Guest BFSleuth Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 With the big release a couple of weeks ago my interest was renewed and I decided to come here and dig a little deeper into the backstory. So I've spent the last few days reading this entire thread. Wow, what a slog! But there have been some very interesting discussion here over the last year and a half and it's been a fascinating soap opera at the very least. +1 for reading through the entire thread, quite the undertaking.... ... and a solid beginning post as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 We can rule out the Red Deer folks and Heidelbergensis as likely candidates then. There is no Neandertal or Denisovan mtDNA surviving today so the human mtDNA wouldn't be a contributor of the 4-6% we supposedly have. That makes what Dr. Ketchum said even harder to figure out. Even a previously unidentified Homo is bound to have traces, and if it isn't Homo then it isn't likely to be successful mating with a human. I'm like SY in that I'm not sure how far removed a type has to be before it's "NO MO HOMO". As for RL, I just consider that more Melbuedian Slippage. I've often wondered if Melba is his insider source, you can't get more ironic than that . Again, Why would Red Deer Man or Heidelbergensis have to have traces of Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA? Heidelbergensis is an earlier form of hominin so if an isolated population of them survived until 15000 BP is someplace like NE Asia, they might never have had any interaction with Neaderthals or Denisovans. I'm not following your reasoning? +1 for reading through the entire thread, quite the undertaking.... ... and a solid beginning post as well. Thanks. I got no work done the last four days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 (edited) Oh Hi Theagenes, welcome to the forum. First I have a basic rudimentary knowledge of genetics and am better with anatomy and physiology, My take on Heidelbergensis is that it is related to Neandertal. We have 2-4% of those residual genes left over from interbreeding but I don't think that is for certain based on what I've read. There are some thoughts that it might be left over from a common ancestor. Either way, if the unknown is Heidelbergensis then the combination of the nuclear DNA should have some matches to Neandertals somewhere and it didn't according to what Dr.Ketchum said. If the unknown does not have a common ancestor then how could it breed with with humans? You just answered that when you mentioned that we don't have everything sequenced. If the event took place 15,000 years ago then the level of mosaicism she talked about shouldn't be present. It would be there if it occurred maybe a couple of thousand years ago. From what I read, if no other hybridization occurred since 15,000 years ago then that genetic mosaicism would be back bred out of the line in a matter of 32 generations. It would still be possible to carry the mtDNA from a human ancestor from a prior hybridization event from 15,000 years ago as long as there was an unbroken chain of mother-daughter transmission. My sister is a midwife and we were discussing this a couple of weeks ago when she happened to give me some of her journals with research articles to read regarding pre-eclampsia. She said that there was a theory as far back as 2003 that this might have contributed to the demise of the Neandertal and reminded me that we should have more than the 2-4 % of the shared genetic material if interbreeding was more successful. It seems that humans lost the protective factor against this auto immune response for the sake of increased brain development. We are the only primate that doesn't have that genetic protection so if conception occurred with a species further removed than Neandertal it is not likely that it would survive because of this auto immune response to foreign genetic material. Perhaps the trait was passed to us from the Neandertal??? Being both HOMO maybe we both had it? The articles about the recent sequencing done on Neandertal don't get that specific about their immune system for me to really draw any kind of conclusions one way or the other specifically. Based on the lack of success with interbreeding with Neandertal for whatever reasons, it seems unlikely that anything further removed would not be successful enough to produce a different species altogether. That's where I am at with this, I'm assuming she has misunderstood the data because according to Todd Disotell , had the research been submitted to the small community that is evolutionary genetics he would have heard about it. What other disciplines, besides those who have sequenced the genomes for the ancient hominids, could you include that would help you with any meaningful interpretation of the data? As described it seems biologically impossible, if not genetically impossible. Edited December 10, 2012 by CTfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Thanks. I got no work done the last four days. I'm guessing the amount of work actually lost to this subject is considerable. There is no legal recourse to recover your losses. Think carefully before continuing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 (edited) . Based on the lack of success with interbreeding with Neandertal for whatever reasons, it seems unlikely that anything further removed would not be successful enough to produce a different species altogether. That's where I am at with this, I'm assuming she has misunderstood the data because according to Todd Disotell , had the research been submitted to the small community that is evolutionary genetics he would have heard about it. What other disciplines, besides those who have sequenced the genomes for the ancient hominids, could you include that would help you with any meaningful interpretation of the data? As described it seems biologically impossible, if not genetically impossible. That's the paradox the study is left with. They are also boxed in around 15K years as well...so we also have the conumdrum of comming up with an *UNKNOWN* unrelated to Neander and more archaic. As a result..those here who still want to believe in all this find themselves *fishing* for anything (The Hobbit) that will give them a life line to keep the study viable by having us buy into the existance of a FAR removed hominid co-existing with humans at 15K (and>>> MATING with a human). Unless Ketcham shifts her position on this (and provides the data), this study is DEAD in the water. Edited December 10, 2012 by ronn1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 (edited) Thought I would post this: URGENT announcement from Igor Burtsev … “International Center of Hominology (Russia) Urgent! The DNA analysis of the Bigfoot/Sasquatch specimen conducted by Dr. Melba Ketchum the head of DNA Diagnostics, Timpson, TX, USA has been over! Team of American scientists led by Dr. Melba Ketchum for five years has analyzed 109 purported samples of such creatures. The study has sequenced DNA of a novel North American hominin, commonly called Bigfoot or Sasquatch. There were a large number of laboratories associated with this study including academic, private and government laboratories in which blind testing was utilized to avoid prejudice in testing. Great time and care was taken in the forensic laboratories to assure no contamination occurred with any of the samples utilized in this study. After 5 years of this study the scientists can finally answer the question of what sasquatch really is. It is human like us only different, a hybrid of a human with unknown species. Early field research shows that the Bigfoot/Sasquatches are massively intelligent which has enabled them to avoid detection to a large extent. They are different than us, however human nonetheless. The hybridization event could not have occurred more than 15000 years ago according to the mitochondrial data in some samples. Origin of this hominin was probably Middle Eastern/Eastern Europe and Europe originally though other geographic areas are not excluded. The manuscript associated with this study has been submitted to a scientific reviewed magazine. For years people have refused to believe they exist. Now that we know that they are real, it is up to us to protect them from those that would hunt or try to capture them for research or for sport. They should be left alone to live as they live now. After all, they are our relatives. At this time, analysis of the Sasquatch genomes is still ongoing. Further data will be presented in the future following this original study. Additionally, analysis of various hair samples purportedly from Siberian Wildman are being tested in an effort to determine if relatedness exists between the Sasquatch and Russian Wildman. Dr. Igor Burtsev, Head of International Center of Hominology, Moscow, Russia +7(916)812-6253 inhomin@yandex.ru “ Edited December 10, 2012 by ronn1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Old news. But thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobZenor Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 (edited) We apparently did interbreed with neanderthals. In case anyone doubts that the evidence is pretty good. That is why only non sub-Saharan Africans share share certain DNA with them. Some also apparently share it with denisovans. Edited December 10, 2012 by BobZenor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 That's the paradox the study is left with. They are also boxed in around 15K years as well...so we also have the conumdrum of comming up with an *UNKNOWN* unrelated to Neander and more archaic. As a result..those here who still want to believe in all this find themselves *fishing* for anything (The Hobbit) that will give them a life line to keep the study viable by having us buy into the existance of a FAR removed hominid co-existing with humans at 15K (and>>> MATING with a human). Unless Ketcham shifts her position on this (and provides the data), this study is DEAD in the water. Have you contacted her about where she might be at this point, with the report? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Old news. But thanks. Yes old news....but you get to *refresh* the issue here and how it contaminates the study itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Yes old news....but you get to *refresh* the issue here and how it contaminates the study itself. Guess I should've added, irrelevant as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Have you contacted her about where she might be at this point, with the report? As far as I know... she has NOT shifted her position one IOTA. The notion that we have an *UNKNOWN at 15K* responsible for SAS is a POISION PILL in this study. We apparently did interbreed with neanderthals. In case anyone doubts that the evidence is pretty good. That is why only non sub-Saharan Africans share share certain DNA with them. Some also apparently share it with denisovans. Yes..but this has no bearing on the Ketcham Study. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 As far as I know... she has NOT shifted her position one IOTA. The notion that we have an *UNKNOWN at 15K* responsible for SAS is a POISION PILL in this study. Highly speculative assumption on your part. = IRRELEVANT! Maybe contact her and get the goods first hand instead of spouting off subjective conjecture. She doesn't have to shift anything to appease anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Highly speculative assumption on your part. = IRRELEVANT! Maybe contact her and get the goods first hand instead of spouting off subjective conjecture. She doesn't have to shift anything to appease anyone. Not a matter of appeasement. The fundamental thesis is going to sink this....it's just not tenable. I wish it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted December 10, 2012 Share Posted December 10, 2012 Not a matter of appeasement. The fundamental thesis is going to sink this....it's just not tenable. I wish it was. Based on what facts that you might have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts