indiefoot Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 I thought the FB page was in response to the large number of emails she was getting, many asking the same questions. This is exactly what many in the BF community were asking for, updates with whatever information could be given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 1) To me, some of the answers provided on that page are far "crazier" than most of the questions. 2) Who cares about rumor and speculation of your upcoming work? It's completely irrelevant to your scientific endeavor. None of what you're doing matters a hill of beans unless and until you can get it published, so I don't see any benefit in making any statements until the galley proofs are returned. Then, in accordance with whatever arrangement you might have with the journal, you can time the release of a website or something in anticipation of the publication. Well I'd say your opinion is in the minority judging by the web traffic to BOTH of her Facebook Pages, the sheer number of blogs and other websites quoting her immediately as each new statement is made. The best was Mr. Dale Drinnon adding BF to the Primate Family Tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FuriousGeorge Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 I love the tree because it helps me visualize, but what are the two pictures in the upper left? It's hard to make out. It looks like a Mermaid and a Gorn. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 You're correct about the mermaid. The Gorn is a Kappa/Freshwater monkey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FuriousGeorge Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 aha lol thanks Bonehead. I wouldn't have put them there due to the lack of a prehensile tail and a diet of children livers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Twilight Fan Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Just an FYI to all of you, updates regarding the Ketchum report were just posted in Campfire Chat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterbarber Posted March 11, 2012 Admin Share Posted March 11, 2012 Not so much, anymore..... All of it can be posted right here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 A couple things stand out. Theoretically, an educational website could link to a pdf of the paper. It so happens that the JREF is an educational foundation, so the study of the paper at that website would probably stand up. An anthropologist would be prominent in the study of the DNA results, in fact a prominent Anthropologist is currently sequencing the Denisova genome as we speak, and is quite willing and able to talk about his work. The role in the BF paper would be to compare what are supposedly human sequences with known sequences and determine where they fall in relation to different modern and former segments of human populations. It seems so fishy, that they claim they cannot talk about the paper, but you can see blogs from scientists in the field, or in their lab telling you exactly what they are working on. I also know that most scientists are for more freedom wrt information. Piltdown Man, 21st century style is my prediction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted March 11, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted March 11, 2012 ....Theoretically, an educational website could link to a pdf of the paper. It so happens that the JREF is an educational foundation, so the study of the paper at that website would probably stand up..... Yes, it would be nice to have an independent educational use site be involved; but re: JREF, thanks, but No Thanks, I think we can come up with another educational use discussion site that will be a little more user-friendly & "neutral". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 (edited) An anthropologist will certainly become involved in the study of the results. Right after the geneticist prepares, assembles,and publish's them for them,then the over all interpretation of the results will begin, where it all fits,and how,but first, I think we will see a statistically proven variant on DNA that closely resembles, or even is, within the Human range. I highly suspect that with the level of professionalism involved here,and the controversy involved,we would see them consider an "educational foundation" internet forum as place of review. Edited March 11, 2012 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bipedal Ape Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Yep its very fishy, or squatchy if you prefer. The report is as elusive as the creature itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 We'll have a beer after the paper pubs if you like. We ought to, especially since we seem to live near one another, relatively. Here is a question for you. It appears that the DNA report will confirm that Texla found Bigfoot hair in Oklahoma. Photos of this find show that the area was not some densely florid forest, nor apparently an especially remote area. Most things Bigfoot do not make a great deal of sense (to me, anyway). How would a population of non-sapiens sapiens humans, or "wood apes," given credence to eye witness testimonies that make the creatures 6 to 9 (or larger) feet tall, massively built, as heavy as 350#s to the weight of a horse, find their way around such Oklahoma terrain easily accessed by people and not have been definitively discovered, virtually never seen, and leaving only broken tree limbs as evidence they have passed this way. Reading your website sy, I know you look at various locations to find if creeks or tree cover exist to sustain or hide a possible Bigfoot. To me, this seems a wise position if you are tracking a fugitive from the law, not a population of a large unknown species. A creature as large as Bigfoot is alleged to be must spend a great deal of time consuming calories as well as leaving volumes of excrement laying about. Since it also is alleged to be very noisy (at night) and prone to let people know it is in the area by tossing rocks and and other objects, how is it that it exists so freely all this time and never once verified concretely? The DNA report is poised to support the Texla find, as well as even more problematic finds such as the skunk in a pipe incident (where a Bigfoot allegedly killed a skunk in an open field in a populated area). As I said, to me, this just does not make a great deal of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 If the DNA report does indeed confirm the existence of BF, and hair with skin tags can be confirmed to come from the target species, it won't matter where the sample was found. At that point we can simply say that BF was here and work on putting together a data base of their movements and behaviors. Being able to prove their presence at a particular location will be a game changer because we can begin to gather trace evidence with more certainty that it could be BF related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 We ought to, especially since we seem to live near one another, relatively. Here is a question for you. It appears that the DNA report will confirm that Texla found Bigfoot hair in Oklahoma. Photos of this find show that the area was not some densely florid forest, nor apparently an especially remote area. A place like that makes people curious doesn't it? You would expect that either people are seeing something other than bigfoot, or bigfoot would be easy to find there, atleast their sign would be. Most things Bigfoot do not make a great deal of sense (to me, anyway). How would a population of non-sapiens sapiens humans, or "wood apes," given credence to eye witness testimonies that make the creatures 6 to 9 (or larger) feet tall, massively built, as heavy as 350#s to the weight of a horse, find their way around such Oklahoma terrain easily accessed by people and not have been definitively discovered, virtually never seen, and leaving only broken tree limbs as evidence they have passed this way. Broken tree limbs and hairs wasn't the only evidence collected from that place, I can assure you, and not just TexLa. Reading your website sy, I know you look at various locations to find if creeks or tree cover exist to sustain or hide a possible Bigfoot. To me, this seems a wise position if you are tracking a fugitive from the law, not a population of a large unknown species. A creature as large as Bigfoot is alleged to be must spend a great deal of time consuming calories as well as leaving volumes of excrement laying about. Since it also is alleged to be very noisy (at night) and prone to let people know it is in the area by tossing rocks and and other objects, how is it that it exists so freely all this time and never once verified concretely? I think some people choose not to prove they exist, to bother them, or bring in more unwanted visitors. Beyond that, I'll let you explain it to me why it took so long, if they can be proven. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I agree with Saskeptic about the FB page. It seems like she's the one actually running the hype machine, and giving all these 'teasers' to everyone, then sort of non-chalantly steps back, and says, "Good science takes time...Be patient." I don't get it. It seems to me, since the rumors of the project probably only come from less than a few hundred people, in a niche community, and are levied by layman and weekend warriors, that there is really no reason to address them. Why not just wait until completion to talk about it? Does she have stars in her eyes? The glamour shots, Twitter, two FB pages, an assistant to answer Q's, etc? #Thingsthatmakeyougohmmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts