Guest OntarioSquatch Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Absolutely agree. Amazing people expect this to be done in no time at all. The Sykes paper is running quickly, but I suspect it won't have the final result of a new species, more one of an 'unknown' species, which they will use for the next stage of identification. Where Dr K will (hopefully) go the whole way. I think Dr. Sykes mentioned he's ready to distinguish between even Denisovan and Neanderthal DNA. So far, there hasn't been a single Bigfoot DNA sample that hasn't come back as Homo sapiens. The Snelgrove Lake sample, Richard Stubstads samples, and the hair sample from David Paulides all came back as Homo sapiens. And to top it all off, Dr. Ketchum accidentally leaked it out that they are Homo sapiens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 (edited) Feral Humans? Like a Pig? I am "anti kill" because I believe them to be too much like us to be considered a dumb animal. If they are genus Homo Sapiens... killing one is very bad idea. Long term legal ramifications on a kill of one would be assured. Pro kill people you better make your story air tight and one about self defense if you get one. This would be the animal rights "apocalypse". Edited September 17, 2012 by Woodswalker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Pro kill people you better make your story air tight and one about self defense if you get one. This would be the animal rights "apocalypse". I think I said this to the woodape proponents about 5 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted September 18, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted September 18, 2012 ....Pro kill people you better make your story air tight and one about self defense if you get one. This would be the animal rights "apocalypse". Might be good to make sure you don't get those game cams turned around on you too, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 (edited) Hmmm...we could Clone, Capture, Kill, or Do Nothing and let the subject remain in the quackery folder. But this is the Ketchum Report folder and should not be discussed too deeply here. The other option I think could fly would be to record MULTIPLE sasquatches interacting with each other, the environment, and people, filmed in HD. This could be a start point for legitimacy. Good luck on that. Anyway you look at it, it'll take a significant event to prove and exonerate this field. Naysayers and protesters will always be there, just have to choose one path that results in the least amount of collateral (I guess). The TBRC is on to something re: wood apes (shouldn't it be woods apes?) and are in a better position to handle the legal ramifications than say a lone hunter. I'll applaud them in that they're at least trying to do something to exonerate all of us from the ridicule we've received. Edited September 18, 2012 by poignant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 (edited) I wasn't questioning the 10 footer, I was suggesting that she should not have revealed her alleged BF experiences because this only diminishes her credibility as an impartial, objective and sane DNA specialist in the eyes of her peers. But what's worse, she claims not just one encounter but several. For those reviewing her work who are animate that Sasquatch is nothing but a farce, they'll start wondering how many cats Ketchum owns. Now her state of mind will be also be in question, in addition to her findings. She just made it that much more difficult for the scientific community to take her seriously. Personally, I think she's pulling a "Curt Nelson", but we shall see. I'll bet any L series lens out of my camera bag that this report will produce no more proof of BF than the 262 pages of this thread have. And that includes my cherished 16-35 f2.8L which I never ever leave home without! People act like finding proof of BF is some top secret operation. If it is real, great (it's not), but hiding this supposed evidence and any supposed kill site is just smoke and mirrors to grab attention, and then try to keep that attention. It isn't there, so therefore, neither is the evidence. It is 2012 people, there is no way a population of BF is roaming the woods of NA and not leaving any proof. I used to believe, but now I realize how ridiculous I must have looked to all the friends and family I tried to convince over the years, I am actually embarrassed now when anyone reminds me. At least I can laugh at myself about it. There is no report coming that will prove BF is real, that is why this report is always pending review or pending something else. Just sayn'! PS The UFO behind me in my picture is not real either, that was just added with an iPhone App...really! Edited September 18, 2012 by summitwalker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 ^Shhh, Sleuth...you aren't supposed to make sense. It messes up the Skeptics' tidy little world of denial. Whoa, there, Mulder. I'm a skeptic and I have no problem with the time element of the Ketchum report. I never understood why to-date-no-report-published implies a hoax. It may imply the report has problems or that it needed major revisions. And, I might add, it seems that several pro-Bigfoot folks here are as suspicious as some skeptics of this report based on the fact that it should have been published already. Maybe I'm naive, but the delays don't say "hoax" to me. That doesn't mean I think the report will end the controversy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 I think Dr. Sykes mentioned he's ready to distinguish between even Denisovan and Neanderthal DNA. So far, there hasn't been a single Bigfoot DNA sample that hasn't come back as Homo sapiens. The Snelgrove Lake sample, Richard Stubstads samples, and the hair sample from David Paulides all came back as Homo sapiens. And to top it all off, Dr. Ketchum accidentally leaked it out that they are Homo sapiens. No she did not. IF the claimed material came from Ketchum's study (which is debatable in and of itself), it showed that the mitachondrial DNA appeared to be human, but the nuclear DNA was definitively NOT human, making BF a near-human primate or hominid, close enough to us genetically to interbreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 That's how I remember it also. She clearly backed off of any of those preliminary findings and early web addresses they had secured. She said that a curveball was thrown their way as far as the results are concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 (edited) Like they wouldn't find it there. Especially if it is also a tracking device. Some guy that makes Anton Chigur look like Mr. Rogers will show up at your door. LOL , Anton was one baaadddd ___________ ______________, to say the very least. with one email from him , we would know every detail Of dr.K's report, including what font it was printed in. Edited September 18, 2012 by zigoapex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 (edited) Mulder, the leak isn't from the study at all, it's from a documentary title that she put a copyright on. She gave a quick summary on how Sasquatch is a modern human and not some hybrid. When the mtDNA is modern human then it's modern human! Even the Neanderthals didn't have mtDNA within modern human range. Edited September 18, 2012 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 No she did not. IF the claimed material came from Ketchum's study (which is debatable in and of itself), it showed that the mitachondrial DNA appeared to be human, but the nuclear DNA was definitively NOT human, making BF a near-human primate or hominid, close enough to us genetically to interbreed. That's how I remember it also. She clearly backed off of any of those preliminary findings and early web addresses they had secured. She said that a curveball was thrown their way as far as the results are concerned. As Dr. Ketchum herself noted in one of her only posts in this forum, the Copyright filings noting human DNA were preliminary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 I really hope we don't have to cover this copyright filing subject again - I think we put that to bed about a hundred pages back. What next? A reprise of that laughable "mail DNA samples from different locations" theory? Meanwhile, over on the facebook page, life goes on... Jaime Arcand posted to Melba Ketchum September 13 Thank you for the add Dr. Ketchup. Much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 xDDD very nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Broken link for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts