Government Coverup?

[Wooly Booger]

52 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

I agree. I don't believe that they hibernate or brumate, but I do believe that they become less active and tend to reduce their movements in winter.

 

 

True, but even gorillas and orangs have pot bellies, both male and female, and that is a result of large portions of vegetation. I think they pass a lot of gas, too. It actually mirrors the carb rich beer belly effect.

I agree that some Sasquatches might carry pot bellies depending upon the need. Such as insulation for winter months or perhaps hibernation. 
 

But unlike gorillas and orangutans, the evidence suggests that Sasquatches are omnivores with a heavy emphasis upon meat eating. They, like humans, would not require a hind gut to aid in digestion of excess plant matter. 

[CelticKevin]

Maybe Squatches with pot bellies have insulin issues. 

[Huntster]

18 minutes ago, Wooly Booger said:

.......But unlike gorillas and orangutans, the evidence suggests that Sasquatches are omnivores with a heavy emphasis upon meat eating. They, like humans, would not require a hind gut to aid in digestion of excess plant matter. 

 

I'm not so sure about that. I think their diet varies wildly, especially depending on their particular habitat or the season (just like bears), and their vegetative diet is significant (again, just like bears). But I do believe that in the winter, while bears are sleeping in dens, sasquatches are heavily into their meat diet, because their vegetation resources are severely reduced or outright gone. Indeed, I believe they may even cache meat like grizzlies do for winter use, and that is the cause of the stench that is often reported when they are seen.

[Wooly Booger]

4 hours ago, CelticKevin said:

Maybe Squatches with pot bellies have insulin issues. 

Highly unlikely that a wild animal would have insulin issues since they are physically active and eat their natural diet. Insulin resistance I’d imagine is unheard of among both wild animals and human hunter-gatherers. 

[Foxhill]

Fascinating stuff,,,,kinda odd how few people even voted 

[BlackRockBigfoot]

On 3/5/2022 at 5:29 AM, wiiawiwb said:

 

I think that is it in a nutshell. Too much at stake to ever allow a dead-body discovery to occur. 

Not to mention how easy it would be to sell the story of an escaped gorilla to the media, the general public, and at least half of the Bigfoot community. 
 

Depending upon who originally discussed the story, half of the Bigfoot community would dismiss it out of hand despite the evidence.

[hiflier]

1 hour ago, BlackRockBigfoot said:

Not to mention how easy it would be to sell the story of an escaped gorilla to the media, the general public, and at least half of the Bigfoot community. 
 

Depending upon who originally discussed the story, half of the Bigfoot community would dismiss it out of hand despite the evidence.

 

Then how does one beat the system so to speak?

 

Might this be a way forward: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/scientists-pull-animal-dna-out-of-thin-air-180979324/

 

In my opinion, this may be potentially the most exciting prospect for discovery that's come down the pike in a long time. It sounds like it would sure beat sleeping in the back of my truck in winter to look for a trackway in snow! Sampling air for 5-20 minutes? Yeah, I could do that  

 

Edited March 7, 2022 by hiflier

[Wooly Booger]

A thought just suddenly came to me. If we had hundreds of Bigfoot researchers collecting DNA from air pumps all along forest roads this discovery could be made within a year. 

[wiiawiwb]

That assumes all of those hundreds are willing to take the time to locate a DNA laboratory that will accept such samples and...drum roll...willing to foot the bill. Somehow I suspect it's going to be hundreds per sample or more.

 

Once they see the cost, the reverie will fade in a NY minute.

[hiflier]

30 minutes ago, wiiawiwb said:

That assumes all of those hundreds are willing to take the time to locate a DNA laboratory that will accept such samples and...drum roll...willing to foot the bill. Somehow I suspect it's going to be hundreds per sample or more.

 

Once they see the cost, the reverie will fade in a NY minute.

WOW! Hundreds of people at hundreds of dollars apiece? That's sure sounds like a horrible idea to me. Gosh, just think about it- no reverie? What a bummer. Imagine, all those hundreds of people just shut out from the discovery process. Serves them right for not being able to afford DNA testing, huh. BTW, how much DOES it cost? Sounds like you must know, so did you contact several labs and average out their costs? Because if you have a list then maybe someone who might want to do this can choose at least the least expansive place.    

[Wooly Booger]

1 hour ago, wiiawiwb said:

That assumes all of those hundreds are willing to take the time to locate a DNA laboratory that will accept such samples and...drum roll...willing to foot the bill. Somehow I suspect it's going to be hundreds per sample or more.

 

Once they see the cost, the reverie will fade in a NY minute.

That’s a complete and total cop out. With an attitude like that it’s no wonder the discovery hasn’t been made after half a century of research. 
 

But I suppose ignorance is bliss since it doesn’t require critical thinking in the slightest. 

[norseman]

4 hours ago, hiflier said:

 

Then how does one beat the system so to speak?

 

Might this be a way forward: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/scientists-pull-animal-dna-out-of-thin-air-180979324/

 

In my opinion, this may be potentially the most exciting prospect for discovery that's come down the pike in a long time. It sounds like it would sure beat sleeping in the back of my truck in winter to look for a trackway in snow! Sampling air for 5-20 minutes? Yeah, I could do that  

 

Thats at a zoo. Animals are kept in those enclosures for life. They are born, poop, pee, eat, sleep, breed and die in those enclosures. In my mind that would mean that the air is just permeated with their DNA. And I concur from the stench that often times accompanies zoos.
 

But that’s not a natural setting. So how would this work for wild animals in a wilderness setting?

[BlackRockBigfoot]

1 hour ago, wiiawiwb said:

That assumes all of those hundreds are willing to take the time to locate a DNA laboratory that will accept such samples and...drum roll...willing to foot the bill. Somehow I suspect it's going to be hundreds per sample or more.

 

Once they see the cost, the reverie will fade in a NY minute.

I think that some of you are taking w’s statement on the reality of the situation as a personal indictment of the process.  Nowhere did I see where he said that he thought that the idea was useless.  He merely stated what the general response would be.
 

We floated the idea of a DNA collection project in this very forum, with the possibility of forum funding.  IIRC, I was the first or second to volunteer to participate.  
 

It never got off the ground.  
 

There are relatively few people involved in this that are willing to spend that kind of money on such a thing, regardless of how dedicated they might publicly portray themselves or what they might say.  
 

I am not saying that it wouldn’t be a worthwhile project, but I am also saying that wiiawiwb isn’t incorrect in his assessment of widespread participation.  

 

[hiflier]

28 minutes ago, norseman said:

Thats at a zoo. Animals are kept in those enclosures for life. They are born, poop, pee, eat, sleep, breed and die in those enclosures. In my mind that would mean that the air is just permeated with their DNA. And I concur from the stench that often times accompanies zoos.
 

But that’s not a natural setting. So how would this work for wild animals in a wilderness setting?

 

Good thinking and good question, Norseman. What also came up in the UK study or was it Copenhagen?) was that animals from outside the zoo that were miles away also got picked up like horses, dogs, cows, hogs, birds, the rare endangered hedgehog, etc. That is what really surprised some of those researchers. But you are correct, things like tigers that could only be at the zoo isn't really an indicator of what could be done in very open air in the wild.

 

But when one thinks about a target species, namely a novel primate, then conducting the process in areas known for activity would seem like a good method. The study picked up guppy DNA from a pond with the guppies under water. That says something about how sensitive the tech is. I see it as meaning one doesn't need a body of water or a river/stream in order to test the waters or a footprint in soil or show to sample a definite physical medium. So sampling could be done in plain old regular forests or woods as long as the tester had the collecting filter facing into a breeze or a wind coming out of the woods. The technology is new, yes, but the principals are the same as water sampling but much easier to deploy.

 

The trick will still be filtering out Human DNA markers, which are practically everywhere now in the environment from the data results. Or addressing the issue before samples get tested- something that is pretty routine for most any lab dealing with fish or mammal population detection. But, man, park along a forest road, step out, fire up the pump. aim the filter into the wind, uncap the cover, sample or 5-20 minutes, and drive away. This opens the door to anyone- even those with physical disabilities can become active and a very important group in the quest. People who make up small research groups, too, can pool their money and resources in the effort. We need more information on all aspects of this new approach but there's already a lot of information on to web to check out, like in the area of more natural settings. 

 

 

[Foxhill]