Did a Squatch do this?

[hiflier]

2 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Correct. But "contamination" is the back door escape from declaring the existence of something that the ideology refuses to accept.

 

Or that the institution is strongly "suggested" to ignore. Because the more I get my head around stuff this the more I'm convinced that the Sasquatch DNA sequence anomalies have presented themselves to science constantly. Science isn't stupid when it comes to this stuff so, to me, this whole thing has been a rather serious matter for some time.

[norseman]

6 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

And I think explained why I agreed with you on that.

 

 

An EXCELLENT way to argue against the idea that Human contamination ruins a sample- it does not. And labs get ahead of this with their normal procedures to eliminate Human contamination. These days however it is as you say, Human DNA would no more contaminate an elk sample as elk DNA would contaminate a Human sample. BUT, And it a big BUT, if labs routinely filter out Human DNA from e-DNA samples ten I have no doubt that the Sasquatch DNA, being so close to Human disappears from the sample in the process. So maybe it isn't that science doesn't see Sasquatch DNA because the filtering process tosses out the Sasquatch DNA baby with the Human DNA bath water? So they never see the creatures presence in a DNA result? All they have to do is use a computer algorithm that deletes Human DNA from the results.

 

 

Thank you, but it was DR. Hart's study- I'm simply running with his results. And no, sorry to say, I've really dragged my feet here but now that the busy holiday times are well behind me, including my screenplay work and contest submissions, I'll bet back on the bandwagon. Thank you for the reminders, my friend.

 

That’s what I am saying. They now have the technology to tell a German and a Norwegian apart. Let alone a Japanese and a Congolese apart. Or a Moose and a Elk apart.

 

So either they are?

 

1-Incompetent

2-Dishonest

3-The creature no longer exists in nature.

 

Another point. Dr. Mayor, she found Chimp DNA in Kentucky. What does that mean? Does that mean Chimps are running around the forests of Kentucky? Does that mean the mystery creature is related to Chimps? Is this simply more Human contamination? Since Chimps and Humans are 98.9 % the same?

 

It confuses and frustrates me that we can put away a murderer based on DNA left at a crime scene. And yet with undiscovered cryptids it’s broad strokes and nothing concrete. It’s also what drives me to grab a rifle and go look myself!🤨

17 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

Correct. But "contamination" is the back door escape from declaring the existence of something that the ideology refuses to accept.

 

 

 

Agreed.👍

[hiflier]

Just now, Huntster said:

 

Do you have a link or reference to any publication on that study?

 

Indeed, Dr. Hart himself was invited to become a member here and there is a thread that was started to accommodate him and his work. He was the one who also came here and started that recent thread asking about thermal imagers. If you look him up here as "hvhart" you'll find everything he's discussed with us. He has articles on Dr. Meldrum's "Relect Hominid Inquiry" pages both here on this Forum as well as on the web. Dr. Hart also came out with his own book in the summer of 2020 (on Amazon) about Dr. Ketchum's study: "Sasquatch Genome Project: A Failed Study. I have two signed copies Chapter 16 of the book (also an eBook) is where that chart came from that I've posted across several recent threads. He's a very interesting guy who is continuing his work to this day.

[hiflier]

36 minutes ago, norseman said:

That’s what I am saying. They now have the technology to tell a German and a Norwegian apart. Let alone a Japanese and a Congolese apart. Or a Moose and a Elk apart.

 

So either they are?

 

1-Incompetent

2-Dishonest

3-The creature no longer exists in nature.

 

Another point. Dr. Mayor, she found Chimp DNA in Kentucky. What does that mean? Does that mean Chimps are running around the forests of Kentucky? Does that mean the mystery creature is related to Chimps? Is this simply more Human contamination? Since Chimps and Humans are 98.9 % the same?

 

It confuses and frustrates me that we can put away a murderer based on DNA left at a crime scene. And yet with undiscovered cryptids it’s broad strokes and nothing concrete. It’s also what drives me to grab a rifle and go look myself!🤨

 

OH MAN! Your post would take a page to answer but I'll keep it as brief as possible. 1) No, it's not incompetence, 2) Dishonest in a way: Don't bring findings to the public, 3) The creatures definitely exist.

 

YES! Dr. Mireya Mayor found Chimp DNA in an eastern Kentucky forest. But think about what I've been saying based on Dr. Hart's chart. Again, the mutations that are present are rare in Humans but COMMON IN OTHER PRIMATES. So, assuming that the chart is showing mutations present in Sasquatch DNA then those very same mutations would be in Chimps. And Gorillas, and Orangutans...The point I'm making is that there is no way that Dr. Mayor's test results would EVER say Sasquatch. And since Chimp DNA would have those same mutations as what's in Dr. Hart's chart? The "official" go-to answer for Dr. Mayor's results have to be be Chimp.

 

But this is the way I think and have been thinking: For me it all goes together like this: Government knows; we are not allowed to know; Dr. Mayor came up with the same mutations and results as what's in Dr. Hart's chart....but no one will officially say Sasquatch as long as there is another well-known common animal to dump it all on. Point being: When Dr. Mayor's results were matched to the Genbank then what got spit out was Chimp....BECAUSE CHIMP DNA IS IN THE GENBANK AND NOT SASQUATCH DNA. So it was the only non-Human primate result that they could come up with. Trust me, I have turned this logic over ten way to Sunday and this scenario is the only thing that fits the picture.

 

And it's been frustrating as crap. No wonder you want to keep on the road you've chosen. The fact is, I've reasoned out the truth of the situation. Good luck in laying it out in front of anyone who matters though. Because NO ONE is going to go against the government. Heck, then one could say that Dr. Hart's chart, which came from studying the SGP raw data, is showing that Chimps are living in the wild is other places , too, which makes no sense whatsoever! A Chimp DNA result is a perfect example for what happens to Sasquatch evidence......and there's always bears to fall back on if a physical Sasquatch specimen is ever acquired. That would end up going down the same common-animal road as DNA.

 

Edited January 13, 2023 by hiflier

[hiflier]

An interesting thought has just occurred to me. According to science, there are NO non-Human primates living in the wilds of North America. And yet at least two sets of DNA results have shown that non-Human DNA has been collected that show mutations that are common in primates other than Human. How can this be? Unless there ARE non-Human primates living somewhere in the wilds of North America! If this isn't obvious to everyone here by now then I don't know what is. I'll bet it's obvious to Meldrum, Mayor, and Disotell et. al. Could this be an argument one could present to scientists? I would say yes. And, if so, then why haven't we heard that Meldrum, Mayor, and Disotell have, or have not, presented this very argument to mainstream science. Maybe they have?

[norseman]

48 minutes ago, hiflier said:

An interesting thought has just occurred to me. According to science, there are NO non-Human primates living in the wilds of North America. And yet at least two sets of DNA results have shown that non-Human DNA has been collected that show mutations that are common in primates other than Human. How can this be? Unless there ARE non-Human primates living somewhere in the wilds of North America! If this isn't obvious to everyone here by now then I don't know what is. I'll bet it's obvious to Meldrum, Mayor, and Disotell et. al. Could this be an argument one could present to scientists? I would say yes. And, if so, then why haven't we heard that Meldrum, Mayor, and Disotell have, or have not, presented this very argument to mainstream science. Maybe they have?

They say it’s contamination. In the case of Dr. Mayor they said it was from Chimp pheromone chips. She said it’s not from that.

 

It would be super helpful if the DNA results didn’t keep coming back as a KNOWN primate. 

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, hiflier said:

.......Government knows; we are not allowed to know; Dr. Mayor came up with the same mutations and results as what's in Dr. Hart's chart....but no one will officially say Sasquatch as long as there is another well-known common animal to dump it all on. Point being: When Dr. Mayor's results were matched to the Genbank then what got spit out was Chimp....BECAUSE CHIMP DNA IS IN THE GENBANK AND NOT SASQUATCH DNA. So it was the only non-Human primate result that they could come up with. Trust me, I have turned this logic over ten way to Sunday and this scenario is the only thing that fits the picture.........

 

This. Every aspect of this phenomenon fits, too. Government simply will not allow widespread knowledge of these creatures until they benefit beyond their liability, and I see no possibility of that at all.........until they're extinct..........if that is even possible. If hybridization is possible (like Neanderthal/Denisovan), it will be suppressed even beyond de facto extinction.

[Huntster]

17 minutes ago, norseman said:

........It would be super helpful if the DNA results didn’t keep coming back as a KNOWN primate. 

 

It has to come back as known, or the search would be warranted. That simply can't be allowed.

[norseman]

http://patagoniamonsters.blogspot.com/2019/12/more-on-erectus-calvaria-from-chapala.html
 

They said this wasn’t dug up in Mexico. Even though the owner said it was. Then the skull disappeared.

 

https://www.8newsnow.com/news/i-team-world-famous-nevada-cave-may-harbor-dark-history/

 

Lovelock cave giants? Gone.

[hiflier]

All it means, beyond our suspicions, that is is that we need to be watchful, AND mindful in how we conduct ourselves and our endeavors. I don't think we especially need to become digital ghosts per se, but keeping our "chatter" within the realm of normal digital "chatter" would be helpful. But hey, let's face it, the digital net is pretty much everywhere now. It may be that using normal words but giving them different meanings among certain individuals, when talking about such things as discovery, could be one way. OR....just have so many people doing the same thing, like DNA collecting, that it becomes too difficult to keep track of everyone. And the side benefit just might be collecting so much Chimp DNA out of the most unlikely of places as to make it seem impossible for that particular common animal, or ANY non-Human primate to be living in so many wild places. Yeah, pretty far fetched idea I know, but.......

 

 

Edited January 13, 2023 by hiflier

[hiflier]

All it means, beyond our suspicions that is is that we need to be watchful, AND mindful in how we conduct ourselves and our endeavors. I don't think we especially ned to become digital ghosts per se, but keeping our "chatter" within the realm of normal digital "chatter" would be helpful. Bu let's face it, the digital net is pretty much everywhere now. It may be that using normal words, but giving them different meanings among certain individuals when talking about such things as discovery, could be one way. OR..just have so many people doing the same thing, like DNA collecting that it becomes difficult to keep track of everyone. And the side benefit just might be collecting so much Chimp DNA out of th most unlikely places as to make it seem impossible for that common animal to be living in so many places. Far fetched I know, but....... 

[hiflier]

One last point needs to be brought out. All of this DNA and talk about sequences belonging to such and such an animal or such and such a genus needs a point of reference, otherwise all these animal sequences were originally just floating around in mid air. So in essence, in the beginning, the genetic difference of any other organism was effectively determined and categorized by matching its DNA sequence against our own Human genome. It was used as the gold standard if you will by comparing any and all other DNA sequences to it. So Bear DNA is known to be bear DNA by originally running it against Human DNA. It was only after that initial comparison that bear DNA ITSELF got registered into the GenBank. Because at first, like the Sasquatch, there was no bear DNA in the GenBank to match a bear sample to. Science, of course, no longer needs to compare bear DNA to Human DNA to ID the bear. Bear has it's own sequence is on record now- along with millions of other animal sequences that originally had also been identified via the same Human genome comparison process.

 

Edited January 14, 2023 by hiflier

[Catmandoo]

On 1/11/2023 at 7:24 PM, Rockape said:

Anyway, it's video of broken saplings and stomped out grass, the guy later does a good comparison to what it looks like for an Elk or Moose to do this sort of damage with antlers scraping. I just thought it interesting and decided to share it here for all to discuss.

 

Thanks for posting. I won't hijack the thread to banter about DNA. The twist snaps that I have seen were impressive. Young evergreens torn up by an elk.  Suitable substrate can show elk hoof prints at the base of the trees. No mystery for me.  I have high weirdness in the trampled down vegetation category. I found a trampled area that was circular, more than 20 feet in diameter. The center area was not disturbed.  The layout looked like the lower half of  a half-torus of revolution. No boot marks, no animal tracks, no deer poop. The area has deer, Sasquatch and black bears. I was not able to come to any conclusions. 

[Rockape]

1 minute ago, Catmandoo said:

Thanks for posting. I won't hijack the thread to banter about DNA.

 

The thread is simply for discussing the video, if DNA is pertinent to the conversation there's nothing wrong with bringing it up.

 

I've seen plenty of "wallows" where tall grass has been trampled down, usually in a circle and have always attributed it to deer bedding down for the night, But this in the video is different due to the broken saplings. I appreciated how he showed the difference to antler scraping by Elk or Moose.

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, Catmandoo said:

.......I found a trampled area that was circular, more than 20 feet in diameter. The center area was not disturbed.  The layout looked like the lower half of  a half-torus of revolution. No boot marks, no animal tracks, no deer poop. The area has deer, Sasquatch and black bears. I was not able to come to any conclusions. 

 

Alien crop circle in the wilderness?