Guest Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 I really hope we don't have to cover this copyright filing subject again Yes. It might make the good Dr. Parnassus come out of his hiding spot and scream the words "modern human" a couple more times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 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! Just my opinion, but those lenses suck. I don't know what you mean by people hiding the kill site, I've seen pictures of it, so it does exist. As far as hiding evidence, I don't know about that either, most submitters of the evidence have been pretty forthcoming with everything they've provided. Just because Dr. Ketchum won't lay out everything she has for you on your schedule, it's really no reason to get all bunched up about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 (edited) When the mtDNA is modern human then it's modern human! Not true. The NuDNA supposedly came back decidedly NOT human. So we have a near relative hominid that is decidedly NOT Hss, but is close enough to interbreed (again, assuming that the "leak" is accurate). *ETA*Looks like summitwalker has joined the ranks of the "we've seen it all" crowd...and that crowd is ALWAYS wrong. We are seeing and finding new things every day. Edited September 19, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 This is the third time I have had to post this in this thread. Here it is, direct from the horse's mouth: Parn,that is a gross distortion of what Stubstad has posted. He has said at great length that the mitochondrial DNA is within normal human range, but right at the extreme (in other words, atypical/ rare). However, the Nuclear DNA is outside the range of any known modern human on the planet (my words....read his below). Therefore, the animal that carries this is NOT a modern human. You keep repeating that same fallacy and misrepresentation, so to try to obviate the possibility of you doing this again, here is his explanation in his words, not yours: (Apologies to the mods if I have done something wrong in clipping this in here) Richard Stubstad March 7, 2012 at 4:16 PM That’s OK, Robert, I can answer the question unequivocally. Whether SeesDifferent believes me or not is another matter. That’s his/her issue, not mine. All three mito sequences WERE within modern human ranges — but just barely at both ends of the spectrum, so to speak. When one “connects the mito dots†and doesn’t assume each sequence is unrelated to the next, one COULD be lead to believe these three were modern humans, albeit from VERY strange and rare haplotypes. It was the nuclear MC1R DNA sequences that sealed the deal. None were within human ranges. Each of the three had a particular mutation that no human on earth has been shown to have. This is exactly the same result that was found for Neanderthal within MC1R, but Neanderthal’s mutation site was different from the three purported sasquatch mutation sites. Based on this, all three MC1R sequences were not within known modern human ranges. So either sasquatch is a hoax and Neanderthals were hoaxes, or both subspecies are the real deal. Put that in your pipe and smoke it for awhile. Richard I hope you'll now adjust your position regarding Stubstat's evaluation of the data . To declare, as you often do, that Stubstad says "sasquatch = modern human" is clearly, clearly erroneous. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 ^Shouldn't have had to do that, Mike. It's been said so many times that I cannot help but think that repeating the claim that "Ketchum says sas=modern human" is deliberately reposting misinformation and should be censured for trolling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 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! Everything besides the UFO iPhone App, could you please provide us with your evaluation of the subject? I'm curious as to the thoroughness of your investigation. Additionally, if what you said is true, what the heck do we have going on here globally? Is there a psychological term for it? There seem to be thousands of people afflicted with whatever is causing them to lie, hallucinate, or misidentify animals at very close ranges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Gawd I can't wait for this thread to end. Anyone know of a sleeping pill that lasts until December? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/hibernol/2658 Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 lol! I remember watching that live. I miss Farley...Hartman too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 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. The snelgrove lake sample isn't in the Ketchum study right? if it is, that's going to be a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 According to RL (God knows if he has a source or if he's making it up) says it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 on monsterquest sasquatch attack 2 they re-ran the dna and it came back as fungus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Feral fungus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Someone please clarify if I am misquided here, but , according to purported leaks, the mitochondrial dna is only passed down on the maternal side, and the dna tested or at least some of the dna tested, comes back as modern human, but just barely on the mitochondrial side, and something else on the paternal nuclear dna side. So a very long time ago, a modern(but just barely) human female was inseminated by a-something other than modern human but close enough to breed male? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 ^pg I think you've got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts