Guest MikeG Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Interesting how General has physical evidence, but people still easily label him a hoaxer. I guess it's inevitable. Justin Smeja having physical evidence is of no use to anyone. In fact, it isn't really even evidence until it has been tested. Once his evidence is tested and the results released, then the situation changes fundamentally. At the moment, he has some bloody boots.......well, so do I. I had an accident on a building site a couple of years ago. Bloody boots are nothing more than bloody boots until someone analyses the blood. If I were to claim that the blood on mine came from an unknown animal that I had shot, I would hope and expect that the world would remain incredulous until the results of the blood tests were published. The same principle applies to the hair-and-flesh sample. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Transformer Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Interesting how General has physical evidence, but people still easily label him a hoaxer. I guess it's inevitable. Got any actual facts to back that up like DNA evidence that it is a piece of sasquatch and he has it in his possession or are you just choosing to believe everything you read? No problem with choosing to believe what you want and it could all be correct but please do not disparage anyone for finding problems believing the stories as told until you have the actual proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I heard from a reliable source that i can't reveal that the report will be published on the back of a happy meal and comes with your choice of Ketchum, Paulides, lindsey, or Sas action figure . It will coincide with the release of the new McSassy- a sandwich with zagnuts, garlic, and duck feathers. Of course you will find no bones... This is not helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Bloody boots? really? or just dirty boots, that might have some remnants of something's blood on them? Should we really call them 'Bloody boots', has anyone seen a photo of the boots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I'm guilty of it myself, folks, but can we take discussions of Sierra Kills stuff over to the appropriate thread, please. Thanks Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Who, besides me, thinks the Sykes reports will spurt and fizzle just like the Ketchum fiasco did? It depends what you mean by 'spurt and fizzle'. If you mean; 'Who, besides me, thinks the Sykes report will not find any evidence of upright unknown primates, just like the Ketchum report?' Then I agree with you. If you mean; 'Who, besides me, thinks the Sykes report will not publish a paper?' Then I disagree with you. I think the Sykes paper will probably be titled something like: "DNA Samples of Alleged Upright hairy primates are really just assorted local agricultural animals" or "DNA Samples of Alleged Upright hairy primates are really just zoo animals" or "DNA Samples of Alleged Upright hairy primates don't match the stories" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 You are really out of the loop Drew. Look I don't 100% know what the Sykes Report will say but it will not be..... "DNA Samples of Alleged Upright hairy primates are really just assorted local agricultural animals" or "DNA Samples of Alleged Upright hairy primates are really just zoo animals" or "DNA Samples of Alleged Upright hairy primates don't match the stories" Ok, maybe I do know, but I know a lot more than I will ever post. Had you not been such a skeptic in the past you might be more trusted and know more. Everyone is remaining mum who knows, and the rampant and unfounded speculation, like the above quote by you is just rampant and unfounded speculation. That's the kindest thing I can say about it and remain within our rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 We don't know if the DNA on the boots is viable or not. Yes, they were worn after the fact and were even exposed to salt water. They might test well, and they might not. They will eventually be tested. It's worth a try. As far as Sykes testing the sierra sample goes, not he has not yet. I will say this. This new study is not secretive. We, the Olympic Project have already submitted samples. No NDA's have been signed at this point, and I hope there will be none of that going on. Not sure I can wait like this again lol. I understand Melbas delays, but like all of you my patience is thin. DR Thanks for this post, plussed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) Mike, Watch1 ( I'm just saying ) Didn't expect this from you as you always seem more upbeat... Yep I am as skeptical about the media ( and science community ) as you are... The skeptics usually are ready to pounce at any time and at the drop of a hat. They are in the "eager to disprove" instead of "Scientific enlightment" mode as far as BigFoot is concerned. But ..... I think a published report in a Scientific journal that has been peer reviewed will be hard to dislodge. The documented proof of DNA and the genome trail rumored to be part of that Report will dispell many of the Die Hard skeps.... and their ability to argue. They always refer to you have "no proof"... etc.. etc ... I think DMK has the proof.... IMHO What will be said when (IMHO) there is finally DNA proof... I think many skeps will retreat back to the Flat World theory when and IF this occurs...I expect it to be a short fight.... that the Media Skeps will lose. Especially when they read the report. I trust Mulder more than any other posters of the so called Science Community on this Forum. Would like to hear his response to your statement... The science community ( as far as BigFoot is concerned ) is committed to the Show me state of affairs .... ( IMHO ---- They are part of the problem ) instead of the old fashioned Lets prove it Sceintists mentality from the Past... That I was raised and taught. This bunch seems to be in the Dark ages and wanting to argue inside the room about how many teeth the donkey has..... If you go outside and count then you are disqualified .>>... The loudest argument usually wins in this type discussion... Admittely SasQuatch gives a lots of Scientists Cold Feet and throws them in to the protect my reputation mode. I have the utmost confidence in DMK and the report and the integrity of the folks that have signed and respected the NDA. Oh Well ...... Only time will tell ..... Again IMHO ... Duffer Edited June 13, 2012 by MikeG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Wonder home many of these folks know of or have been involved with this project in one way or another http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v467/n7319/full/nature09534.html#/group-1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 This is not helpful. Nor is anything else on this thread. It's as factually based as any other theory posted. Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Welcome to the forum, Science Critic. You'll get an awful lot more response if people can comfortably read your posts. Big blocks of texts never encourage people to read, and breaking it up into paragraphs is such a quick and easy thing. I'll edit your post to show you what I mean. You make a bizarre connection between the media and the science community..........two groups that often seem to completely misunderstand each other. I would also suggest that being respectful to all posters, including sceptics, is a lesson you are going to have to learn quickly here. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shaun Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 If/when the study is published I never expected it to be in Nature. I thought they'd be far too stuffy to consider Sasquatch. Then I was pleasantly surprised to find this on their web site http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090707/full/news.2009.641.html So, you never know. If it is accepted, and published then it could well end up somewhere like Nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dxm2 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 WelcomeScience Critic, In my humble opinion, blaming the skeptics, the media, and science, for Sasquatch not being recognized as a legitimate biological entity is not productive and only feeds the flames of paranoia and conspiracy theory. As someone who became more skeptical after I joined the forum, I look forward to any serious examination of the evidence and am confident that if the science is good, and can be repeated, then the case for this animal will be moved forward. For me, it will take another qualified scientist who reads the paper, examines the DNA and says, publicly, "Holy Cow!!! This IS new!". And when that happens, it will be a great day for everyone interested in this topic. The skeptics, the media and mainstream science may not like it, but they will have to lump it. Again, this is the rantings of someone who almost never posts and is only my own crackpot opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I trust Mulder more than any other posters of the so called Science Community on this Forum. Would like to hear his response to your statement... This statement? The media most likely has the plans already in place to shoot holes all in this report and have the "professionals" lined up waiting to do the same. Then after that happens, who in their right mind is going to try it again and go through the same thing. Get use to it folks, you are never going to hear the truth. If you did, would you believe it? Mike (watch1) Wouldn't surprise me in the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts