Guest parnassus Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) @SY you have identified one of the several beauties, paradoxes and verities about the "bigfoot is human" trope. In this case, we have a perfect excuse for not harvesting a bigfoot. Of course, a bigfoot killed by accident, self defense, in Florida, or by another animal or dead by natural causes would not create any problems. p. @Saskeptic: If Ketchum's or anyone else's analysis led to the recognition of Homo bigfooteus by the ICZN, then Edited March 20, 2012 by parnassus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 The rub concerns your premise of statistical proof - of what: a rare polymorphism among populations of Homo sapiens? I wouldn't be at all surprised by such a finding. The important part is how it might be established that people with such a polymorphism are "bigfoots", i.e., giant, hairy, technology-averse, wild people with long arms, mid-tarsal breaks, and the ability to catch and dispatch deer with their bare hands. That's the part I'm waiting to see when and if a Ketchum paper is ever published. From what I gather you have to will have to take someone's word on it. Sample examined that is claimed to be from a bigfoot. This cannot be confirmed because the existance of bigfoot has not been confirmed. DNA sample is analyzed and is found to be Human DNA with a rare poymorphism. This leads to two possible conclusions. Sample is from a bigfoot and so bigfoot is human; or sample is from a human. The inability to rule out that sample is from a human with a social security number renders the analysis and conclusions useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Nothing like having your mind made up prior to any of the evidence being produced, hey? If I was ever put on trial for anything in the USA, I'd want my lawyer to make sure a fair few of you guys didn't end up on the jury!! Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 @SY you have identified one of the several beauties, paradoxes and verities about the "bigfoot is human" trope. In this case, we have a perfect excuse for not harvesting a bigfoot. Of course, a bigfoot killed by accident, self defense, in Florida, or by another animal or dead by natural causes would not create any problems. p. It would still be a problem to posess a body from which human DNA is extracted for purposes of personal scientific research based on a belief it was a bigfoot. You would have to prove something is very nonhuman about it, which is outside the scope of a layman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Dang it, Mike. I'm outta plusses for the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Allow me 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Particle Noun Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I'da plussed the heck out of that also.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted March 20, 2012 Moderator Share Posted March 20, 2012 Nothing like having your mind made up prior to any of the evidence being produced, hey? If I was ever put on trial for anything in the USA, I'd want my lawyer to make sure a fair few of you guys didn't end up on the jury!! Mike Mike There is no way i can be on a jury for this creature,I seen the **** thing.But Like i have said before,if General ever has to go to court I will go with him as a wittness.For surr.I have seen these guys and they scare the crap out of me but thats my issue with them.So yes my mind you can say is"made up" on the account of seeing them. I am also of the belief that DNA is as good as having a body present,If it is good enough for in court.Anything that you can prove with out a shadow of doubt should be good.This includes these creatures that are flesh and blood with intelligent abilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Do you think Napoleon is related to bigfoot? He seems to have some unusual variant with the HSV1, wasn't that the same gene that snagged Stubstad's attention on the three original mitochondrial samples he analyzed? http://www.investigativegenetics.com/content/1/1/7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 It's most interesting to me that the arguments of those promoting themselves as critical thinkers and "Science" mouthpieces have seemed to be based on opinion rather than direct evidence. I have a hard time putting credence to arguments based on a lack of evidence. In other words, if someone is offering any opinion regarding the validity of the Ketchum report, then you know they lack sound scientific processes, as they have yet to read the report. Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Oh, well it's a good thing no one here has made up their mind before reading it that there is something earth-shattering and ground-breaking in Ketchum's paper. . . I have a hard time putting credence to arguments based on a lack of evidence. Me too. This is why I'm yet to be convinced there ever was a paper in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) Me too. This is why I'm yet to be convinced there ever was a paper in the first place. That fits nicely with my point. We have no idea what is coming, if anything. Everything being stated in public is hearsay. NOTHING is factual until a report is published. Perhaps we should, oh, say, READ THE REPORT before we decide it's not up to our critical thinking standards? Perhaps then our arguments would be worthy of consideration? Tim B. Edited March 20, 2012 by TimB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I thought we were all speaking under the assumption of speculation for every topic related to bigfoot on the forum........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 My point is judgement based on speculation is a faulty critical thought process. Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Well of course it is Tim, it's called gossip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts