Bigfoot DNA

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Originally Posted by GT/CS

Here are some bigfoot legends from the Colvilles. I won't vouch for any of them because I don't know the author of the book but it is in the public sector, which brings me to my point.
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/biology/fusch.htm

Talk about hubris. There's a reason this didn't make it into a bona-fide accounting of Colville Indian Reservation legends. This is a self-declared "Anthropologist", also a self-declared "Dr. and PhD" - which seems an obvious lie on the face of it. A scoundrel.

He claims to have achieved degrees in Arts and Science, Anthropology/Archaeology, Geology, and Philosophy! From Wenatchee Valley College (Which grants none of those) and Eastern Washington University, where there is no such thing as Anthropology/Archaology. So he is a liar, even about undergraduate studies.

Just look at the stories, starting off with Adam and Eve fostering Cain, who is bigfoot. Oopsie! There is a story allegedly in 1885 with an indian maiden carried off in her white slip. Oopsie! Everywhere you look it is perfectly obvious these are not pre-European legends, but things made up only recently, possibly even by this man. They're really bad, sort of how Joseph Smith spoke in King James Version English to lend an air of verisimilitude to his stories.

What kind of gall does it take to do this? Looking over his record, he went to a sasquatch conference in 1978 at UBC and that gained him his international bigfoot cultural credentials displayed in his remarkable self-published book.

This is the kind of scruples it takes, and whenever we look closely - that's what we see with the 'footers.

Edit: He has a BA in Geology from Eastern Washington. Parading around as a PhD and Anthropologist. This is from their Alumni News:

Quote:

Ed Fusch (BA, 1987) is a consulting geologist, assayer/geochemist, and
anthropological researcher in his company Mining Center. He teaches
classes in mineral exploration, electronic prospecting, etc., and addressed
the International Society of Cryptozoology and the British Folklore Society
in Surrey England, reporting on results of a research he conducted over a
10-year period.

[Drewbot]

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/...owth-2012.html

Recent posting by Dr. Hawks detailing how large population and growth means more and more mutations are appearing at very low frequencies.

Data sets must become larger in order to identify characteristics in a population.

This is possibly a problem considering the number of samples in Dr. Ketchum's data set.

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/...owth-2012.html

Originally Posted by Dr. John Hawks in the article linked above

Large-scale sequencing projects have moved beyond simply categorizing common genetic variation. They are now at a stage where thousands of individuals need to be examined, to find increasingly rare genetic variations and determine their collective effects on phenotypes. That means that the next version of the 1000 Genomes Project really needs to be involve many of us who are directly concerned with human population history.

[TheJackal]

Dr. Hawks article is exactly why thePaper will never see the light of day in a respectable journal. You can't have DNA samples that come up "human" with one variation in the MC1R gene. The data set in GenBank is incomplete, and does not capture all the DNA from 6.8 Billion humans on the planet; and, therefore, does not capture all of the possible mutations of MC1R. Any savvy referee reviewing thePaper would know full well that you can't draw the conclusion that the DNA is "Bigfoot" because the variation of the MC1R is not in GenBank. The only logical conclusion is that you have "human" DNA with an undocumented variation of the MC1R gene; NOT that it is Bigfoot. You need to eliminate the obvious before you can conclude the mythological.

Also, what is interesting in Dr. Hawks article is that you introduce a possiblity of "false-positives". So, even the result of a non-cataloged MC1R variation could be nothing more than a "false-positive". Again, this is why it will be very difficult to get thePaper published, and to defend thePaper if it ever does get published.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

....

What kind of gall does it take to do this? Looking over his record, he went to a sasquatch conference in 1978 at UBC and that gained him his international bigfoot cultural credentials displayed in his remarkable self-published book.

This is the kind of scruples it takes, and whenever we look closely - that's what we see with the 'footers.

Edit: He has a BA in Geology from Eastern Washington. Parading around as a PhD and Anthropologist. This is from their Alumni News:

so is he now a corrupt evil elite Syintist or a courageous bleever syintist?
good work.

[BravesFan]

Originally Posted by TheJackal

Dr. Hawks article is exactly why thePaper will never see the light of day in a respectable journal. You can't have DNA samples that come up "human" with one variation in the MC1R gene. The data set in GenBank is incomplete, and does not capture all the DNA from 6.8 Billion humans on the planet; and, therefore, does not capture all of the possible mutations of MC1R. Any savvy referee reviewing thePaper would know full well that you can't draw the conclusion that the DNA is "Bigfoot" because the variation of the MC1R is not in GenBank. The only logical conclusion is that you have "human" DNA with an undocumented variation of the MC1R gene; NOT that it is Bigfoot. You need to eliminate the obvious before you can conclude the mythological.

Also, what is interesting in Dr. Hawks article is that you introduce a possiblity of "false-positives". So, even the result of a non-cataloged MC1R variation could be nothing more than a "false-positive". Again, this is why it will be very difficult to get thePaper published, and to defend thePaper if it ever does get published.

This is why I think the paper will be called "Variations in MC1R as yet seen in Genbank" (or wtvr) there will be no mention of unknown primate nor Bigfoot.

BUT, when she explains this to the Footers she will explain how this "proves" Bigfoot and how" groundbreaking " it is. It's the perfect way to get it published in a decent journal, yet still spin it to the footers

[parnassus]

I imagine that whatever "new" snp's she's found have already been found by others in basically normal modern humans, but were not thought worthy of publication and didn't find their way to Genbank. So if ThePaper is published, I expect there will be (if anyone reads her article, not a given) an immediate shower of letters saying in essence, "not so much.."
btw, now that another "deadline" has gone by the boards, a new one (or more) has been put forward. And of course the usual pointing of fingers at the evil skeptics and men in black. These are absolutely classic manifestations of cognitive dissonance as described by Festinger in the classic "When Prophesy Fails."
p.

[GT/CS]

Something I find interesting is how most of the folks on the BFF and a few other sites are fairly astute at rejecting most blurry bigfoot photos and videos but they accept Ketchum as the second coming and her work (whatever it is) as their new gospel.

Why are so few of them holding her feet to the fire?

[RayG]

Ketchum is the latest Willy Wonka of bigfootdom, and her Oompa Loompas will support her no matter what.

RayG

[parnassus]

In defense of Dr. Ketchum, I expect that what she had been dealing with for many years were mutations in human-selected pets/domestic animals. It may be that for obvious reasons, in that subject population, certain genetic characteristics are easier to work out than in humans. Perhaps she expected a similar state of the art in humans. I am certainly not an expert but I do know, for example, that hair color determination generally works differently in humans than it does in animals...generally speaking humans don't exhibit the kinds of banding/stripes/spots that we see in other animals.

Further, I think it is very possible that she could have been "hoodwinked" by one or more of the individuals who submitted samples, or by those who furnished samples to those who submitted them to her. She has only their word as to where the samples came from, what the circumstances were, and why they were submitted. This issue of "provenance" makes it very difficult to take seriously any claims that rare yet similar patterns were found in (otherwise modern human) samples obtained "all across the country." I can go to the airport at 6 am and by 10 pm have returned, having mailed samples to Texas from 6 states and three countries. Affadavits/schmaffadavits...let's be frank here, she is dealing with a group of people not unlike Roger Patterson. The more they learn about DNA and what is needed in that realm to fool the world, the more likely it will be that they will come up with it.

[River]

Originally Posted by parnassus

In defense of Dr. Ketchum, I expect that what she had been dealing with for many years were mutations in human-selected pets/domestic animals. It may be that for obvious reasons, in that subject population, certain genetic characteristics are easier to work out than in humans. Perhaps she expected a similar state of the art in humans. I am certainly not an expert but I do know, for example, that hair color determination generally works differently in humans than it does in animals...generally speaking humans don't exhibit the kinds of banding/stripes/spots that we see in other animals.

Further, I think it is very possible that she could have been "hoodwinked" by one or more of the individuals who submitted samples, or by those who furnished samples to those who submitted them to her. She has only their word as to where the samples came from, what the circumstances were, and why they were submitted. This issue of "provenance" makes it very difficult to take seriously any claims that rare yet similar patterns were found in (otherwise modern human) samples obtained "all across the country." I can go to the airport at 6 am and by 10 pm have returned, having mailed samples to Texas from 6 states and three countries. Affadavits/schmaffadavits...let's be frank here, she is dealing with a group of people not unlike Roger Patterson. The more they learn about DNA and what is needed in that realm to fool the world, the more likely it will be that they will come up with it.

She claims to have seen them. Multiple times. Along with these DNA claims, or rather leading on of the public. Credibility. Get some.

:

[Resume]

Originally Posted by River

She claims to have seen them. Multiple times. Along with these DNA claims, or rather leading on of the public. Credibility. Get some.

:

Yes, once she made this claim, there's no going back; her credibilty rests on putting up or shutting up.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Parnassus keeps showing his own decent nature, projecting that onto others. That's exactly what con-men use against us.

[parnassus]

Now, the sightings are another story. However, to me they may indicate, again, that she is a credulous person. I could conceive of her being hoaxed by whoever is her host on these "get togethers".

Has she ever said that she collected specimens from whatever she saw? She has made somewhat contradictory claims about photos, I think.

The other area of concern is the apparent inaccuracy of a number of statements on facebook, concerning "embargos' and the like. Again, those may be related to inexperience. But to me they give the impression of someone scrambling to cover up a trainwreck.

p.

[AttorneyTom]

I perceive a "what have I allowed myself to get involved in" situation. Just me..

[parnassus]

all that said, at some point, even a credulous person has to stop looking around for the pony, and clean up the big mess.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Reasonable people can disagree on this. The hard thing to fight is our own nature: substituting our own conscience for that of others. The kindest way to say it is that she has a screw loose.

But she isn't stupid. What criminologists do to differentiate between accident, innocent mistake, self-defense etc. as opposed to calculated crime is to observe how they conceal what they know shows their guilt. Lying is the most basic method, and there are three types: the overt lie, the lie by omission, and the lie by inclusion of extraneous misleading information. The facebook page alone is like a giant billboard advertising all three.

[parnassus]

ABP, I am giving a sort of best-case scenario. I would also add that if she has dealt largely with domestics/pets, she may have had a view of intraspecies variability (e.g. chihuahuas v Great Danes) which would allow her to honestly believe that modern humans and the popular bigfoot could be of the same species ie have the same mtDNA, with the marked phenotypic differences based simply on some mutations in certain nuDNA genes.

I don't think this interpretation would have survived any interaction with an actual primatologist or population geneticist. I expect that if these experts she has purportedly brought in are actually telling her it's "interesting," then I would interpret that as polite. If I asked my wife to review a manuscript and she said that, I'd prolly start over.

The facebook stuff, to me, suggests that her PR person is operating pretty much in the dark, while Dr. Ketchum keeps pretty mum on what journals she is submitting to and what she is getting back from them. I would guess that by now she has probably gone through at least 3 or 4. I have had papers rejected, and it's not the kind of thing you shout from the rooftops. I think that could explain her dodginess at this point.

I realize that you may be closer to the truth than I am. The multiple sightings stuff makes it quite difficult to not view her much less generously than I would like to.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Originally Posted by parnassus

However, to me they may indicate, again, that she is a credulous person. I could conceive of her being hoaxed by whoever is her host on these "get togethers".


p.

You may be more right about this than I thought. Check PM's.

[parnassus]

in a post at RobertLindsay, Stubstad terms Ketchum's hypotheses "vaguely tenable."

Quote:

Hi all !

A new thread I happened to find here …

My guess re. Ketchum’s long overdue paper is that she can’t help herself with vaguely tenable hypotheses, along with tenable DNA facts (mito and nuclear sequences). The idea of changing the order of the authors is a good one; I suggested this too, towards the end of 2010.

She said “no way, Jose”. It won’t matter if it’s Paabo & Green themselves; she won’t ever let this one go as second or third fiddler, even if it means ultimate failure.

The ego point made by Lindsay is well taken and absolutely accurate (not to mention potentially big bucks).

I would term this "faint praise." (if that.)

[parnassus]

The entry of Meldrum (not to mention Stubstad, Ed Smith, and who knows else) into the DNA field insures that hope will never die for the 'footers. There will always be samples to submit, multiple labs to process material, encouraging letters and emails from lab owners, polymorphisms to hype, papers being endlessly written and rewritten, power point presentations phoned in, press embargos that last for years, publications in 3rd rate journals, blurry videos and images, reports of encounters, campaigns to save the bigfoot, descriptions of bigfoot family life, diet, shelters, communications, and footprints; and nine year olds reporting bigfoot sightings in Wisconsin school yards. The one thing there will never be... is an actual bigfoot.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Following the video precedents, all of the DNA will be blurry.

[LTC8K6]

Originally Posted by parnassus

The entry of Meldrum (not to mention Stubstad, Ed Smith, and who knows else) into the DNA field insures that hope will never die for the 'footers. There will always be samples to submit, multiple labs to process material, encouraging letters and emails from lab owners, polymorphisms to hype, papers being endlessly written and rewritten, power point presentations phoned in, press embargos that last for years, publications in 3rd rate journals, blurry videos and images, reports of encounters, campaigns to save the bigfoot, descriptions of bigfoot family life, diet, shelters, communications, and footprints; and nine year olds reporting bigfoot sightings in Wisconsin school yards. The one thing there will never be... is an actual bigfoot.

Snelgrove lake.

Enough said about Meldrum and DNA.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

Snelgrove lake.

Enough said about Meldrum and DNA.

Quote:

On April 28, 2012 Dr. Jeff Meldrum and Dr. Bryan Sykes had lunch to discuss among other things the possibility of the hybridization of sasquatch. Sykes, who is very familiar with the mixing of ancestral genes in humans, was curious about the possible hybridization of Sasquatch. During the lunch Dr. Meldrum advised Dr Sykes, "It was extremely unlikely that such hybridization had occurred," Meldrum continued, "and the evidence was non-existent at this point, but the question was out there and was worthy of examination."

Translation: "You say bigfoot is human..game on, Melba! I see your veterinary lab and raise you the Relict Hominoid Inquiry The National California/Oregon Trail Center Idaho State Oxford University."

I have to believe Meldrum is going for the Sierra Steaks (and the Olympic project business), both of whom must be running out of patience with TheMelba and her cosmic embargos. I imagine Sykes could dispose of the Sierra steak in about three weeks.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

Following the video precedents, all of the DNA will be blurry.

That's hilarious and actually somewhat true, if you look at the gels.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

Following the video precedents, all of the DNA will be blurry.

That's hilarious and actually somewhat true, if you look at the gels.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by BravesFan

This is why I think the paper will be called "Variations in MC1R as yet seen in Genbank" (or wtvr) there will be no mention of unknown primate nor Bigfoot.

BUT, when she explains this to the Footers she will explain how this "proves" Bigfoot and how" groundbreaking " it is. It's the perfect way to get it published in a decent journal, yet still spin it to the footers

I agree, but the paper then becomes almost pointless. The problem with that is that she doesn't have any phenotypes ie no bodies/individuals, to show the expression of these mutated genes ie what does an individual look like with this polymorphism?. So it becomes a "so what?" paper. There are dozens of polymorphisms in that gene. Do you think every single one gets a separate publication, especially with no phenotype?

Literally and figuratively, the journal might say, "Where's the meat?"
jmho.

ps is BravesFan/whoever now banned? what is the story there?

[GT/CS]

The paper may not be pointless because it will still win her favor from the 'footers.

BravesFan
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=236140

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by GT/CS

The paper may not be pointless because it will still win her favor from the 'footers.

BravesFan
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=236140

I meant pointless in terms of scientific interest and therefore a journal wanting/not wanting to publish it, because there are other more interesting/deserving papers.

Let me also say and clarify, in this regard, for the benefit of any bigfoot believers who might read this, that I do not think that Meldrum/Sykes will be helpful/supportive to what Ketchum/Paulides is/are seemingly up to. Au contraire. I think it likely that M/S will be adding this to their lab equipment.

It is interesting to me that Meldrum has not associated with Todd Disotell in this effort, whom he recruited for the editorial board of the Relict Hominoid Inquiry. I expect there may be already be some friction there, based on the quality of stuff that has been published.
jmho.

[HarryHenderson]

Originally Posted by parnassus

That's hilarious and actually somewhat true, if you look at the gels.

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

Following the video precedents, all of the DNA will be blurry.

That is hilarious!

[HarryHenderson]

Originally Posted by parnassus

...
It is interesting to me that Meldrum has not associated with Todd Disotell in this effort, whom he recruited for the editorial board of the Relict Hominoid Inquiry. I expect there may be already be some friction there, based on the quality of stuff that has been published.
jmho.

If Disotell is a legitimate scientist doing legitimate science, there's no ******* way he and Melsdumb could still be on the same page. And that's regardless of what Melsdumb actually 'believes' regarding Bigfoot.

What should be obvious to everyone now, including the BFF faithful types, is Dr. Melsdumb isn't a Bigfoot science dissident, he's an unrelenting charlatan. Note how his colleagues barely allow his name spoken in their presence. They'd rather piss in the dean's shoes than endorse the lump. YET, it's true that a guy like him - one going against the grain - who was on the right track to something would absolutely have a quantifiable amount of fellow scientist followers if he was really on to something worthwhile. Even if mainstream science hadn't yet 'accepted' it. Meldrum can't even get his childhood friend, lifelong buddy and fake-doctor-thief "Dr. Steal" to endorse him. Even the ones with the dubious titles don't wanna get mixed up in that ****.

For Melsdumb, the 'guise of science' is just a cover for his shameless hustling. And his shameless hustling is just a cover to get more chicks. And cash. His wife hates more chicks. Loves cash.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

The chicks say he has a mid-pecker break.

[TheJackal]

All of the various DNA studies either underway or under discussion will still prove nothing without a body. They can collect all the hair, toe nails, ear wax, feces, etc. they want, but until you have a body, all you have is some interesting DNA (assuming the DNA even tests out as something beyond a known creature or modern human). Either capture one alive, or bring back a body of one that has died of natural causes or lead poisoning. Until then, I will still firmly believe that Bigfoot is a mythological creature of modern creation.

[HarryHenderson]

Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot

The chicks say he has a mid-pecker break.

<unabashed bashing>
So at just before the 2 inch mark it 'breaks' left or right?
</unabashed bashing>

[River]

Welll..... you guys should already know as skeptics that "if" there were any "human" dna /steak whatever present that LE would be all over it. It would no longer be a NDA situation. Period.

So, what are the alternatives? Something naturally occurring, or there would be an official investigation. Period. Next?

Meldrum disappoints me lately. I feel like he is allowing his clouded objectivity to persuade dollars from marks in a sometimes direct fashion, and sometimes indirect. If he can't solve the Wallace mystery or the Patterson one given the evidence he's been handed, I'd have to say bluntly that he hardly deserves the title he holds.

I could change my mind if he would actually step up and be willing to eat a little crow. (especially on the footprints from the pgf which he published a paper on) He might surprise me, but I think he's lost care for the truth. JMHO


As for Ketchum? lol... shes going to keep taking the test dollars until someone stops paying. duh.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

The break at 2" renders the rest the organ flaccid for the remainder of its entire inch Harry

River - we didn't see Merldumb stepping out with is own bigfoot hoaxing until he already had tenure, which is a demonstration of how calculating his deceit is. So I wouldn't expect him to come clean unless bigfoot fell from popularity. It's a P.T. Barnum philosophy - as long as people will pay admission there isn't any reason to cancel the show.

[parnassus]

The bleevers have kind of mangled, in their own special wishful way, and to fan the flickering flames of DNA, most of the information about Bryan Sykes, Meldrum's new partner in the DNA/bigfoot business. Firstly, they want to recall that he processed a specimen that showed an unknown animal DNA. Actually, the DNA turned out later to be bear, and this was written up in an unpublished thesis by a grad student, according to Wikipedia's Yeti entry.

Quote:

One well publicized expedition to Bhutan reported that a hair sample had been obtained that, after DNA analysis by Professor Bryan Sykes, could not be matched to any known animal.[59] Analysis completed after the media release, however, clearly showed that the samples were from the Brown bear (Ursus arctos) and the Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus).[60]

Chandler, H.C. (2003). Using Ancient DNA to Link Culture and Biology in Human Populations. Unpublished D.Phil. thesis. University of Oxford, Oxford.

Secondly, the "president"of "bigfootology" a certain "Rhettman A. Mullis, Jr., MS, MHP
Academic and Field Researcher," says Sykes is going to write a book and make three one hour documentaries, yet they haven't collected the specimens yet??

Quote:

Dr. Sykes is writing a book on the findings and their invitation for us to be a part of this project is the equivalent of having Dr. Stephen Hawkings ask to help identify a new star, or Einstein asking us to be a part of developing quantum-mechanic theories. We are honored and privileged to be included. So Dr. Sykes will write his book, but they are also filming a documentary that will be three one hour shows about the event. Soon we will be asking for DNA samples from all over the world and Bigfootology will assist in the accumulation of those samples. We are also in the process of reaching out to some known hybrid-offspring of human and Bigfoot joining. Because this work is being done by scientists using scientific method and Bigfootology being the only actual scientific organization, the outcomes will not be questioned or doubted critically, because the scientists involved are at the top of their field.

Cough, cough.

Actually I think that he is referring to a new book by Sykes

Quote:

Professor Sykes latest book DNA USA: A Genetic Portrait of America is now on sale in the US. It has already received excellent advanced reviews. ...
British geneticist Sykes, whose account of his discovery of the "clan mothers" of Europe The Seven Daughters of Eve (2001), became a bestseller, wondered what a genetic protrait of America would look like. He gamely embarked on a coast-to-coast DNA-collecting adventure and learned that the collision between genetics and people's sense of identity can be explosive. After cogently explaining how "the record of the past" is "written in DNA" and how it is interpreted, he presents startling findings about Native American ancestry, which stand in profound conflict with traditional beliefs and reopen old wounds. African Americans, by and large, have embraced the revelations of DNA as a remedy to the rupture and erasure of the slave trade, and Sykes was able to reconnect individuals with heretofore lost legacies rooted in specific African regions. ... Human genetics energetically elucidated, entertaining travel writing, the fascinating personal stories of DNA volunteers, and Sykes' candid musings on his awakening to the complex emotional and social implications of hidden biological inheritances make for a milestone book guaranteed to ignite spirtied discussion"

This has nothing to do with bigfoot.

[parnassus]

The bleevers have kind of mangled, in their own special wishful way, and to fan the flickering flames of DNA, much of the information about Bryan Sykes, Meldrum's new partner in the DNA/bigfoot business. Firstly, he is no longer a professor at Oxford, he retired. He's emeritus. He may be running a for profit operation now.

Secondly, they want to recall that he processed a specimen that showed an unknown animal DNA. Actually, the DNA turned out later to be bear, and this was written up in an unpublished thesis by a grad student, according to Wikipedia's Yeti entry.

Quote:

One well publicized expedition to Bhutan reported that a hair sample had been obtained that, after DNA analysis by Professor Bryan Sykes, could not be matched to any known animal.[59] Analysis completed after the media release, however, clearly showed that the samples were from the Brown bear (Ursus arctos) and the Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus). Chandler, H.C. (2003). Using Ancient DNA to Link Culture and Biology in Human Populations. Unpublished D.Phil. thesis. University of Oxford, Oxford.

Thirdly, the "president"of "bigfootology" a certain "interesting" gentleman named "Rhettman A. Mullis, Jr., MS, MHP "Academic and Field Researcher," ( had his first encounter at age ten, and once chased a female bigfoot through the woods for an hour. Imagine that. Cough, cough) says Sykes is already writing a book and will make three one hour documentaries, yet they haven't collected the specimens yet?? and they are reaching out to some hybrids??

Quote:

Dr. Sykes is writing a book on the findings and their invitation for us to be a part of this project is the equivalent of having Dr. Stephen Hawkings ask to help identify a new star, or Einstein asking us to be a part of developing quantum-mechanic theories. We are honored and privileged to be included. So Dr. Sykes will write his book, but they are also filming a documentary that will be three one hour shows about the event. Soon we will be asking for DNA samples from all over the world and Bigfootology will assist in the accumulation of those samples. We are also in the process of reaching out to some known hybrid-offspring of human and Bigfoot joining. Because this work is being done by scientists using scientific method and Bigfootology being the only actual scientific organization, the outcomes will not be questioned or doubted critically, because the scientists involved are at the top of their field.

I think that he is a little confused and probably the book he is referring to is a new book by Sykes

Quote:

Professor Sykes latest book DNA USA: A Genetic Portrait of America is now on sale in the US. It has already received excellent advanced reviews. ...
British geneticist Sykes, whose account of his discovery of the "clan mothers" of Europe The Seven Daughters of Eve (2001), became a bestseller, wondered what a genetic protrait of America would look like. He gamely embarked on a coast-to-coast DNA-collecting adventure and learned that the collision between genetics and people's sense of identity can be explosive. After cogently explaining how "the record of the past" is "written in DNA" and how it is interpreted, he presents startling findings about Native American ancestry, which stand in profound conflict with traditional beliefs and reopen old wounds. African Americans, by and large, have embraced the revelations of DNA as a remedy to the rupture and erasure of the slave trade, and Sykes was able to reconnect individuals with heretofore lost legacies rooted in specific African regions. ... Human genetics energetically elucidated, entertaining travel writing, the fascinating personal stories of DNA volunteers, and Sykes' candid musings on his awakening to the complex emotional and social implications of hidden biological inheritances make for a milestone book guaranteed to ignite spirtied discussion"

This has nothing to do with bigfoot.

Well, whatever, he's got to be a halfdozen steps up from whatever the last clown was who promised proof of bigfoot. I expect he will put a speedy end to this bigfoot is a modern human stuff. Which is what Meldrum wants.

[Jodie]

It's called "Bigfootology" now? I leave for two weeks and bigfoot world got a new name? I guess that is no different than styling oneself a "researcher" with no facts to base research on......bigfootoology=scientology, or mythology, or reflexology? Whatever "ology" you want to tack on to it does not denote validity. A pile of crap still smells whether you call it excrement, feces, or ****.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by Jodie

It's called "Bigfootology" now? I leave for two weeks and bigfoot world got a new name? I guess that is no different than styling oneself a "researcher" with no facts to base research on......bigfootoology=scientology, or mythology, or reflexology? Whatever "ology" you want to tack on to it does not denote validity. A pile of crap still smells whether you call it excrement, feces, or ****.

It's just that one guy's "organization." There are many others that are similar.

[Jodie]

I think the less I know the better off I am, it is kind of painful to hear about it.