Guest poignant Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Damned if she does and damned if she doesn't. Tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted November 29, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted November 29, 2012 If it hasn't already been done, I've added a link below, on what may be possibly going on? On the Bigfoot subject, my book project should be out in 2013? The publisher is feverishly working on this avenue. There will be many controversial things involved in the Bigfoot/Sasquatch, told there. The reader will decide what they believe... No stone was left unturned. Glen (lookoutman) http://bigfootbooksb...udy-fiasco.html Fiasco huh, I've got a problem with that word, until the study is released, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 I had to play with an excerpt. ------------------------------------------- David Coltman, a geneticist with the University of Alberta, believes that plenty of caution is needed before interpreting this press release as proof of Bigfoot. “Until you see anything in peer review, there is nothing really to go by. And even if it does appear in a peer-reviewed journal, that doesn’t mean it’s true,†he said. "And even if it's true, that doesn't mean Bigfoot is real. And even if Bigfoot meets you on a trail and rips your head off, or tears open all your rabbit hutches and eats them, or trashes your campsite while you're out fishing...or come to think of it, even if one did all those things to everyone in the scientific community, that doesn't mean it's true." ------------------------------------------- My stuff in bold (because you would be amazed). And doesn't it just feel like that sometimes...? Yep. Never underestimate the power of ideology to blind otherwise intelligent people to truth. My belief is that bigfoot is for the most part nomadic, so I really doubt that any meaningful legislation could be produced - or is needed - in terms of habitat protection. The status quo works for BF. That would make it even worse, as the "BF advocates" would call for even MORE land to be locked up and kept out of human use to provide habitat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 They're still digging up plenty of Hominin's. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmanisi Homo georgicus Further information: Homo erectus georgicus Early human fossils, dubbed Homo georgicus, or Homo erectus georgicus, were found at Dmanisi between 1991 and 2005. At 1.8 million years old, they may be a subspecies of H. erectus or a separate species of Homo predating Homo erectus, but in any case represent the earliest known human presence in the Caucasus. Subsequently, four fossil skeletons were found, showing a species primitive in its skull and upper body but with relatively advanced spines and lower limbs. They are now thought not to be a separate species, but to represent a stage soon after the transition between Australopithecus and Homo erectus, and have been dated at 1.8 million years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted November 29, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted November 29, 2012 Yah, but they won't be sequencing dna from that sucker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 (edited) Article at time.com. Robert Lindsay gets a mention. LINK Here's a handy Google link to the available articles. Sykes might want to find a new project. Edited November 29, 2012 by slimwitless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Particle Noun Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Robert Lindsay is currently at the peak of his career. I imagine it will all be downhill from here. Thanks for those links Slim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted November 30, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted November 30, 2012 (edited) That time.com article is as bad as some of the RL blogs themselves, sheesh, even worse than some of the laughable blogger sans journalism efforts that have been linked to throughout this "truth-fest". Edited November 30, 2012 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 I'm curious, with much talk about the distrust of Science (big S for you Mulder, with respect), has anyone wondered if Sykes is a ringer brought in to smash all of this? He is well respected, and part of the Science world. What if his job is to intentionally come out with "nothing to see here" results? Results that totally refute Ketchum, and shoot down every sample collected as a misidentification. Results like that could be devastating to many people, and coming from someone so well respected, they're gonna be hard to dispute. Since I saw a bigfoot in my riflescope for well over a minute in broad daylight, that doesn't really apply to me, just sayin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted November 30, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted November 30, 2012 The Ruggster weighs in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 (edited) I'm curious, with much talk about the distrust of Science (big S for you Mulder, with respect), has anyone wondered if Sykes is a ringer brought in to smash all of this? He is well respected, and part of the Science world. What if his job is to intentionally come out with "nothing to see here" results? Results that totally refute Ketchum, and shoot down every sample collected as a misidentification. Results like that could be devastating to many people, and coming from someone so well respected, they're gonna be hard to dispute. Since I saw a bigfoot in my riflescope for well over a minute in broad daylight, that doesn't really apply to me, just sayin. Why didn't you shoot? They really need to release the samples to a University for study. There's several good ones that will carefully analyze the evidence. Going to Russia to find a scientist to agree was probably the wrong path. This is the only way to get respect from the majority of scientists. Edited November 30, 2012 by Tim Kota Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 I thought about it. The one thing that hit me right away was just the overwhelming thought that I would get busted. I didn't feel like it was my chance to get rich or anything like that. I felt with my luck, they're gonna call it a human and I'm gonna do a murder bid. It was just a, "I don't need this fight, because with my luck, I'll lose" type of feeling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tontar Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 ... anyone wondered if Sykes is a ringer brought in to smash all of this? He is well respected, and part of the Science world. What if his job is to intentionally come out with "nothing to see here" results? Results that totally refute Ketchum, and shoot down every sample collected as a misidentification. Results like that could be devastating to many people, and coming from someone so well respected, they're gonna be hard to dispute. Endless conspiracy theories? Dr. Meldrum, who totally believes in sasquatch, supports Sykes' work. Why would Meldrum, by extension and association, want to smash proof of bigfoot's existence? It makes no sense. It sounds more like people are panicking about what Dr. Ketchum's report may or may not accomplish. If her science is sound, you have nothing to worry about. If her science is unsound, then the Science Community doesn't need to send in some hit man to undermine her work. It's amazing how worked up people are starting to get as it gets closer to D-Day for the report. The past couple pages have not been proponents battling with skeptics, it's been skeptics battling with one another, even attacking the only person so far to promise scientific proof of bigfoot's existence! Amazing! It's like way too many people crowded into a small room around a tiny TV, all wanting to see the show, watch the final goal, and everyone starts pushing and shoving because of the tight squeeze. Skeptics have not been all that active in this thread lately. They don't need to contribute to the fire when everyone else is throwing their own gas on the flames. I'm anxiously waiting to see if the paper will come out, and if it does, what it will say. I'm happy to wait, sort of. But I don't see the need to get all lathered up and start elbowing everyone else in the waiting room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 I thought about it. The one thing that hit me right away was just the overwhelming thought that I would get busted. I didn't feel like it was my chance to get rich or anything like that. I felt with my luck, they're gonna call it a human and I'm gonna do a murder bid. It was just a, "I don't need this fight, because with my luck, I'll lose" type of feeling. It would have to be threatening me, I understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 I would not be surprised if the Tribal Governments weigh in with a claim. They could say these guys are members of the tribe and sue for protection in Federal Court. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts