Guest Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Slimwitless, the main reason I think #3 is necessary is because otherwise all we would have conclusively is "unknown primate"... Without footage how do we know its not the ever-elusive North American pygmy tamarin? That's not to say that it wouldn't be obvious to you and me, but we all know science is a cold b-word, so to me that extra piece lets us spike the football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 There's one more thing that bears repeating: There is non-circumstantial evidence that could link Justin to the scene. If it hasn't been tested yet, someone isn't thinking clearly. IMHO Blood on his boots? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) You can convict a person "beyond a reasonable doubt" of the crime of murder, even if you lack a body. I suggest that we can suggest "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the Bigfoot phenomenon is based on the existence of a flesh and blood creature. If a large primate is proven to be out there are there any other serious candidates? Edited March 23, 2012 by indiefoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Slimwitless, the main reason I think #3 is necessary is because otherwise all we would have conclusively is "unknown primate"... Without footage how do we know its not the ever-elusive North American pygmy tamarin? An elusive North American pygmy tamarin would be incredible! That said, if the DNA is closer to us, no one is going to argue it's a tamarin. I think most people will conclude there's probably something to those thousands of sighting reports even if the paper doesn't use the term "bigfoot". Blood on his boots? Mike Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 I think that the sample from this shooting is really only one piece of the data set that will be included in a broader report. I think Dr. Ketchum has hinted that she has photographs, and I would think that many of the people that have submitted samples have done so in conjunction with ongoing efforts that included photography and videography to establish that their hair or saliva samples are coming from a BF. Whether this relationship is established with trackways or with actual images of BF, this will help add validity to the set of samples. Some are advocating that Dr. Ketchum should have released DNA results from the shooting right away, as though this particular sample has more merit than others. I don't see it this way. The value of the sample(s) from the shooting really have value if they can be shown to be consistent with other samples that may have better documentation (video or photographic) to connect the sample directly to BF. Lets say, for arguments sake, that of the 100 (or 200) specimens used in the study they have video or photographs to link BF to only 10 of the samples. If the other 90 or 190 samples follow the same patterns of DNA, then we can infer that all the samples come from the same species shown in the video or photographs. The Sierra shooting sample(s) are just a part of the overall picture, and would not stand alone very well because of the length of time from the shooting to the time they collected the sample. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 After stepping back from this site for a while, I realized some things. How the heck do y'all do it? I checked this site hourly when this story ramped up. Then daily, now weekly. It's a load of garbage. Not neccesarily the event, but the bickering, whining, accusing, "I cant answer NDA bs", can't say this or that here, etc. Month after month on this tread and also the Ketchum thread. There has been 0 evidence brought forth. Absolutely zero. Until a picture, a pic of the chunk, a pic of Justin's boots and clothes, a pic of the site, ketchum's report, a body, a bone, or other hard evidence is produced. This is a story. Nothing more. Argue for a year+ over absolutely nothing. Geez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Not sure how the Ketchum Report will work out in the end in all sincerity. One thing is for sure I think.... There have been some pretty bold statements made by some of the principal parties on FB and there is an awfully large portion of my mind that says that with personal reputations being at stake, that if they did not have something rather conclusively favorable that such claims would not have been made. I get *Hoosierfoots* perspective. That is sort of the *bottom-line* rationale and how things probably appear to a vast majority. But NDA's are pretty serious so I'll not castigate anyone involved in them for efforting to honor them. Some bold claims have been made and we'll eventually see how this all works out. When lawyers protecting the best interest of their client, and NDA's are involved among several parties, then it is no wonder that such might take some time to sort out and as such not fit our preferred timeline. I'd advocate for patience. There is no timeline for me regarding this as I understand that there is much more involved in all of this than initially might be apparent. Me, I'm just hoping there is something of merit in this that will serve to hopefully provide some manner of corroborative evidence in substantiating the species of BF. I hope it is not just smoke and mirrors over a bunch of nothing as the *Ga. Boys Hoax* and *Enoch* proved to be. Last thing we need as a community is another black eye. We'll know one way or the other before too long. I'm certainly hoping that there is some factual merit to some of the FB postings by Dr. K and her assistant that other members have sent me and have a really hard time believing that Dr.K would risk her reputation by making suggestive postings if she did not feel comfortable that the report will back her and her assistants suggestive insinuations up. Of course, stranger things have unfortunately taken place regarding BF before. I really hope the DNA findings will be something definitive one way or the other as opposed to ambiguous and subject to differing interpretations. If that is the case then we will have gained absolutely nothing IMO. So, I realize the frustration but have managed to avoid reaching that point myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 I really hope the DNA findings will be something definitive one way or the other as opposed to ambiguous and subject to differing interpretations. If that is the case then we will have gained absolutely nothing IMO. ^ Hrp, I'll be satisfied even with that, because this mystery still would have gotten a fair shot at proving itself. I'd still be disappointed for witnesses, but could still claim a victory towards the goal of having science take a hard look at the physical evidence from researchers across the country. We might not have proof if your scenario plays out, but we wouldn't claim that "science" shunned this mystery anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BackInAction Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 (edited) Southernyahoo; I suspect the DNA findings will be ambiguous ("Unknown primate"), as long as they are all appear to come from the same spieces we'll be fine. If the DNA matches Homo Sapiens, the findings will be useless and would be a major step backwards to BF'ers. I guess if samples match Neanderthal or the other Homo DNA souce we have (Giganto?) that wouldn't be too bad. As we have so few samples of those, having a dozen more samples from "living" beings would excite the science community. Edited March 26, 2012 by BackInAction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Unknown primate as a result of a study like Dr. Ketchums would be a real head turner by itself, but that same unknown should place itself on the phylogenetic tree of life, thus further defining it. One would have to mentally contrive a hoax on the level of a conspiracy to account for how a bunch bigfoot investigators could consistenly all come up with a species of primate unknown to science, or uncataloged by science. We might not have as much DNA for the ancient hominids as we might need to compare with putative BF DNA at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BackInAction Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 True. Unknown primate should, at least, help place the creature along the correct branch of the family tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Hutch Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 One additional question for the General? What kind of truck do you drive? The reason that I ask is that I am curious how it was that you were able to navigate unplowed USFS service roads at the 7,200 foot elevation in 3 feet of snow? After all, you stated that when you and the driver returned to find the bodies and recovered the now famous "Steak" that you were searching in 3 feet of snow. Typically, the USFS gates 90% of these roads, closing them to public access due to heavy snow as they are unable to provide snowplow or roadside assistance service in incliment weather conditions. They don't want you to end up like that family in Oregon a few years back - stranded in the middle of BFE. Must be a monster truck - perhaps even Bigfoot? Sorry, couldn't resist that one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 @ HUTCH He never said he was in a truck when they found the steak, you have a batting average of about .013 with the details of what happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 When I'm looking for an answer from someone I often try to be pleasant and respectful, but that's just me. Let's see how your method gets you results... Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 Plus, I asked last august what kind of truck they were driving when they popped it, and never got an answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts