Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 I'm not a huge fan of Biscardi, but fair is fair. He lost several 10s of 1000s of dollars obtaining what turned out to be a fake. Biscardi may be a showboat and more of a nuisance than an aid to the field of BF research, but that doesn't mean that it was kosher to take advantage of him as the GA boys did. You could call it "poetic justice" and have a point, however. There are no words. Completely inaccurate and false. Biscardi knew the entire thing was a hoax before he got up and talked at the press conference. Please go back and do your research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Just a play on words there Scout but glad you picked up on it LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 When someone does not have the background or the in depth knowledge to really understand the nuances and complex details of a subject they often simplify it or claim that it IS simple in order to back up their opinion. We see this all through this thread. When people reduce complexities to simple generalizations it is clear they are not doing the heavy lifting of critical thinking. If and when Ketchum publishes this report these generalists of knowledge are going to be in for a huge shock when people like Disotell and other VERY knowledgeable and qualified people challenge these assumptions and conclusions in the paper. Although when this happens the default response is always along the lines of "oh they are just biased or they don't really understand". Get ready for that conversation because as you can see it has already started. Prepping the field as I like to say. The tactics of the true believers are no different than the tactics of the JREFers. This is why they hate each other so much, because deep down inside they know they are both exactly alike. Same Stuff, Different Day "Poisoning the well" is one of the more obvious Skeptic tricks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 And, based on your statements to date, will find some way to reject/dismiss/ignore even if it IS "confirmed". In the mean time, all you seem to have to offer the conversation is yammering about "hero worship", which is all heat and no light. Speaking about all heat and no light.. where exactly is this paper you are so adamantly supporting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 There are no words. Completely inaccurate and false. Biscardi knew the entire thing was a hoax before he got up and talked at the press conference. Proof? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 the mDNA comes not from "mixing" but from the mother alone. Ultimately mDNA is mixed in humans due to a lot of human-human interbreeding. Do we think that there would be a LOT of Human Sasquatch interbreeding? Also, females are the important element in the story. Human mDNA gets into Sasquatch by a Sasquatch mating with a woman, that woman having Sasquatch babies [doubtless a difficult birth for the smaller human birth canal], some of these surviving babies being girls with mom's mDNA, and either being popular successful breeders or there being an awful lot of sasquatch rapes of women who then have successful pregnancies. Um, well...that sounds like the "Mars Needs Women" scenario Robert Lindsay attributes to Ketchum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Speaking about all heat and no light.. where exactly is this paper you are so adamantly supporting? Not being in the loop I don't know exactly where it is, and if I were in the loop I would not be allowed to say. That there is a paper is a safe conclusion as JDL said earlier. She's got too much to lose if there isn't one, and too many people have confirmed that they have participated in the study by sending samples. If you want to argue that the paper ultimately will not be accepted, go knock yourself out. It's a fair opinion. Arguing that this is a giant hoax and that there was no study and is no paper at all, ignores the facts, unless you are prepared to call people like southernyahoo a liar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Why, I have never seen so many DNA experts in all my life! Truly wonderful! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 (edited) This thread is going meta. It's becoming more and more about itself. Edited December 9, 2012 by slimwitless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 (edited) And, based on your statements to date, will find some way to reject/dismiss/ignore even if it IS "confirmed". In the mean time, all you seem to have to offer the conversation is yammering about "hero worship", which is all heat and no light. And based on your statements, if other papers do disagree with the Ketchum paper, you'll dismiss then as close-minded ivory-tower people. "How dare they question my hero, don't they know she'll be the next Galileo!" Edited December 9, 2012 by Jerrymanderer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 So there is 'unique animal DNA' just laying around all veterinarian clinics.... 'unique' is 'unique' no vet has access to 'unique' DNA unless they manage to discover a new species that just happens to have 'unique' DNA. That statement is flat out incorrect. A one time mating could introduce the mtDNA into the entire species given the correct set of circumstances. *Correct circumstances*? Care to elaborate? Which scenario is more *Likely* if Ketcham's thesis is correct? Your *correct* circumstances or this>>>> For the human mDNA to *take hold* and permeate the SAS population, it would take repetative mating with human females. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Same Stuff, Different Day "Poisoning the well" is one of the more obvious Skeptic tricks. He went after believers and skeptics. Of course that still makes him "one of them!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Arguing that this is a giant hoax and that there was no study and is no paper at all, ignores the facts, unless you are prepared to call people like southernyahoo a liar... Mulder you crack me up. Using the word "facts" does not equal their actually being any. You cannot prove that a paper exists any more than i can prove that it doesn't. The only difference is that i refer to my position as my opinion. You refer to yours as being a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 Speaking of meta, I did a search on the first mention of the word "hybrid" in this thread. It occurred back in July 26, 2011. That's one year, four months and thirteen days (sorry, I wrote a program once to calculate elapsed time...I have to use it for something). FWIW ps the hybrid rumor will prove to be false; if they had hybrid DNA it would already be shouted from the rooftops and every media outlet (not to mention the far fetched quality of this proposition). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2012 Share Posted December 9, 2012 (edited) From the study: Researchers’ extensive DNA sequencing suggests that the legendary Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago as a hybrid cross of modern Homo sapiens with an unknown primate species. “Our study has sequenced 20 whole mitochondrial genomes and utilized next generation sequencing to obtain 3 whole nuclear genomes from purported Sasquatch samples. The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to Homo sapiens and other primate species. Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens. Hominins are members of the taxonomic grouping Hominini, which includes all members of the genus Homo. Genetic testing has already ruled out Homo neanderthalis and the Denisova hominin as contributors to Sasquatch mtDNA or nuDNA. “The male progenitor that contributed the unknown sequence to this hybrid is unique as its DNA is more distantly removed from humans than other recently discovered hominins like the Denisovan individual,†explains Ketchum. “Sasquatch nuclear DNA is incredibly novel and not at all what we had expected. While it has human nuclear DNA within its genome, there are also distinctly non-human, non-archaic hominin, and non-ape sequences. We describe it as a mosaic of human and novel non-human sequence. Further study is needed and is ongoing to better characterize and understand Sasquatch nuclear DNA.†If I were to distill the Ketcham thesis down to ONE fundamental *Achilles heel*, it would be the notion that an *UNKNOWN* species was around 15K years ago to mate with a human. This simply goes against ALL anthropological evidence. Other than other primates at the time, there is absolutely ZERO evidence or scientific data to support the notion that another hominid species coexisted with humans (Homo sapiens) AT THAT POINT IN TIME. You would have to go back at least 30K years to see another..Neander...and we know they interbred with modern humans because most humans alive today still have some of their genes (except certain African types). The type of creature posited by Ketcham would have to be RADICALLY diverged from us..even more so than Neanders...to give rise to a creature like BF. I just don't see how the study can overcome this fundamental fact. Yes..I'll await for all the *evidence* to come in...but I have to tell ya'all....it *Ain't gonna happen*...not this year..not next year...not in your lifetime. Well,,heck....NOT EVER. Edited December 9, 2012 by ronn1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts