Jump to content

Sasquatch Discovery DNA Choices


hiflier
 Share

Recommended Posts

I just read an article out of the UK from last March, 2021 about a new method for collecting DNA samples. Air. No joke: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/373/6553/376

 

So....I'm curious....IF one had the choice of which DNA sampling method to deploy which would it be? Snow, soil, water, or air? Don't know about air, but I gather that soil is the more expensive of the bunch with snow or water being about the same. It also comes down to cost of sampling materials, too. Snow may be more expensive than water if samples need to be transported, or stored outside of a lab and need to be in their maintain frozen state.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not sure that I would invest in any of the results if they only come back “contaminated” or “human”.  It seems we are so close to BF that any results will be too convoluted to tell.   We need a body on the slab.

Edited by Twist
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, hiflier said:

I just read an article out of the UK from last March, 2021 about a new method for collecting DNA samples. Air. No joke: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/373/6553/376

 

So....I'm curious....IF one had the choice of which DNA sampling method to deploy which would it be? Snow, soil, water, or air? Don't know about air, but I gather that soil is the more expensive of the bunch with snow or water being about the same. It also comes down to cost of sampling materials, too. Snow may be more expensive than water if samples need to be transported, or stored outside of a lab and need to be in their maintain frozen state.

Soil or water.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Twist said:

I’m not sure that I would invest in any of the results if they only come back “contaminated” or “human”.  It seems we are so close to BF that any results will be too convoluted to tell.   We need a body on the slab.

 

That does seem to be the history and the case. Getting around the usually outcomes or interpretations of those outcomes has bee a reel stumbling block.

 

3 minutes ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Soil or water.  

 

Pretty good there. Water would cast a wide net so to speak and soil would be much more pin pointed and narrow. Seeing the Sasquatch swimming in a small body of water or finding one or more tracks in mud or other substrate would be helpful. Time of year would be a factor perhaps and, of course, whatever contingencies one made is case anything looked good. Footprint hoaxing is sometimes a possibility but I doubt anyone would be swimming in a remote body of water in a monkey suit. Never say never though, LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

HAH! I thought of that, too, and, believe it or not, it wouldn't be that far(t) off the mark. Especially in a reasonably closed environment like a cave or a lahar. But if that was the case then airDNA might not even be required ;)

Edited by hiflier
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a bad situation for snow sampling by BF researcher Paul Graves, Washington State:

 

Prints.jpg.b8137e7be48962aa4b499f0e71c13174.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

London Trackway in soil. This and the snow example above could be good targeted sources of DNA:

 

1261690371_LondonTrackway.png.1515ab62de49c515a3228eb754e5ed15.png

 

Edited by hiflier
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, the truth can be funny sometimes, Huntster, that's for sure. I guess the air approach was inevitable because scientists do say "Why not" sometimes. I just wish they'd say "Why not Sasquatch?" at some point. LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...