Sasquatch "Nest" Question

[hiflier]

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

We'll, if geneticists can use modern Human DNA as a baseline for discovering a Denisovan or a Neanderthal then those same genetic protocols should allow a geneticist to find a novel Human with one test tube tied behind their backs. But it doesn't alter the fact one bit that a Human of some kind built the nests as recently as 3 years ago if the discovery of the new nests in February of 2020 has anything to say about it. Of course what we're dealing with here are the results from seven years ago. And those results were good enough to PROVE that a Human, or Humans, built the ones in the initial discovery. The glaring point, though, is that if something novel build the nests then no matter what anyone says that novel "something" would also have to be nothing beyond Human.

 

^^ No comments on this?

 

31 minutes ago, Twist said:

Im told DNA came back degraded human.  I’ve seen pictures of humans in the nest, we know it’s an area that humans inhabit.  When looking at the evidence as presented I have to default to the most likely answer, humans.   Wish it was Bf, that would be cool and confirming of a long held belief in the creature.  Unfortunately as I stated above, until evidence says otherwise the simplest answer is the most likely answer. 

Agreed, even though the claim was that samples were extracted BEFORE anyone laid in the nests. Of course you need to default to Humans as the most likely answer, but then so do I. Because the results say so. Therefore, my point is, and has been, why even say no novel "primate" when 1) It didn't need to be said and 2) If those two professors felt they needed to add that in? Then the evidence says that they should have said no novel Human.

 

But saying no novel Human, which was the truth of the matter according to the evidence, they chose the more ambiguous novel primate. All that did was evidently what it was supposed to do, intentionally play into the Bigfoot game. It was wrong, it was deceptive, and it was completely playing up to the BF community. The idea that Bigfoot, if it built the nest, could ONLY be Human. An extremely critical concept that they totally avoided by saying primate. The result was that for most, if not all of the Bigfoot community, including those on this Forum, the idea that if Sasquatch was the nest builder it would have to be Human. That little detail never entered anyone's mind. But if it did it was no thanks to those two professors. Well, it's in everyone's mind now who has read this thread. Truth being there is NO alternative: Sasquatch, should it have been the nest builder, was DEFINITELY a species of Human. With a ZERO chance of it being anything other than Human. Tough pill to swallow? Not for me. I go where the evidence leads and it has always leads to that. And that only.  

 

Edited May 19, 2023 by hiflier

[hiflier]

Okay, forget about the Sasquatch for a moment. For Twist's sake, let's tackle the idea that only modern Humans built the nests and run with it. Which should be an interesting avenue to pursue all on its own considering where the nests were. YA THINK?

[Twist]

3 hours ago, hiflier said:

Okay, forget about the Sasquatch for a moment. For Twist's sake, let's tackle the idea that only modern Humans built the nests and run with it. Which should be an interesting avenue to pursue all on its own considering where the nests were. YA THINK?

 

Too your first point, yes it seems using novel primate can be considered a bit off but not when you consider the fact that BF has been more about money than discovery for years!!!    These guys have bills to pay and prolonging the entertainment side of money is in their best interest.  I personally have no ill will for that.  Just a fact of life.

 

 

As far as assuming it’s human, while it’s not what I would do......it’s far from the craziest thing I’ve heard humans do.   We do. 10x crazier things on a daily basis compared to building nests in the woods.....by 10 fold.  

[Huntster]

6 hours ago, hiflier said:

........Sasquatch, should it have been the nest builder, was DEFINITELY a species of Human. With a ZERO chance of it being anything other than Human. Tough pill to swallow?.........

 

Not at all. In fact, I've been prescribing that pill for you all to take for years now. All the evidence, especially DNA evidence, has been screaming that sasquatches are of the genus Homo. 

[Huntster]

6 hours ago, hiflier said:

Okay, forget about the Sasquatch for a moment. For Twist's sake, let's tackle the idea that only modern Humans built the nests and run with it. Which should be an interesting avenue to pursue all on its own considering where the nests were. YA THINK?

 

Yes, indeed. First, why build a nest deep in a temperate rainforest on private land when you can live in a tent in downtown Seattle and receive services? Free food? Etc?

 

If it was a modern human, it was either a sasquatch hoaxer or a feral human.

[norseman]

3 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

Yes, indeed. First, why build a nest deep in a temperate rainforest on private land when you can live in a tent in downtown Seattle and receive services? Free food? Etc?

 

If it was a modern human, it was either a sasquatch hoaxer or a feral human.

 

[Huntster]

Who is that?

[norseman]

2 hours ago, Huntster said:

Who is that?

Mick Dodge

[Huntster]

11 minutes ago, norseman said:

Mick Dodge

 

Have you seen the reality show about him? Does he build nests like gorillas and sleep in them, or does he build shelters designed more as shelter from rain, dew, snow, and wind?

[norseman]

22 minutes ago, Huntster said:

 

Have you seen the reality show about him? Does he build nests like gorillas and sleep in them, or does he build shelters designed more as shelter from rain, dew, snow, and wind?

No, just clips. He is a crazy bush hippie. 🤷‍♂️ But he isn’t alone out there on the peninsula. He also scares people away by imitating Bigfoot.

[norseman]

 

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, norseman said:

…….. He also scares people away by imitating Bigfoot.

Oh, yeah, that guy. The eventual gunshot victim.

 

Quote

………But he isn’t alone out there on the peninsula………

Yeah, well, I have yet to meet a “human” who builds a ground nest in a rainforest without cover. Is it possible? Yeah, I suppose. There’s a whole bunch going on today that I never even considered possible, even during the craziness of the 1960’s. But using such possibilities to explain a scientific mystery seems pretty desperate to me.

[norseman]

2 hours ago, Huntster said:

Oh, yeah, that guy. The eventual gunshot victim.

 

Yeah, well, I have yet to meet a “human” who builds a ground nest in a rainforest without cover. Is it possible? Yeah, I suppose. There’s a whole bunch going on today that I never even considered possible, even during the craziness of the 1960’s. But using such possibilities to explain a scientific mystery seems pretty desperate to me.

I’m not trying to explain away Bigfoot with Mick Dodge. You know I think there is probably something out there. We need proof that it’s out there.

 

But by the same token I am well aware the Mick Dodge’s of the world are out there as well.

 

Again I hate to sound like a broken record. But let’s say these are authentic Bigfoot nests. Let’s say that the DNA samples collected were positive for Bigfoot. And let’s say the establishment got ahold of whatever scientist and said “If you say what the samples are? We will pull your funding or worse!”

So once again the samples come back as Homo Sapiens? 
 

All the more need for a body. It’s still the only sure fire way to recognize this species as real. 

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, norseman said:

.........let’s say these are authentic Bigfoot nests. Let’s say that the DNA samples collected were positive for Bigfoot. And let’s say the establishment got ahold of whatever scientist and said “If you say what the samples are? We will pull your funding or worse!”

So once again the samples come back as Homo Sapiens?..........

 

I don't think that's how it happens. It's more like a few honest prosecutors in a town full of corrupt defense lawyers and hostile citizens. The judges really don't like the prosecutors. The government doesn't want a riot. "If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit". 

 

They repeatedly blow it off.

 

The prosecutors aren't stupid. They know they're up against a stacked deck. They're just waiting for a murder victim to fall from the sky, complete with undeniable proof.

 

If you provide one, they'll be famous for finally winning the case.

 

You'll go to prison for murder. The glove will fit.......like a glove.

[norseman]

2 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

I don't think that's how it happens. It's more like a few honest prosecutors in a town full of corrupt defense lawyers and hostile citizens. The judges really don't like the prosecutors. The government doesn't want a riot. "If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit". 

 

They repeatedly blow it off.

 

The prosecutors aren't stupid. They know they're up against a stacked deck. They're just waiting for a murder victim to fall from the sky, complete with undeniable proof.

 

If you provide one, they'll be famous for finally winning the case.

 

You'll go to prison for murder. The glove will fit.......like a glove.

Why would I go to prison for shooting a Pixie or a Gnome? Bigfoot doesn’t exist remember? It’s a fairy tale.

 

No, it may be illegal to shoot the 2nd Bigfoot. But the 1st? That’s discovery. Like Paul Du Chaillu, Petrus Camper or Nicolas Tulp. Discoverers of other great apes.