Jump to content

Sierra Shooting from A-Z


slabdog

Recommended Posts

Guest OntarioSquatch

^ I dunno about the blood, but I read some of the comments posted on Mr. Lindsay's blogs and it looks like many people don't believe Justin's story at all. They call BS on it. But if Justin is lying it would mean Dr. Melba Ketchum is also lying. What would be the chances of that? IMO it was only a matter of time before someone shot and killed a bigfoot. We've been on this continent for only several hundred years and yet people act like they know everything.

Edited by OntarioSquatch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest slimwitless

Does anyone know if the purported blood from Justins boots were in fact profiled for DNA ?

Stinky

The last I heard the answer is no. That said, I'm pretty certain they're aware of it's importance. Bart Cutino has addressed this a few times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully Dr. Ketchum's paper will accomplish that. But interesting how the first sample that was sent came back as human. It's not a good sign for Justin IMO. Dale Drinnon thinks the authorities might nail Justin for the shooting if the paper reveals it was a "human" that got shot. Personally I really don't know. I wouldn't wanna be Justin right now. He's also recieving death threats that go towards his daughter. This world works in weird ways to say the least.

The first sample did not come back as human and Dale Drinnon doesn't know what he's talking about. It ridiculous that people are trying to find all these ways for homicide charges to be slapped on Justin and it's just never going to happen. He went to the DFG and they had no interest in even following up on it. He did not shoot a human.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest OntarioSquatch

This Dale Drinnon character must be some troll. Or maybe he knows something we don't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a troll on Bigfoot Evidence trying to make a name for himself by acting like he knows people involved. He doesn't. Don't believe one word you read in those comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone else a bit confused with parts of the Examiner interview ?

For instance:

In reply to question #3, regarding the "steak".....

" I did NOT carve any piece of meat or any part off of any animal ever. After we left we did not return for several weeks. Hard to say why it left me with a weird fear feeling almost like ptsd. Mean while I was so sure it was just like any other animal and would be there when we went back to get it, at least some hair and skull I figured. Some people had said to me ''well after several weeks scavengers would have ate every last bit of meat.'' Thats simply not true anyone who has said anything like that hasnt killed enough animals or any to make that statement. Go shoot a cow a deer or elk and leave it lay. Come back in a few weeks. There will be a &**& load of hair hide depending on elevation and time of year fat and yes even a bit of meat on the bones ect. Me and my buddy returned several weeks later with a blood hound, we were greeted by a few feet of snow that came in shortly after the shooting. All we could find was a small scrap of hide. We sent some to Dr. Melba Ketchum."

Then,

In reply to question #6, regarding Dr Ketchum's involvement.....

" She was working with the Olympic project long before I came along. Theres an on going DNA study that I contributed one of the larger samples to, but I really have no inside information on when and where it will be released, I havent even a guess. Your guess is as good as mine. I have talked to her one time for 10 minutes on the phone back in January nothing before or sense. I have much more flesh from the shooting and its going to be sent around to labs all over the US and outside. They can do whatever they do with it. "

Umm, so which is it ?

I saw one or two other minor things, but the above seemed kind of glaring to me.

How can their be confusion about what was recovered, or not recovered...?

You either found a "small scrap of hide", or you "have much more flesh from the shooting".... You can't have both....

Guess I'm a little confused at this point.

-A-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good catch art.

that sounds like perhaps either they have nothing very solid.......or a lot more than they admit.

No disrespect to anyone involved,but this & the ketchum saga seem to be slipping on the "hope meter".

If they've got something good luck to those involved,if not.......oh well,its been interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any piece of "hide" that hasn't been processed (tanned) is going to have flesh attached to it. The hide being referred to, in the past, as a steak might be where the confusion lies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest slimwitless

Anyone else a bit confused with parts of the Examiner interview ?

No. I think he's been entirely consistent. He says he expected a lot and found one piece. That single piece, as previously revealed, was a bit of flesh with hair, fat and tissue. I don't think his use of the word "hide" means anything significant. As far as "much more flesh", the piece he sent to Ketchum was reportedly quite small. He really doesn't need a lot (two pounds at most by his own admission) to send numerous samples to outside labs. It's all relative.

Edited by slimwitless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This Dale Drinnon character must be some troll. Or maybe he knows something we don't?

Just a troll on Bigfoot Evidence trying to make a name for himself by acting like he knows people involved. He doesn't. Don't believe one word you read in those comments.

Assuming (and we all know what that does...) that the person leaving the comments is Dale Drinnon, he is more than a simple troll. Although I rarely agree with him, I do find his blogs to contain some interesting material. See http://frontiersofzo...y.blogspot.com/ and http://frontiers-of-...y.blogspot.com/.

Edited by Bonehead74
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah I guess I couldve been clearer. There are so many imposters on there it's really hard to tell who is who.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Patron
....How can their be confusion about what was recovered, or not recovered...?

You either found a "small scrap of hide", or you "have much more flesh from the shooting".... You can't have both....

Guess I'm a little confused at this point.

-A-

Gotta read the book Art, it will be the great leveler.

Or, a great approximation of an underwear bomb (off topic but great Letterman jokes last night:

Membership and recruiting of al-Qaida is drying up. Far be it for me to tell terrorists about strategy but I think membership started to subside when they went to the suicide bomber exploding underpants.

Let's just say you put on the exploding underpants and you detonate. When they bring in the 72 virgins, then what?

j/k on the bomb part of it.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...
Guest OntarioSquatch

Check this out

youthiteration2.jpg

It has no hooded nose. Has it been drawn to look less human than it really did?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Patron

Black nose like a boxer dog..... attributed comments from MM and JS/General...

confirmatory validity? You be the judge...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...