Guest Jodie Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 Or so he claimed... where is Stubstad these days? Really took a turn for the worse and hasn't been able to pursue the bigfoot issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 Thanks JDL, that's what I was asking. But what if the DNA revealed HUMAN? And he is saying he shot it....could he say it didn't look like a human to escape charges? I mean, true enough, "no body" would give him room to say he never killed it, etc. If someone shot one and claimed that it was threatening, I don't think there'd be much chance of prosecution. Confronted with something both unknown and monstrous, acting in self defense is a reasonable response, plus the shock of the moment would be significant. The Sierra shooter has revealed a lot about his encounter at this point. I can only assume that he's gotten legal advice before doing so. Interesting is a great word to use if you're seeking to be understated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 Or so he claimed... where is Stubstad these days? It does seem his health took a turn for the worse but he did manage to put out a theory on the origin of sasquatch. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 For what its worth, I still think you should ask questions of Wikipedia like a lawyer asks of a witness in a jury trial. Only ask the ones for which you already know the answer. BF's existence will not be confirmed by having it appear in a Wiki. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 'modern human' should be held as a likely consequence of failing to properly vet. As the saying goes "Modern Humans found in N America...and in other news, the sky is dark at night!". That she is publishing a paper shows that her results show something that is actually groundbreaking and/or noteworthy. Otherwise there is no paper and no reason to publish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowBorn Posted April 28, 2012 Moderator Share Posted April 28, 2012 Wikipedia is never good place to retrieve info and as far as changing things on wiki there is no problem.One just has to edit source to notepad,change and reload. Modern human is fine but what would make it interesting would be tracing it back to the origin I believe.Is that not what the DNA would do with these creatures.We would have some understanding how far back these creatures would be in our evalution of modern human.Is that not what MTDNA (did i say that wrong )would prove.That the DNA would trace the linage of these creatures and trace where they first began in our evalution. If this is true then this would change alot of things that we know about our selves as humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 (edited) FYI an example of how well the system works, first they had what.....a body!!!! Crud couldn't get the link to work. It's on Fox web site new species of bee discovered with DNA! Edited April 28, 2012 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 My prediction is that if there is a paper that is ever released it will not be in a scientific journal, but on a website that each and every person that wants to see the paper, pics and vidoes, will have to pay for. Why else would you hold back on photos or videos that she has? Those wouldn't have a thing to do with her paper being approved. We'll see one day I suppose. Nalajr I predicted that quite awhile back. I am certainly don't think we will see what would constitute a "scientific paper" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 My prediction is that if there is a paper that is ever released it will not be in a scientific journal, but on a website that each and every person that wants to see the paper, pics and vidoes, will have to pay for. Why else would you hold back on photos or videos that she has? Those wouldn't have a thing to do with her paper being approved. We'll see one day I suppose. Nalajr I asked the question on her FB page about what any pictures or video would have to do with the paper and why not release some kind of teaser. Especially given her claims of observing and hearing them speak and stuff. All I got for that effort was banned from being able to interact with her site. There will be no proof coming out of this camp is my prediction, I'd bet any L series lens in my camera bag on it...pick one! Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 (edited) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ you had to do more than ask that question to get banned Edited April 28, 2012 by zigoapex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vilnoori Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 I hope to one day search Sasquatch on wiki and see it as a recognized living species. Well, you can search Bigfoot. Not such a bad write-up I think, it tries to be fair and present all possible viewpoints. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 Pictures and video have everything to do with the paper. If she put them out first without any supporting DNA they will be completely blasted. After all the crap Dr. Ketchum has had to listen to I'm starting to think she is handling this properly. I just changed my mind about that. I would also ban people that ask for proof. She asked you to be patient and you're still bugging her. I would keep making confident statements, showing a little swag, to really start making skeptics mad. They are hammering her either way, I think she may be fed up with it and is now saying, "you want to question every single move I make, let me give you something to talk about." My sources say she is getting a kick out dropping little tidbits that are incensing her detractors. She has made them go all in against her, then she it going to basically drop a daisy cutter on a few prairie dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 AB I do agree. I do need help in rounding up enough crow for all the skeptics we have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 (edited) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ you had to do more than ask that question to get banned I'd link you to it but my post was also deleted, have a look, only cheerleaders allowed to post over there....I wonder why! Pictures and video have everything to do with the paper. If she put them out first without any supporting DNA they will be completely blasted. After all the crap Dr. Ketchum has had to listen to I'm starting to think she is handling this properly. I just changed my mind about that. I would also ban people that ask for proof. She asked you to be patient and you're still bugging her. I would keep making confident statements, showing a little swag, to really start making skeptics mad. They are hammering her either way, I think she may be fed up with it and is now saying, "you want to question every single move I make, let me give you something to talk about." My sources say she is getting a kick out dropping little tidbits that are incensing her detractors. She has made them go all in against her, then she it going to basically drop a daisy cutter on a few prairie dogs. There will be no proof! AB I do agree. I do need help in rounding up enough crow for all the skeptics we have Crow? I think it will be self served! And for the record, I'm not a BF skeptic, but I am a huge skeptic of this 'paper'....er...and wood knocking! Edited April 29, 2012 by summitwalker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 I'd link you to it but my post was also deleted, have a look, only cheerleaders allowed to post over there....I wonder why! I'm shocked! Imagine that.... a person 'unfriending' someone that posts unflattering or abusive comments on their own Facebook page... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts