Guest Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Thepattywagon, the last thing the driver wants to do is talk to anyone on this forum, lol. He's seen people get eaten up here. I've interviewed him extensively. You won't hear from him here I'm sure. His story is being very carefully documented, and will be available once the study is complete. DR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 I agree. An in-depth account needs to be available after the study comes out. I have no problems paying for it. That's traditionally how these things work. In bigfootery, not science Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thepattywagon Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Thepattywagon, the last thing the driver wants to do is talk to anyone on this forum, lol. He's seen people get eaten up here. I've interviewed him extensively. You won't hear from him here I'm sure. His story is being very carefully documented, and will be available once the study is complete. DR As is his right, and I can't say I would blame him to some extent. It probably wouldn't change anything either way; no proof of the story will have been offered up here, unless Driver has photos of the day's catch to post up. Evidently General wasn't able to retrieve the photos he had of the sample. Either that or he was advised to save them for 'the book'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 (edited) In bigfootery, not science We're not talking about the science. That's Ketchum's peer-reviewed paper. This is the story of one sample provider and, according to Randles, the Olympic Project. I'm guessing there will be very little science in the book. Strangely, I was just looking at Jane Goodall's catalog on Amazon when I saw your post. One of those telling coincidences, I guess. Edited October 28, 2011 by slimwitless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Derek, is the driver under an NDA as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 Interesting article on what I think you can expect with DNA testing. http://usat.ly/vmACyH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 You mean DNA will settle the mystery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StankApe Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 I think multi-lab verified DNA would do a heck of a lot for settling the bigfoot mystery. As far as this Sierra issue goes.... heck I'm not sure anything could straighten this all out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 You mean DNA will settle the mystery? LOL no way! My point is if they can't identify a known fish good luck with Bigfoot. Only a body will be accept by the majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted October 28, 2011 Share Posted October 28, 2011 (edited) LOL no way! My point is if they can't identify a known fish good luck with Bigfoot. Only a body will be accept by the majority. Um. You better go back and read the story. The DNA tests proved the fish was labeled incorrectly. Edited October 29, 2011 by slimwitless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Um. You better go back and read the story. The DNA tests proved the fish was labeled incorrectly. I did why don't u take another whack at it! Umm did u miss the part about couldn't identify some of the fish. Thats my point folks!!! If we can't identify fish which are known and pretty common good luck with your biggie DNA!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 From the article "definitively red snapper, though eight couldn't be ruled out" If they couldnt rule them out then the DNA testing was inconclusive IMO. That's the part that got my attention. Sorry for the derail to reality back to fantasy world! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Have they mapped the entire genome of the various mentioned fishes as they have with the higher primates? That would make identification more reliable I would guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 Don't know, don't care I'm guessing we know a whole lot more about fish DNA than Bigfoot DNA. It's not going to come back primate it's going to be some sort of mumbo jumbo interpetation of human DNA and that's why you've got to go shopping for someone to support your conclusions hence the wait and more waiting. I don't think that is necessarily out of the ordinary for new discoveries. But given the subject matter good luck to them hope they've got some great footage or surprise us with a body! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 From the article "definitively red snapper, though eight couldn't be ruled out" If they couldnt rule them out then the DNA testing was inconclusive IMO. That's the part that got my attention. Sorry for the derail to reality back to fantasy world! I wouldn't necessarily expect that all the types of fish have been mapped, but all the apes have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts