and I don't expect to hear that an entire team of genetics speacialists could get the interpretations wrong. Yes, biological evidence is a different ball game altogether and could help strengthen the case for bigfoot. "Wrong" isn't exactly the right word although I'm guilty of using it myself, difference of opinion on what the results mean would be a better way of putting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted March 4, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted March 4, 2012 .....As to the nature and origin of the Sasquatch, the Ketchum study will settle the issue. Much more can be said about them after release of that study. In the meantime, those who know are quiet and should remain so for reasons that are known to the journal and to Melba Ketchum. It is possible that a special request by the government for cause temporarily constrains release of the study. I would like to think these enigmatic sentences may have some merit. Proof will be in the pudding. Or NOT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 (edited) I had not intended my previous brief remarks to be a treatise on how to help the Sasquatch people. Let me elaborate a bit on how we can help them. 1. First education, especially in matters of health and sanitation. 2. Initially, provision of free hospitals specialized to their situation. I suggest we start out with one on the west coast, perhaps Oregon/Washington, and one on the east coast, perhaps Kentucky. Specialized tractor-trailer clinic/ambulances should also be provided to each hospital. The Sasquatch people are the poorest of the poor. Because of their frightening appearance, unavoidable sanitation situation, and lack of education as to human customs they are rejected by rest of humanity. Consequently they have no access to courts by those reasons and because of the difficulty of understanding their speech. Thus, they have not even elementary land rights, nor also access to education. Specialized compassion is appropriate to them more than any other segment of humanity. 3. Provision of appropriately sized specialized tools such as scissors. 4. No doubt controversially, introduce them to agriculture so that they can optionally lead a more settled lifestyle. A settled life style would immeasurably help the sanitation, education and health problems. A logical consequence of this is that specialized reservations must be established where it is forbidden for non-licensed persons to enter by land, air or by remote controlled drones. That provision is necessary because they are ashamed of their appearance and are shy. First off they probably aren't human and so I don't think they are going to be participating in the "scissors for squatches" program. Second, good luck getting them into a hospital, we can't even get a decent picture of one. Edited March 9, 2012 by slabdog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 (edited) I would like to think these enigmatic sentences may have some merit. Proof will be in the pudding. Or NOT. Who is the quote from ? I didn't see it on Melba's public FB page Edited March 4, 2012 by Jodie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts