Guest slimwitless Posted October 29, 2011 Share Posted October 29, 2011 (edited) That's interesting speculation. I agree the presence of an undercoat could be highly advantageous to the these things. Is the presumed lack of an undercoat based solely on what's known about other primates? Remember though that General believes one of Ginger3's observations is wrong. It's unfortunate Ginger3 seems to have abandoned this thread - especially in light of General's revelation (in the shooting thread) that the sample in question was a small salt-dried piece cut from the original flesh. Ginger3 mentioned "they" have been hampered by contamination of the sample. Perhaps the drying process is why it's difficult to extract useable DNA . It'd be nice to get an update. Edited October 29, 2011 by slimwitless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 30, 2011 Share Posted October 30, 2011 I know how most people totally dismiss what Janice Cater had to say about Sasquatch of Tennessee, but she said they did have an undercoat and their hair was like a bears and to think of them as bear people. Fahrenbach dismissed the idea, but I think he did find the sample she provided to be squatchy if I remember correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tyler H Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 I don't keep up on this forum much, but if the General has said that regarding the sample, then I guess I can speak a bit freely on that topic. I was at the shoot site for the attempted body recovery, and have dealt with the General on this issue for a year now. A well respected Dr. was provided a sample that was, as General states, salted. I communicated with the Dr. after his testing. As far as I was made aware, I felt his thoughts were in line with what Ginger said. The Dr. seemed to think the morphology was in line with canid, so I'm not sure if he was going to subject it to further testing or not. Obviously, he would have preferred an unsalted sample, but I'm not sure to what extent it would prevent reliable testing. I've always felt that the General is not trying to deceive anyone. Had the sample come straight from the body, I don't think there would be any other question marks. As it is, I believe there is only one question mark left, and I think that it all comes down to the same thing, folks - until Ketchum's test results are made public, or a second, independent lab is allowed to test it, it's a "wait and see" game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Ginger3 suggested the "Dr." did submit the sample for further testing. It also seems he/she has information about the nature of the contamination but has declined to share. Since the flesh is purported to be left over from scavengers, it's possible it could be the real deal but still test out as coyote (the scavenger) in a cursory test. It could also be contaminated by any of the people that handled it (I wonder if General has any relatives from sub-glacial southern Europe). In any case, isn't hair analysis sufficiently advanced for known species that a positive ID could be made by a canid hair expert? Has this been done? I ask because I'm not sure the person in question is qualified to make a final determination. If it were me, I wouldn't make any assumptions about what to expect based on theories about sasquatch. Anyway - yeah, it seems the answers are in Ketchum's lab and/or General's freezer. Tyler H, when did you participate in an attempted body recovery? Did you find anything interesting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tyler H Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 If Ginger can join us, maybe he/she can elaborate, but I have a feeling she has only heard what I have heard from more than one researcher, which are the accounts of the opinion of the Dr. I speak of. Last I had heard, he had not submitted it for DNA testing, but that could have changed. I know there were concerns about the salt contamination on the sample he had. My impression was that between the contamination concern, and his opinion that the visual inspection suggested canid, he may not have been pursuing further testing. I believe the General has already divulged info about our attempted body reocovery. I accompanied him on that, along with a group of other researchers. Nothing of note was found at that time. Our hopes for cadaver dogs at that time, were frustrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Do you consider this Dr. to be an expert in identifying canid hair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted February 2, 2013 BFF Patron Share Posted February 2, 2013 I don't keep up on this forum much, but if the General has said that regarding the sample, then I guess I can speak a bit freely on that topic. I was at the shoot site for the attempted body recovery, and have dealt with the General on this issue for a year now. A well respected Dr. was provided a sample that was, as General states, salted. I communicated with the Dr. after his testing. As far as I was made aware, I felt his thoughts were in line with what Ginger said. The Dr. seemed to think the morphology was in line with canid, so I'm not sure if he was going to subject it to further testing or not. Obviously, he would have preferred an unsalted sample, but I'm not sure to what extent it would prevent reliable testing. I've always felt that the General is not trying to deceive anyone. Had the sample come straight from the body, I don't think there would be any other question marks. As it is, I believe there is only one question mark left, and I think that it all comes down to the same thing, folks - until Ketchum's test results are made public, or a second, independent lab is allowed to test it, it's a "wait and see" game. Interesting that we have canid, ursus and guard hairs in the mix now. So wonder what ginger3 is thinking about all of this now?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 a year ago this discussion! and it appears Ginger3 had some good info and the incorrect item I think has since come out. .....and yet things like Henner and others say are confounding wrt to hair .. an example was Ketchum's C2C interview end of Dec 2012...in which she said. "non-human hair testing human" and of course the American Black Bear results from Trent...and now from Russia via Skyes (I see paid by Sun).... whoa...who put forth the bear-human hybrid?!! I used to think simple relict hominid...so human like, but that eyeshine is amazing...and so it pushes me to some more "primative" primate genes.. I hope as many samples find their way to Sykes as did Ketchum. The wait now seems surrealistic, the whole "field" does and I so look forward to whatever Sykes says...just to hang my hat on something besides my own data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 5, 2013 Share Posted February 5, 2013 Tyler and Apehuman- saw this on PBS last night about the Japanese Maquac monkey who are the farthest north known living primate, and get this, it has an undercoat. I googled for the info. Just saying, reports say the monkey can live in temputures to -4 degree below; than they jump in the hot springs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 (edited) And they would have gotten away with it, too, if it hadnt been for those meddling kids and their dog. Edited February 6, 2013 by PsyShroom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 6, 2013 Share Posted February 6, 2013 a year ago this discussion! and it appears Ginger3 had some good info and the incorrect item I think has since come out. .....and yet things like Henner and others say are confounding wrt to hair .. an example was Ketchum's C2C interview end of Dec 2012...in which she said. "non-human hair testing human" and of course the American Black Bear results from Trent...and now from Russia via Skyes (I see paid by Sun).... whoa...who put forth the bear-human hybrid?!! I used to think simple relict hominid...so human like, but that eyeshine is amazing...and so it pushes me to some more "primative" primate genes.. I hope as many samples find their way to Sykes as did Ketchum. The wait now seems surrealistic, the whole "field" does and I so look forward to whatever Sykes says...just to hang my hat on something besides my own data. Yes, the inherent human and non-human characteristics present within the assorted forms of BF evidence is the Gold IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts