Guest Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Here we are 14 month past the beginning of the year of the Sasquatch. We are six months past the date that Dr Ketchum cancelled an appearance at a bf conference because she was flown to Europe to discuss her findings with the astonished scientists at Max Plank Institute or Nature. How do all of these rumors get started? What is the source of these rumors? What is the motivation of the person or persons who create and spread these rumors? Through powers of deduction, I have been able to verify that the paper will be released in exactly 44 days on a Sunday. It will be the main topic on the Sunday news shows. 60 minutes may be doing a special. With respect to Mr. Claerr. He does not write "for" the Yahoo contributor network. He writes on Yahoo Contributor network the say way we write on this forum. It is like saying, Bigfootnis, who writes for the bigfootforums, puplishes article that proves Erikson Project is a hoax. It is a little misleading to say he writes for the Yahoo Contributor network. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 I'm still trying to figure out who Sally Ramey is. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 No, it isn't. Homo means human. No, Homo Sapiens Sapiens means human. Homo properly refers to hominid or 'human like" creatures. To rephrase what you said for accuracy: Homo erectus was not human. Homo habilis was not human. You can keep saying that they are but you will be wrong every time. Please enlighten me as to what is inhuman about the following: "Neanderthals made and used a diverse set of sophisticated tools, controlled fire, lived in shelters, made and wore clothing, were skilled hunters of large animals and also ate plant foods, and occasionally made symbolic or ornamental objects. There is evidence that Neanderthals deliberately buried their dead and occasionally even marked their graves with offerings, such as flowers. No other primates, and no earlier human species, had ever practiced this sophisticated and symbolic behavior." Chimpanzees, sea otters, and some birds use tools. Many animals make shelters of various sorts. Elephants are capable of painting with artistic intent. Gorillas have been taught to "speak" in modified ASL. Animals of various types have been shown to display both self-awareness and social consciousness behaviors, including morning the dead. None of those behaviors make any of those animals human. And neither do they make non-HSS hominids human. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Just curious, Mulder -- Here in Texas I know quite a few folks who do not think humans are animals. They believe the human being is a separate creation and set apart from the animal kingdom. This is a popular religious position. I'm not inquiring as to your religious beliefs. I'm just curious if you hold to the idea that humans are not animals, not primates, and so forth. And for the sake of argument -- if we find throwback neanderthals living in our remote areas, you would not consider them part of humanity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Mulder, you don't even seem to know what a hominid is. Even orangutans are hominids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 I'm still trying to figure out who Sally Ramey is. RayG http://www.ggc.edu/about-ggc/directory/faculty-and-staff/meet-the-staff3/sally-ramey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iacozizzle Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 An average sasquatch, a taxonomist, and William Hurt in character as Professor Edward Jessup all walk into a bar......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 If someone told me nothing more than this --- there is a comprehensive study being conducted on alleged sasquatch hair and nail samples, and it will be published soon in a peer-reviewed journal and its conclusions will be surprising ---- I would be excited. But I'm not excited. Even if the previous leaking of report "information" is only a faint echo of the report itself, it would still seem questionable to me. I honestly believe that you cannot have a DNA report reliant upon and verifying such divergent phenomenon as the Sierra Kills, the Erickson habituation videos from Kentucky, the sasquatch skunk attack, the hair find in Oklahoma, the Raven Ullibarri sighting in California, an Arizona sasquatch toe nail, etc. etc. The reasons I would distrust this venture is based on the fact that some of these events describe creatures so different they could not be of the same species, as well as some of these events lacking reliability. If the DNA report is anything like this cornucopia of best case scenarios, then for me we have a journal paper version of (pretending) Finding Bigfoot. So, I hope most of what I learned here and elsewhere is but a bad dream and we will be treated to a clean, concise, unambigious case for the existence of sasquatch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Well what if there is more than one kind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bipedal Ape Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 I just read that scientists at cern submitted a paper for review and publication in a journal. They state the papers title/ findings and the name of the journal submitted to. They must be doing this all wrong then. You are supposed to keep all that secret for no reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 I've seen that. She's employed as the Assistant Director of Media and Publications at a college (Georgia Gwinnett College) that was established in 2005, opened its doors in 2006, and which "has a unique organizational structure that omits academic departments and other units typically found in higher education" (from the Wiki page). I must admit when I read that sentence I had brief thoughts of the movie Accepted, where the students teach themselves courses such as culinary arts, sculpting, Taking a Walk and Thinking about Stuff, and International Relations: Hooking Up Overseas, at the South Harmon Institute of Technology. But who is Sally Ramey? Does she teach at the college? Where did she teach prior to GGC? Does she teach at all? What papers has she had published in scientific journals? What qualifications and experience does she have with regards to DNA? RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 (edited) If she is handling public relations, does any of that matter? Edited February 18, 2012 by arizonabigfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Well what if there is more than one kind? It would throw the analyst a "curve ball". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 If she is handling public relations, does any of that matter? Of course not, as long as she's not given equal status to Dr. Ketchum, or perceived to be an expert in areas where she has no expertise. I asked who she was because I've been following the bigfoot mystery for about four decades now, have heard lots of names mentioned, but had never heard of Sally Ramey until she was mentioned on this forum. RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 18, 2012 Share Posted February 18, 2012 Well what if there is more than one kind? Jodie I still maintain there is one in the south east that is more closely related to the orang. But I am not expecting that to be addressed in the Ketchum study. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts