Bigfoot DNA - Page 38

Muldur · 15th June 2012, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Jodie

Mulder, how can you write a whole book on the anatomy and physiology of a bigfoot when we don't have a type specimen? I stopped listening to Meldrum when he got into an argument with Bobby Short over whether bigfoot had a blaculum or not. I theorized with the best of them , it doesn't take credentials to do that when everyone is guessing.

Firstly, are you certain you spelled your term correctly? I could find no reference to an anatomical term "blaculum"

Secondly, you can obtain bio-metric data from sources other than direct examination of a type specimen. Examining tracks and other body impressions, photos, etc can also yeild valuable information, and it is this later approach that Drs Meldrum, et al have had to take until a type specimen becomes available.

Jodie · 15th June 2012, 03:01 PM

I agree with you Mulder, it is not right to paint anyone with a broad brush unless there is something concrete to the contrary that says this researcher falls in the category with the rest of the majority.

And Mulder, how much evidence have you seen from other bigfoot researchers claiming to be serious about what they do? It is a legitimate question, you may know more of them personally than I do.

Jodie · 15th June 2012, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by Muldur

Firstly, are you certain you spelled your term correctly? I could find no reference to an anatomical term "blaculum"

Secondly, you can obtain bio-metric data from sources other than direct examination of a type specimen. Examining tracks and other body impressions, photos, etc can also yeild valuable information, and it is this later approach that Drs Meldrum, et al have had to take until a type specimen becomes available.

Mulder, what if the tracks were hoaxed? It has happened.

Sorry, baculum, it's a penis bone. The whole debate I heard on whether bigfoot had one or not could have been a skit on Saturday Night Live.

AlaskaBushPilot · 15th June 2012, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by Muldur

You know exactly what I mean.

Cryptic ad-homs usually masquerade as "meaning something" by insinuation, but are vaccuous when asked for an explanation.

Quote:

It is lower than low to compare BF researchers, including respected scientists like Dr Meldrum to Ted Bundy.

What does "lower than low" mean other than an empty ad-hom? It's not just germane but vitally important that even serial killers on the surface appear sincere when underneath is savage, murderous intent. An angry smiley is not an argument. Well, it is a manipulative argument - I can't use anything that makes you angry.

All of these examples from mere child cookie jar raiders to adult cannibal killers are actors. "Looking" or "sounding" sincere is the most basic requirement of lying, and is understood by a three year old. So it is silly to say "he sounded sincere" as a logical argument for woo. Of course they sound sincere. How stupid do you have to be not to?

And the objection to this elementary fact about lying is that the speaker (Merldumb in your case) is too stupid to understand he needs to sound sincere when lying.

Castro · 16th June 2012, 06:05 AM

Originally Posted by Muldur on the BFF

In the case of DNA, the results are even more diagnostic. Assuming a good "read" on the sample, if it doesn't match anything in the database, then it, by obvious process of elimination must be from a new, undocumented critter.

ETA: we already have such a statement from Dr Sykes about at least one sample.

Quote
Bryan Sykes, Professor of Human Genetics at the Oxford Institute of Molecular Medicine and one of the world's leading experts on DNA analysis examined the hair. "We found some DNA in it," he said, "but we don't know what it is. It's not a human, not a bear not anything else we have so far been able to identify. It's a mystery and I never thought this would end in a mystery. We have never encountered DNA that we couldn't recognize before."

http://www.professorfringe.com/news_...a_evidence.htm

Please carefully note the emphasized part.

It seems you missed something, Muldur:

"...Sykes also analyzed hair samples from Bhutan attributed to the Yeti, which seemed to defy DNA identification. Interestingly, during our conversation I learned that further efforts were subsequently successful in determining that the hair originated from bear..." Jeff Meldrum.

http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Oxford%20PR.pdf

The Shrike · 18th June 2012, 06:15 AM

Apparently we all missed a rather important memo but our own Muldur got it: Bigfoot has been proven and we no longer need to concern ourselves with the "nonsense" (his term) of trying to prove its existence!

Castro · 18th June 2012, 07:42 AM

^ Shame on The Huffington Post!

parnassus · 18th June 2012, 08:41 AM

Damian Bravo at Bigfoot Evidence:

Quote:

We now have Melba Ketchum DNA study camp going totally quiet and some are even forgetting that David Palaudis [sic] explained in a private message to Snow Walker Prime that the Ketchum DNA will not prove that Bigfoot is human or that these creatures exist.

!!

Jodie · 18th June 2012, 08:59 AM

Who is Damian Bravo?

TheJackal · 18th June 2012, 09:19 AM

Damian Bravo is one of the multiple guest bloggers on Bigfoot Evidence.

Drewbot · 18th June 2012, 10:10 AM

Is Ed Smith involved in the Ketchum DNA stuff?

Castro · 18th June 2012, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by Jodie

Who is Damian Bravo?

He's also a member of Team Tazer Bigfoot (as Snow Walker Prime).

Jodie · 18th June 2012, 04:27 PM

Nevermind, I just googled it.....I'm not sure whether I need to laugh or cringe.

calwaterbear · 19th June 2012, 06:15 AM

I don't keep up on all this stuff like i should, but it seems to me, that for the last 6 months or so, the wind was blowing in the "it's not an ape, it's human" direction.
i saw this as a direct result of the expected result from Melba. when she could not get her samples to say anything other than "human" she changed her methodology to a less sensitive test, so she could get a little wiggle room, and claim it's human!". A lot of believers bought into that, naturally!

So fast forward to now, and i am seeing cracks in the dam, Melba has apparently failed the believers, and their beliefs are under scrutiny from a real scientist (at least DNA wise), so I am now sensing a shift in the tide.

Seems to me, we are now starting to see a - Not only is it not human, but it's not even an Ape! school of thought!

Agnostic skeptic communists like me see that as a premptive strike, to gain a head start on plausdable deniability of DNA coming back as - you got nothing but bears and goats and humans!

They still haven't realized that the primers being used are universally used across all mammals, so if you are setting yourself up to deny the DNA results, essentially you will be forced to choose between 2 really bad explanations.

1. It's not a Mammal! in that case you need to explain the hair and breasts, 2 of the required elements to define a mammal. (3rd is 2 sets of teeth - ie baby teeth and permanent teeth)

2. Alternately, you could fall back on the supernatural explanation - BF is like nothing else on the planet, he has magic DNA that is unlike every other living plant and animal on the planet!

You do have to give these guys a little credit, they feel the direction of the wind, and get ahead of the story. They prefabricate their ~~excuses~~ explanations, with a keen eye on whats coming down the pike.

Whats interesting about that, however is that their prefabbed explanations keep cornering them into more and more ridiculous explanations!

Oh well,
back to work!
CWB

GT/CS · 19th June 2012, 06:56 AM

Which of those geniuses is claiming it's neither human or ape?

parnassus · 19th June 2012, 08:10 AM

Meldrum is on the best path, simply invoking the rarity of his ape to explain the absence of unique DNA. He can retire in 10 years still saying that eventually it will be found, or that it would be found if only Science would organize an enormous SquatchHunt.

It remains to be seen whether or not the human hybridists/Melbists will survive the siege guns that Sykes and Meldrum will be firing at them in the next couple of years. A lot depends on whether or not TheMelba can get her ideas published in some form, somewhere, this year. I continue to believe she can, though my faith is dwindling. The lurid nature of the human hybrid concept/misconception has great mass market appeal, combined with the mumbo jumbo of footer pseudoscience. This camp would claim that the bigfoot mystery would be solved if only Science would sequence the complete genome of every "human" specimen the believers can find, for free.

GT/CS · 19th June 2012, 08:30 AM

I love it. Meldrum fighting Melba's junk science with his own junk science.
He knows exactly what he's doing, and he knows that all he needs to do is use more impressive technical jargon than Melba. He learned a long time ago with his midtarsal break nonsense that big words impress his core 'footer audience.

Castro · 19th June 2012, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by GT/CS

Which of those geniuses is claiming it's neither human or ape?

Damian Bravo claims (with tongue in cheek I presume) it could be a sloth.

GT/CS · 19th June 2012, 09:00 AM

It couldn't be a sloth in Washington or Oregon because the PNW Tree Octopus would drive it out of the area.
http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/

Hey, wait a minute. When a tree octopus jumps to the ground it makes a huge splat that looks like a single large footprint. That may be why we have so many single bigfoot prints!

Actually, it looks like bigfoot is decimating the octopus population.
http://zapatopi.net/bsa/octopus.html

Castro · 19th June 2012, 09:59 AM

^

I'm sure those guys would be interested by this new theory.

dafydd · 19th June 2012, 10:01 AM

Wasn't there a guy here who said that bigfoot existed in another dimension?

Castro · 19th June 2012, 10:18 AM

Well, if he did, the Tree Octopus hypothesis shouldn't be a problem for him.

AlaskaBushPilot · 19th June 2012, 12:28 PM

A bit late to remark that TheMelba closed the web-page without ever having given a single link to her research, which was the ostensible purpose of opening the webpage.

TheJackal · 19th June 2012, 01:10 PM

I think Meldrum went "all-in" with Sykes, and Melba folded. I imagine that the apparent inability to get the paper through a peer review process and the appearance of the "big gun" from the Meldrum camp caused a quick "riding off into the sunset." The question is will Melba resurface at a later date if Sykes' testing comes back with bear, goat, donkey, dog, etc.

OntarioSquatch · 22nd June 2012, 12:51 PM

some leaked info

Vortigern99 · 22nd June 2012, 12:54 PM

... and?

OntarioSquatch · 22nd June 2012, 12:56 PM

If the paper is ever published, they could be recognized as feral Homo Sapiens. In other words, they are us.

I am Bigfoot · 22nd June 2012, 01:06 PM

Or maybe the sample just came from a human!
Surprise! You need to get sasquatch samples from a sasquatch and compare it to known sasquatch samples (that were also obtained directly from sasquatch) to confirm that the DNA is from a sasquatch. You don't get to say "we found this sample. Don't know where its from. Therefore it's bigfoot. And if it matches human DNA, then bigfoot are people!" That's utter and unadulterated childish nonsense.

Unless the makers of that film and/or documentary, narration or audiobook, whateverthehell have a sasquatch corpse sitting around, all they proved is that they have successfully found DNA that matches humans.

Drewbot · 22nd June 2012, 01:08 PM

Leaked info? really?
Parnassus noted that gem back in January http://www.forums.randi.org/showpost...&postcount=703

Drewbot · 22nd June 2012, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If the paper is ever published, they could be recognized as feral Homo Sapiens. In other words, they are us.

Dude or Dudette, they can't be Homo sapiens. They have a different foot, they are huge, they don't use tools, they don't use fire, unless you think a tribe of mentally deficient humans has been able to somehow reproduce AND avoid human capture for several thousand years, this explanation is absolutely impossible.

Vortigern99 · 22nd June 2012, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

If the paper is ever published, they could be recognized as feral Homo Sapiens. In other words, they are us.

If they're human, where then is the evidence of tool use? Clothing? Religion? Art? A precise hand grip, a minimum brain capacity between 600-900cc, small teeth? etc. etc.

Please read about anthropology and what traits distinguish genus Homo from other primates. Otherwise you are unqualified to have this discussion.

ETA: Plus what IAB and Drewbot said.

OntarioSquatch · 22nd June 2012, 01:21 PM

Just to clear a few things up. Their feet are almost identical to ours. The DNA can't be from one of us because there are obvious variations Dr. Ketchum discovered. Dr. Ketchum got dozens of samples that led her to these conclusions. The man behind the scenes of all this is David Paulides. He's not a hoaxer. Many of the samples came from people who are legit.

The most amazing of all is that one of her best samples came from Justin Smeja, the man who shot dead two different Sasquatch. People criticized pictures of his steak sample because the hair looked like it was from a bear, but it simply wasn't.

ETA - I have no idea why Bigfoot lack many of the aspects that we have, but I have a feeling these questions will be answered soon enough

I am Bigfoot · 22nd June 2012, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

The DNA can't be from one of us because there are obvious variations Dr. Ketchum discovered

OS Thinks all huma DNA is identical

Quote:

Dr. Ketchum got dozens of

Unknown

Quote:

samples that led her to these conclusions. The man behind the scenes of all this is David Paulides. He's not a hoaxer. Many of the samples came from people who

At best legitimately found their samples in the woods

Quote:

The most amazing of all is that one of her best samples came from Justin Smeja, the man who shot dead two different Sasquatch.

And the bodies are where?
I'm not a hunter. I'd be kinda squeamish about gutting and cleaning an animal. But If I freaking shot 2 bigfoots at least one of them would be stuffed and mounted in my living room.

Drewbot · 22nd June 2012, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

Just to clear a few things up. Their feet are almost identical to ours.

No, they have a mid-tarsal break. This is a feature found in other apes. The human foot has a fused mid-tarsal joint. I have asked Dr. Meldrum about this, he said it is an adaptation that Bigfoot has made for gripping rough terrain in mountainous areas.

Vortigern99 · 22nd June 2012, 01:29 PM

Back any of that up with evidence, OS, and you've got yourself a discussion. As it is, you're just making unsupported assertions.

aboman · 22nd June 2012, 01:30 PM

Their feet are almost identical to ours except they are huge with a midtarsal break. The DNA can't be from one of us because there are obvious variations Dr. Ketchum discovered after an engineer showed her dubious statistics based on genbank data. Dr. Ketchum got dozens of samples that led her to these conclusions from (mostly?) unknown sources. The man behind the scenes of all this is David Paulides who has published books on the subject already and thus has a financial intrest. He's not a hoaxer ,probably he is just misguided. Or he is a hoaxer.

The most amazing of all is that one of her best samples came from Justin Smeja, the man who shot dead two different Sasquatch. People criticized pictures of his steak sample because the hair looked like it was from a bear, but it simply wasn't, It was probably from a coyote, according to Meldrum.

Fixed it for you.

OntarioSquatch · 22nd June 2012, 01:37 PM

Dr. Meldrum didn't even bother testing the sample. He simply observed it and said%2

I am Bigfoot · 22nd June 2012, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch

Dr. Meldrum didn't even bother testing the sample. He simply observed it and said it's coyote because of the guard hairs. Dr. Ketchum would have to be lying about that sample for it to be truly coyote.

Bigfooters never lie! EVER!

Except for Meldrum who lied when he said it was coyote hair (according to you).

Vortigern99 · 22nd June 2012, 01:44 PM

OS, you cherry-pick points to argue and ignore the rest. Are we to take your silence on the dozens of counterarguments we've made in these threads as your concession of defeat on those points? Or do you prefer to ignore all logic and reason, and continue to live in a fantasy world with your fingers in your ears chanting "lalalalalabigfootexistslalalala"?

OntarioSquatch · 22nd June 2012, 01:44 PM

I never ment he was lying. He was simply mistaken.

15th June 2012, 02:53 PM	#1481
Muldur Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,965	Originally Posted by Jodie Mulder, how can you write a whole book on the anatomy and physiology of a bigfoot when we don't have a type specimen? I stopped listening to Meldrum when he got into an argument with Bobby Short over whether bigfoot had a blaculum or not. I theorized with the best of them , it doesn't take credentials to do that when everyone is guessing. Firstly, are you certain you spelled your term correctly? I could find no reference to an anatomical term "blaculum" Secondly, you can obtain bio-metric data from sources other than direct examination of a type specimen. Examining tracks and other body impressions, photos, etc can also yeild valuable information, and it is this later approach that Drs Meldrum, et al have had to take until a type specimen becomes available.
Muldur Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,965

15th June 2012, 03:01 PM	#1482
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,906	I agree with you Mulder, it is not right to paint anyone with a broad brush unless there is something concrete to the contrary that says this researcher falls in the category with the rest of the majority. And Mulder, how much evidence have you seen from other bigfoot researchers claiming to be serious about what they do? It is a legitimate question, you may know more of them personally than I do.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,906

15th June 2012, 03:03 PM	#1483
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,906	Originally Posted by Muldur Firstly, are you certain you spelled your term correctly? I could find no reference to an anatomical term "blaculum" Secondly, you can obtain bio-metric data from sources other than direct examination of a type specimen. Examining tracks and other body impressions, photos, etc can also yeild valuable information, and it is this later approach that Drs Meldrum, et al have had to take until a type specimen becomes available. Mulder, what if the tracks were hoaxed? It has happened. Sorry, baculum, it's a penis bone. The whole debate I heard on whether bigfoot had one or not could have been a skit on Saturday Night Live.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,906

16th June 2012, 06:05 AM	#1485
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	Originally Posted by Muldur on the BFF In the case of DNA, the results are even more diagnostic. Assuming a good "read" on the sample, if it doesn't match anything in the database, then it, by obvious process of elimination must be from a new, undocumented critter. ETA: we already have such a statement from Dr Sykes about at least one sample. Quote Bryan Sykes, Professor of Human Genetics at the Oxford Institute of Molecular Medicine and one of the world's leading experts on DNA analysis examined the hair. "We found some DNA in it," he said, "but we don't know what it is. It's not a human, not a bear not anything else we have so far been able to identify. It's a mystery and I never thought this would end in a mystery. We have never encountered DNA that we couldn't recognize before." http://www.professorfringe.com/news_...a_evidence.htm Please carefully note the emphasized part. It seems you missed something, Muldur: "...Sykes also analyzed hair samples from Bhutan attributed to the Yeti, which seemed to defy DNA identification. Interestingly, during our conversation I learned that further efforts were subsequently successful in determining that the hair originated from bear..." Jeff Meldrum. http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Oxford%20PR.pdf
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	Last edited by Castro; 16th June 2012 at 06:42 AM.

18th June 2012, 07:42 AM	#1487
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	^ Shame on The Huffington Post!
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290

15th June 2012, 03:16 PM	#1484
AlaskaBushPilot Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 1,609	Originally Posted by Muldur You know exactly what I mean. Cryptic ad-homs usually masquerade as "meaning something" by insinuation, but are vaccuous when asked for an explanation. Quote: It is lower than low to compare BF researchers, including respected scientists like Dr Meldrum to Ted Bundy. What does "lower than low" mean other than an empty ad-hom? It's not just germane but vitally important that even serial killers on the surface appear sincere when underneath is savage, murderous intent. An angry smiley is not an argument. Well, it is a manipulative argument - I can't use anything that makes you angry. All of these examples from mere child cookie jar raiders to adult cannibal killers are actors. "Looking" or "sounding" sincere is the most basic requirement of lying, and is understood by a three year old. So it is silly to say "he sounded sincere" as a logical argument for woo. Of course they sound sincere. How stupid do you have to be not to? And the objection to this elementary fact about lying is that the speaker (Merldumb in your case) is too stupid to understand he needs to sound sincere when lying.

18th June 2012, 06:15 AM	#1486
The Shrike Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: USA Posts: 1,804	Apparently we all missed a rather important memo but our own Muldur got it: Bigfoot has been proven and we no longer need to concern ourselves with the "nonsense" (his term) of trying to prove its existence!

18th June 2012, 08:41 AM	#1488
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Damian Bravo at Bigfoot Evidence: Quote: We now have Melba Ketchum DNA study camp going totally quiet and some are even forgetting that David Palaudis [sic] explained in a private message to Snow Walker Prime that the Ketchum DNA will not prove that Bigfoot is human or that these creatures exist. !!
	__________________ Never let the data encumber the plausibility. ---paraphrased from David Paulides "It will be politically charged though, I am sure as anytime something like this happens, it will get interesting".---TheMelba Last edited by parnassus; 18th June 2012 at 09:27 AM.

18th June 2012, 08:59 AM	#1489
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,906	Who is Damian Bravo?
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,906

18th June 2012, 09:19 AM	#1490
TheJackal Thinker Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Downtown Hollow Earth Posts: 152	Damian Bravo is one of the multiple guest bloggers on Bigfoot Evidence.

18th June 2012, 10:10 AM	#1491
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	Is Ed Smith involved in the Ketchum DNA stuff?
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	__________________ "I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

18th June 2012, 03:58 PM	#1492
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	Originally Posted by Jodie Who is Damian Bravo? He's also a member of Team Tazer Bigfoot (as Snow Walker Prime).
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290

18th June 2012, 04:27 PM	#1493
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,906	Nevermind, I just googled it.....I'm not sure whether I need to laugh or cringe.
Jodie Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,906	Last edited by Jodie; 18th June 2012 at 04:30 PM.

19th June 2012, 06:15 AM	#1494
calwaterbear Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 232	Is this the current trend? I don't keep up on all this stuff like i should, but it seems to me, that for the last 6 months or so, the wind was blowing in the "it's not an ape, it's human" direction. i saw this as a direct result of the expected result from Melba. when she could not get her samples to say anything other than "human" she changed her methodology to a less sensitive test, so she could get a little wiggle room, and claim it's human!". A lot of believers bought into that, naturally! So fast forward to now, and i am seeing cracks in the dam, Melba has apparently failed the believers, and their beliefs are under scrutiny from a real scientist (at least DNA wise), so I am now sensing a shift in the tide. Seems to me, we are now starting to see a - Not only is it not human, but it's not even an Ape! school of thought! Agnostic skeptic communists like me see that as a premptive strike, to gain a head start on plausdable deniability of DNA coming back as - you got nothing but bears and goats and humans! They still haven't realized that the primers being used are universally used across all mammals, so if you are setting yourself up to deny the DNA results, essentially you will be forced to choose between 2 really bad explanations. 1. It's not a Mammal! in that case you need to explain the hair and breasts, 2 of the required elements to define a mammal. (3rd is 2 sets of teeth - ie baby teeth and permanent teeth) 2. Alternately, you could fall back on the supernatural explanation - BF is like nothing else on the planet, he has magic DNA that is unlike every other living plant and animal on the planet! You do have to give these guys a little credit, they feel the direction of the wind, and get ahead of the story. They prefabricate their ~~excuses~~ explanations, with a keen eye on whats coming down the pike. Whats interesting about that, however is that their prefabbed explanations keep cornering them into more and more ridiculous explanations! Oh well, back to work! CWB
calwaterbear Thinker Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 232	Last edited by calwaterbear; 19th June 2012 at 06:17 AM.

19th June 2012, 06:56 AM	#1495
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	Which of those geniuses is claiming it's neither human or ape?
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986

19th June 2012, 08:10 AM	#1496
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Meldrum is on the best path, simply invoking the rarity of his ape to explain the absence of unique DNA. He can retire in 10 years still saying that eventually it will be found, or that it would be found if only Science would organize an enormous SquatchHunt. It remains to be seen whether or not the human hybridists/Melbists will survive the siege guns that Sykes and Meldrum will be firing at them in the next couple of years. A lot depends on whether or not TheMelba can get her ideas published in some form, somewhere, this year. I continue to believe she can, though my faith is dwindling. The lurid nature of the human hybrid concept/misconception has great mass market appeal, combined with the mumbo jumbo of footer pseudoscience. This camp would claim that the bigfoot mystery would be solved if only Science would sequence the complete genome of every "human" specimen the believers can find, for free.
	__________________ Never let the data encumber the plausibility. ---paraphrased from David Paulides "It will be politically charged though, I am sure as anytime something like this happens, it will get interesting".---TheMelba Last edited by parnassus; 19th June 2012 at 08:29 AM.

19th June 2012, 08:30 AM	#1497
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	I love it. Meldrum fighting Melba's junk science with his own junk science. He knows exactly what he's doing, and he knows that all he needs to do is use more impressive technical jargon than Melba. He learned a long time ago with his midtarsal break nonsense that big words impress his core 'footer audience.
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986

19th June 2012, 08:55 AM	#1498
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	Originally Posted by GT/CS Which of those geniuses is claiming it's neither human or ape? Damian Bravo claims (with tongue in cheek I presume) it could be a sloth.
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290

19th June 2012, 09:00 AM	#1499
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	It couldn't be a sloth in Washington or Oregon because the PNW Tree Octopus would drive it out of the area. http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/ Hey, wait a minute. When a tree octopus jumps to the ground it makes a huge splat that looks like a single large footprint. That may be why we have so many single bigfoot prints! Actually, it looks like bigfoot is decimating the octopus population. http://zapatopi.net/bsa/octopus.html
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,591	__________________ SweatyYeti or Bill Munns would be my vote for looking at this - BFSleuth @ BFF I've got plenty of common sense! I just choose to ignore it. - Calvin; October 15, 1986 Last edited by GT/CS; 19th June 2012 at 10:47 AM.

19th June 2012, 09:59 AM	#1500
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	^ I'm sure those guys would be interested by this new theory.
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290

19th June 2012, 10:01 AM	#1501
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,448	Wasn't there a guy here who said that bigfoot existed in another dimension?
	__________________ Yesterday upon the stairs I met a man who wasn't there He wasn't there again today I wish that he would go away.

19th June 2012, 10:18 AM	#1502
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290	Well, if he did, the Tree Octopus hypothesis shouldn't be a problem for him.
Castro Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 290

19th June 2012, 12:28 PM	#1503
AlaskaBushPilot Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 1,609	A bit late to remark that TheMelba closed the web-page without ever having given a single link to her research, which was the ostensible purpose of opening the webpage.

19th June 2012, 01:10 PM	#1504
TheJackal Thinker Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Downtown Hollow Earth Posts: 152	I think Meldrum went "all-in" with Sykes, and Melba folded. I imagine that the apparent inability to get the paper through a peer review process and the appearance of the "big gun" from the Meldrum camp caused a quick "riding off into the sunset." The question is will Melba resurface at a later date if Sykes' testing comes back with bear, goat, donkey, dog, etc.

22nd June 2012, 12:51 PM	#1505
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 485	some leaked info

22nd June 2012, 12:54 PM	#1506
Vortigern99 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,016	... and?
	__________________ "I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 / Noah D. Henson "One thing we've learned (and the Internet confirms this) is that humans will screw just about anything." -- Theagenes

22nd June 2012, 12:56 PM	#1507
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 485	If the paper is ever published, they could be recognized as feral Homo Sapiens. In other words, they are us.

22nd June 2012, 01:06 PM	#1508
I am Bigfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 307	Or maybe the sample just came from a human! Surprise! You need to get sasquatch samples from a sasquatch and compare it to known sasquatch samples (that were also obtained directly from sasquatch) to confirm that the DNA is from a sasquatch. You don't get to say "we found this sample. Don't know where its from. Therefore it's bigfoot. And if it matches human DNA, then bigfoot are people!" That's utter and unadulterated childish nonsense. Unless the makers of that film and/or documentary, narration or audiobook, whateverthehell have a sasquatch corpse sitting around, all they proved is that they have successfully found DNA that matches humans.

22nd June 2012, 01:08 PM	#1509
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	Leaked info? really? Parnassus noted that gem back in January http://www.forums.randi.org/showpost...&postcount=703
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	__________________ "I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

22nd June 2012, 01:10 PM	#1510
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If the paper is ever published, they could be recognized as feral Homo Sapiens. In other words, they are us. Dude or Dudette, they can't be Homo sapiens. They have a different foot, they are huge, they don't use tools, they don't use fire, unless you think a tribe of mentally deficient humans has been able to somehow reproduce AND avoid human capture for several thousand years, this explanation is absolutely impossible.
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	__________________ "I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

22nd June 2012, 01:13 PM	#1511
Vortigern99 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,016	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch If the paper is ever published, they could be recognized as feral Homo Sapiens. In other words, they are us. If they're human, where then is the evidence of tool use? Clothing? Religion? Art? A precise hand grip, a minimum brain capacity between 600-900cc, small teeth? etc. etc. Please read about anthropology and what traits distinguish genus Homo from other primates. Otherwise you are unqualified to have this discussion. ETA: Plus what IAB and Drewbot said.
	__________________ "I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 / Noah D. Henson "One thing we've learned (and the Internet confirms this) is that humans will screw just about anything." -- Theagenes Last edited by Vortigern99; 22nd June 2012 at 01:14 PM.

22nd June 2012, 01:21 PM	#1512
OntarioSquatch Critical Thinker Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 485	Just to clear a few things up. Their feet are almost identical to ours. The DNA can't be from one of us because there are obvious variations Dr. Ketchum discovered. Dr. Ketchum got dozens of samples that led her to these conclusions. The man behind the scenes of all this is David Paulides. He's not a hoaxer. Many of the samples came from people who are legit. The most amazing of all is that one of her best samples came from Justin Smeja, the man who shot dead two different Sasquatch. People criticized pictures of his steak sample because the hair looked like it was from a bear, but it simply wasn't. ETA - I have no idea why Bigfoot lack many of the aspects that we have, but I have a feeling these questions will be answered soon enough
	Last edited by OntarioSquatch; 22nd June 2012 at 01:24 PM.

22nd June 2012, 01:28 PM	#1513
I am Bigfoot Critical Thinker Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 307	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch The DNA can't be from one of us because there are obvious variations Dr. Ketchum discovered OS Thinks all huma DNA is identical Quote: Dr. Ketchum got dozens of Unknown Quote: samples that led her to these conclusions. The man behind the scenes of all this is David Paulides. He's not a hoaxer. Many of the samples came from people who At best legitimately found their samples in the woods Quote: The most amazing of all is that one of her best samples came from Justin Smeja, the man who shot dead two different Sasquatch. And the bodies are where? I'm not a hunter. I'd be kinda squeamish about gutting and cleaning an animal. But If I freaking shot 2 bigfoots at least one of them would be stuffed and mounted in my living room.

22nd June 2012, 01:28 PM	#1514
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	Originally Posted by OntarioSquatch Just to clear a few things up. Their feet are almost identical to ours. No, they have a mid-tarsal break. This is a feature found in other apes. The human foot has a fused mid-tarsal joint. I have asked Dr. Meldrum about this, he said it is an adaptation that Bigfoot has made for gripping rough terrain in mountainous areas.
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	__________________ "I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker "I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325 Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

22nd June 2012, 01:29 PM	#1515
Vortigern99 Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 5,016	Back any of that up with evidence, OS, and you've got yourself a discussion. As it is, you're just making unsupported assertions.
	__________________ "I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99 / Noah D. Henson "One thing we've learned (and the Internet confirms this) is that humans will screw just about anything." -- Theagenes