Sierra Shooting from A-Z

[Guest]

Prag, you always know what to say, at least in your mind. My answer to your last five paragraphs is.......nothing.

I have great answers to all of your questions but if I answer them you'll just come up with new ways to say the same thing. You're good at that, but I'm bored.

lil foot, yes he does have a life size pic. "Big Phil". I'll check with him and see if it's OK for me to talk about on this forum.

General, thanks for keeping it real! Call you tomorrow.

Derek, thank you so much for your candor on this subject. I really hope it all pays off for you in the end both monetarily and through vindication. If this is as big as it sounds like it could be, you are to thank as much as anyone.

I have a question about the above: I could be wrong, but for some reason I was under the impression that any pics snapped with the OP's trailcams were not covered under the NDA and were fair game, and that you had even vowed to post any possible BF pics as soon as you get them. Is there some reason "Big Phil" does not fall in this category? Or perhaps I am mistaken altogether? Thanks!

[Guest]

NiceGuyJon,

As far as I know, the "Big Phil" photo that Wally Hersom has pre-dates the OP trailcam pictures.

[southernyahoo]

He is right about a couple things though. Wally is helping with study costs on the DNA project. The money has to come from somewhere. All serious Bigfoot researchers owe Wally a big thank you for his contributions and help with this project.

Thanks Wally!!!!

[southernyahoo]

When I publish a paper and I have, it goes to my department, then to security then out. As a military scientist I dont have to send it out to the Air Force

or to the Army. I have to present the paper at a International Conference then I am up for questions by anyone who is cleared to be at that conference if its classified or anyone if its not classified and at a international

public technical meeting. Then anyone can pin me to the wall if they see fit. Usually the questions start with "I hate to disagree with my esteemed colleague but..." The ONLY time I have signed a NDA is to cover proprietorial

information for a defense contractor.

Perhaps the difference is that you don't have a mob of laymen pounding on your door demanding info about your research and wishing to scatter it in bits and peices across the internet before you can even present your paper to the proper peers. The people who pay for that research would like it to be released in whole not in part and in that sense it is proprietary.

[Guest Strick]

I doubt the DNA results that Derek and the General have been privy to have come back 'modern human' period.

The Sierra kill sample is not scat, hair or saliva like many of the others presented for analyisis, but a real piece of meat with skin and hair.

I'm no expert, but I imagine the nuclear analysis of the DNA markers clearly differentiates the subject from modern homo sapiens, while still placing it as closer to ourselves than the Great Apes.

If I had submitted a flesh sample that was simply identified as modern human by DNA analysis then I would be worried, as questions would surely be asked as to its provenance. Instead, the General and Derek project an air of calm self-confidence.

[Guest]

NiceGuyJon,

As far as I know, the "Big Phil" photo that Wally Hersom has pre-dates the OP trailcam pictures.

Ah- thank you. If that's the case then why haven't we seen it?

[Guest]

NiceGuyJon,

As far as I know, it's some sort of agreement between the original photo owner and Wally. That's all I know.

[Guest]

Willinyc, I don't mean to sound short about the track. I didn't post it here because we wanted to talk about it, I posted it because one of the forum members here asked me to. I know there's no good scale to measure by but according to the General, who actually found the tracks, it's much larger than a bear track. The heel is to elongated IMO to be a bear hind. Also the toe pattern in wrong IMO. The toes in the track extend down the side. Bear tracks are more uniform and on top, or front of the foot. Also, the claws are missing. Again I'm sorry for sounding short, but I never know what to expect here. Peace.

The big Phil pic does not belong to us. We didn't get it. I haven't asked Wally for permission to put on our web site yet because I'm not convinced it's a Sasquatch.

DR

[Guest]

The big Phil pic does not belong to us. We didn't get it. I haven't asked Wally for permission to put on our web site yet because I'm not convinced it's a Sasquatch.

DR

Is that because it's a blobsquatch or is it so real-looking that it looks fake?

[Guest]

Bipedalist, No he was not actively tracking a family group. He found the tracks on one of his failed attempts to gain access to the site because of snow drifts. Because of the location of the tracks he put two and two together and has made an assumption about their movements.

Prag, I'm sorry about my shortness with you as well. In past conversations with you I honestly feel like I'm talking to a wall. I don't mean you any dis-respect, but it's really frustrating. I'm not here to argue and debate. We're here to answer what questions we can without violating our agreement.

If you think I haven't had a hard time processing this your wrong. This has kept me up nights. Many nights. When I first started to accept this story-event for what it is it broke my heart. It hit me very hard. My inner emotions are my business and not something I care to discuss on this or any other forum.

Your line of questioning borders on antagonistic. Maybe you don't mean to come off like that but IMO you do. You have a way of finding fault in the way so many researchers do things, and quite frankly it gets old. I can tell you are an intelligent person, but going back and forth with you makes me uncomfortable. Not because I'm guilty of anything but because there are no answers you'll accept. You just ask the question in different words. You see something in your head and nothing anyone says will change that. Makes a guy not want to talk to you.

You see I'm not the Generals Judge, jury or executioner. I'm a guy that decided to work with him, and I'm his friend. It's not my job to decide if what he did was right or wrong. What's done is done, and all the talk and reflection won't change that. My deep feelings on this are my business and mine alone. I've never met you and I can't call you my bro, so why in Gods name would I bear my soul to you? We've been as open and forthright as possible here on this forum.

The Olympic Project is not perfect. We make mistakes like everyone else, but we are trying very hard to put an end to this mystery. All of us LOVE this research. I am very fortunate to work with these people.

DR

[Guest]

If the picture is real, it's an amazing photo. I'm on the fence because the proportions are completely different from the one I saw, head shape, arm length and so on.

[Guest]

Derekfoot Said:

"PaulGT3, Do you seriously expect her to present an incomplete study? She is in no way toying with everyone, the paper needs to make it through peer review before it's presented. As a scientist you know this."

Derek I dont expect her to do a incomplete study but that doesnt have anything to do with my question. It appears to me She is covered by a NDA, you are behind a NDA, JC Johnson is behing a NDA, Steve Kulls is behind

a NDA, The General is behind a NDA. WHY? I dont understand. When I publish a paper and I have, it goes to my department, then to security then out. As a military scientist I dont have to send it out to the Air Force

or to the Army. I have to present the paper at a International Conference then I am up for questions by anyone who is cleared to be at that conference if its classified or anyone if its not classified and at a international

public technical meeting. Then anyone can pin me to the wall if they see fit. Usually the questions start with "I hate to disagree with my esteemed colleague but..." The ONLY time I have signed a NDA is to cover proprietorial

information for a defense contractor.

Forgive me but I am new to this non military scientific community here but I have listened to so many internet radio programs and it appears to me that EVERY so called expert is covered by some NDA.

This is what I have pieced together just by casual reading on the internet and about this accident with the general. Everyone is that has any real evidence is under contract to Dr Ketchum. NO one is allowed

to divluge any REAL evidence that Bigfoot exists until her paper comes out. Everyone is holding back to time their release with her paper release. Thats the part I dont understand. Suposedly there are HD videos

of Squatch's and pics of Squatches that are holding back for the Dr's Paper. Why? That would be akin to me coming out with a targeting systems for Special Ops for the Navy then the Air Force not releasing any targeting

systems they have come up with in the same development period as me, the Army not releasing any systems they have come up with, NATO countries not releasing any info, until I present my paper at the International NATO

Technical Meeting in Brussels the following year. Do you see my confusion?

I dont understand how ALL of a sudden the whole BIGFOOT community is congealed in to one very cohesive organization all waiting to reveal convincing evidence all based on the release of one paper. It appears to me that

this WAS a very competitive scientific community have all come together to release all this info all at once at some huge technical meeting as if they all went to work for SkunkApeworks in Palmdale. The only other conclusion

I can draw is that the evidence is not that compelling which I HOPE ISNT the case.

Again I am just coming out of my own closed scientific community as I retire and I am just confused, since its not the same as I am used to. I just dont understand the sudden cohesion in what seems to me to be the biggest

biological find of our lifetimes. Outside of the fact chihauhaus are the smartest of all canine species.

I am very familiar with Academe and research/technical papers and reports.

Welcome to the forums. I love it here, and we have exciting news coming out regarding the reality of a *new* to science species.

Edited August 12, 2011 by SweetSusiq

[Guest Thepattywagon]

I wonder if the multiple piles of scat in the road is a way of marking territory or some other specific reason. It certainly wouldn't be to increase their ability to remain undiscovered, since other forms of evidence are so rare.

[Guest parnassus]

Nope - I just asked Melba your exact words and she did not "admit" it was human. I don't know, again, where you get your information about her project or her personally, but none of it is correct. I have contacted A&M about using the term "Dr." to describe a DVM and they verified that is the correct usage. I also verified the course of study and as a scientist myself, I can indeed say she is both a "Dr." and a scientist. Again, you (and all) should be waiting for the results (when published) and tear that apart....don't bother with rumors, hearsay, opinions....wait for a peer reviewed paper and then have at it.

Lol Hairyman, good for you, but i' afraid you may not have asked the right questions.

Everyone knows a vet is entitled to use the title Dr. That was not in question. Let's just make sure everyone has the facts. I think we can all agree that she has a DVM (as does every other vet) and this is not (as some here have suggested) a masters or a PhD.

I am indeed waiting with bated breath for any publication, but I have concerns. So Dr. Ketchum wont admit the Gates hair was human. OK. Then what was it that "scored high" on her "human panels" back in 2009? Why no report? I mean, TV is TV, but if she is implying this is the find of the century in 2009... well...what scientist wouldn't have that puppy in print by now, August 2011? Surely the big money from SoCal or TV would have at least gone back to to the Gates location to find the creature or more specimens....unless....

So did you ask her that? That could be very informative.

Well, keep up the good work. We will all look forward to your next report.

[Hairy Man]

Yes, I know that a DVM is not a Ph.D. or a masters - no one has been arguing that it is. You don't have to have a Ph.D. nor a master's degree to be a scientist. She has a DVM degree and is board certified. She's a scientist.

Why no report on the Gates hair? I'll assume, based on her answer to me, that it's part of this current study. I have no idea if anyone went back to the location for more hair. I'll guess we'll just have to wait.