Bigfoot DNA - Page 4

parnassus · 5th July 2011, 04:21 PM

Leeches ("bloodsuckers") are a good deterrent to would-be swimmers.

Seriously, story telling is a whole thread or forum section in itself. War stories, fish stories, Hoosier daddy, dog ate my homework, "telephone," not to mention translation issues. Oh and tribal people didn't have eyeglasses, not to mention cameras, note pads or embedded reporters.

William Parcher · 5th July 2011, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by The Shrike

. . . And if the risk of abduction was higher in certain areas of "no man's land" between tribal boundaries, then you'd be likely to warn your young'ns to never go there. Of course, if you tell those young'ns that they can't go there because our enemies are there, then you're basically daring them to go to prove their bravery. If, however, you tell them some mystical, giant, shape-shifting, uber-cunning monster/spirits live there, you might have some better luck keeping your kids closer to home.

I'm pretty sure this is why my parents took us to see "Boggy Creek" - so we wouldn't wander too far on our own in the woods. (My kids are easy - I just say "ticks" and you can't pay them enough to go there.)

Why not tell your kids that they will be eaten by a bear, cougar, lion, wolf or smilodon?

parnassus · 5th July 2011, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

The random Bigfooter in Oklahoma who says he watched a Bigfoot and that there is no way that he was mistaken or hoaxed. What "real thing" is his monster originated from?

Whoa, we were talking about the origins of Native American legends. The "knower" in OK is a misidentifier, a hoaxer or a hallucinator. He likely got the idea from Patterson, not from the PNW tribal legends.

Blackdog · 5th July 2011, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

Why not tell your kids that they will be eaten by a bear, cougar, lion, wolf or smilodon?

For the same reasons he listed as a known enemy. The unknown enemy is always more frightening than the known.
After all, those animals you listed were all defeated by humans, the boogyman never has been without supernatural effort, abilities and intervention.

William Parcher · 5th July 2011, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by parnassus

Whoa, we were talking about the origins of Native American legends. The "knower" in OK is a misidentifier, a hoaxer or a hallucinator. He likely got the idea from Patterson, not from the PNW tribal legends.

I understand but I'm trying to put it into perspective for the NA. We don't really know how many Salish claimed to see Sésquac when they were out and about.

A fella comes running into camp. I just saw Sésquac over by the lake! Were there any Sésquac skeptics in the tribe? Did they suggest that he had a misidentification, hallucinated or was just telling a lie? Did any Salish ask for proof of the existence of Sésquac? Did they all just believe? Did they even have a concept of something that can be talked about but does not exist at all?

parnassus · 5th July 2011, 05:23 PM

A PNW tribe of short hairless people is attacked by a wandering tribe from the Plains whose men are taller and hairier. The Plains tribe comes out of the forest at night while most of the men are away hunting seals and attacks the village, and wins because they are bigger and stronger and better fighters; and they take women. Only a few survivors tell the tale and the stories conflict. But they all agree that the attackers were not of The People ie not us. The attackers never return. Over 16 generations the story becomes slightly distorted. Now the attackers were very big and very hairy and not people.
Now some Strain type comes to the tribe and says, "hey, bigfoot exists; you got any giant hair covered forest beast legends?"

"DO WE EVER !!??!"

LTC8K6 · 5th July 2011, 05:52 PM

The hairless tribes never won any of the fights?

parnassus · 5th July 2011, 05:55 PM

Back on topic, Ketchum herself showed up to call Stubstad a liar.
http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/.../page__st__600

Deacondark · 5th July 2011, 06:07 PM

Exactly Parnassas. Native American lore is full of stories that cannot possibly be completely true. They are exaggerations and fabrications designed to teach lessons. Stories of snakes marrying Badgers. Wolves turning into men and marrying women. All kinds of things. Native lore cannot be taken in a literal sense.

Deacondark · 5th July 2011, 06:13 PM

"Parnassus" My bad.

parnassus · 7th July 2011, 02:34 PM

There seems to be some feeling amongst the footers that Bigfoot may seek retribution for the killing of a mother and young squatch (which resulted in a tissue specimen being sent to Ketchum for DNA). So all of us in Northern California better take bigfoot repellent into the woods with us. (Of course, I wouldn't be without it; have carried it for 40 years and it works perfectly. Canon is the brand name; various models.)

Deacondark · 7th July 2011, 04:20 PM

I can 100% guarantee that there will be no bigfoot retaliation. I read that link, and can't believe they are seriously entertaining that thought.

parnassus · 7th July 2011, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by Deacondark

I can 100% guarantee that there will be no bigfoot retaliation. I read that link, and can't believe they are seriously entertaining that thought.

You can't?

HarryHenderson · 7th July 2011, 06:01 PM

Originally Posted by Deacondark

...and can't believe they are seriously entertaining that thought.

The fact we, supposed 'smart people' here at the JREF, have 'seriously entertained the thought' of writing more than one or two words addressing this 'Bigfoot DNA' aspect - as if it deserves even one or two words - is what I can't believe. Sadly, this is the type of inane JREF thread (and there are many) where one proves they have way too much free time on their hands.

atpeace · 7th July 2011, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by HarryHenderson

The fact we, supposed 'smart people' here at the JREF, have 'seriously entertained the thought' of writing more than one or two words addressing this 'Bigfoot DNA' aspect - as if it deserves even one or two words - is what I can't believe. Sadly, this is the type of inane JREF thread (and there are many) where one proves they have way too much free time on their hands.

Would they have had to have mapped bigfoot genome to make the statements they are making? DNA shows bf is "between humans and chimps" etc How long would that take and how much DNA?

NA legends and big hairy ape abductors: Maybe like the Egyptians who never "lost" a battle, is it also possible that NA males would rather have lost their women and children to "monsters-men" than mere men?

parnassus · 7th July 2011, 09:06 PM

Originally Posted by atpeace

Would they have had to have mapped bigfoot genome to make the statements they are making? DNA shows bf is "between humans and chimps" etc How long would that take and how much DNA?

No; a moment; and none.

In other words, it's a lie.

atpeace · 7th July 2011, 11:46 PM

Originally Posted by parnassus

No; a moment; and none.

In other words, it's a lie.

Of course it's a lie, I never thought otherwise.

But I wondered just how ludicrous a theory it was, (besides the obvious fact of bf's nonexistence). I was trying to figure out how you get "halfway" between humans and chimps". If a humans and chimps genome are the same except for x < 4% Bf would be x amount of that x<4% therefore they would have had to have mapped a lot of DNA?

GT/CS · 8th July 2011, 07:46 AM

If you're going to use math regarding bigfoot issues you will probably first need to study up on 'Bigfoot Math' which is a specialized part of 'Bigfoot Science'.

RioBravo · 8th July 2011, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by parnassus

No; a moment; and none.

In other words, it's a lie.

You know this how?

atpeace · 8th July 2011, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by GT/CS

If you're going to use math regarding bigfoot issues you will probably first need to study up on 'Bigfoot Math' which is a specialized part of 'Bigfoot Science'.

Yes, every JREF BF thread has one obvious twist, a nonexistent subject that should end all threads, but I just wondered exactly what the "halfway" DNA claim would mean had they really had DNA. Is it as simple as saying "we drew this conclusion overnight with our brand new shiny DNA evidence"?
Suspension of disbelief is definitely required to answer my question but that is not unusual in bf discussions in relating bf "science" and "math" to real science and math and psychology and anthropology and....

"Oh, what a tangled web [they] weave..."

Deacondark · 8th July 2011, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by parnassus

You can't?

OK, I can believe it. But I wish I didn't. It never ceases to amaze me what these guys will come up with.

Deacondark · 8th July 2011, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by HarryHenderson

The fact we, supposed 'smart people' here at the JREF, have 'seriously entertained the thought' of writing more than one or two words addressing this 'Bigfoot DNA' aspect - as if it deserves even one or two words - is what I can't believe. Sadly, this is the type of inane JREF thread (and there are many) where one proves they have way too much free time on their hands.

I hear ya'. I've always been interested in Bigfoot. As a child I was a believer, now I'm a non-believer. The subject, however is still compelling. Mostly the human aspect: what makes people believe? Why? Why do they so need this hairy forest dweller to exist, to the point of believing the unbelievable, and even fabricating evidence? I have a feeling I'll never have answers. But, I'm a musician, so I've got loads of free time on my hands.

parnassus · 8th July 2011, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by RioBravo

You know this how?

That's my opinion. What's your opinion of the likelihood of it being the truth? That Human mtDNA didn't come from a human? That it came from a stable, fertile, robust hybrid of modern humans and something like a chimp, that human women are being held in Bigfoot clans, that they never escape, that they birth Bigfoots; that this source is reliable, that there even is a creature at all, that it possesses abilities beyond what could considered natural for a primate, that there is no tangible evidence for a real animal of such characteristics....

What is your opinion? That it "might" be true? All of it? Like, the Pope is going to ring your doorbell in the next 30 seconds and give you all the assets of the Catholic Church?
If I were you I wouldn't put off my golf game. Call me closed- minded.

Drewbot · 8th July 2011, 07:04 PM

What a simple, poorly thought-through idea.
Here we have Bigfoot DNA that is manifestly Human, yet we have a creature with a flexible midfoot, gigantic, covered with hair, without apparent tool-use abilities.
What's more, the creatures have been stealing human women, raping them, raising the children as their own.
The humans never hunted down these monsters? never spitted their heads and displayed them on the way to their villages? never locked them up? never gathered a lynch mob and rounded up the lot of them? (a la Frankenstein)

parnassus · 8th July 2011, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by Drewbot

What a simple, poorly thought-through idea.
Here we have Bigfoot DNA that is manifestly Human, yet we have a creature with a flexible midfoot, gigantic, covered with hair, without apparent tool-use abilities.
What's more, the creatures have been stealing human women, raping them, raising the children as their own.
The humans never hunted down these monsters? never spitted their heads and displayed them on the way to their villages? never locked them up? never gathered a lynch mob and rounded up the lot of them? (a la Frankenstein)

Maybe if BF abducts a scientist's daughter....

atpeace · 8th July 2011, 07:19 PM

Originally Posted by Drewbot

What a simple, poorly thought-through idea.
Here we have Bigfoot DNA that is manifestly Human, yet we have a creature with a flexible midfoot, gigantic, covered with hair, without apparent tool-use abilities.
What's more, the creatures have been stealing human women, raping them, raising the children as their own.
The humans never hunted down these monsters? never spitted their heads and displayed them on the way to their villages? never locked them up? never gathered a lynch mob and rounded up the lot of them? (a la Frankenstein)

I figure these early people just made impressionist drawings of them, howled, banged a tree or two and moved on. Apparently, we never learn.

Drewbot · 11th July 2011, 06:24 AM

Originally Posted by atpeace

I figure these early people just made impressionist drawings of them, howled, banged a tree or two and moved on. Apparently, we never learn.

Maybe the early humans felt sorry for the Bigfoots. After all, they have all of this muscle and grace, and have TERRIBLE aiming skills. I mean, those rocks never hit anybody.

Grug: LOOKOUT THORG! The Bigfoot is throwing rocks!!
Thorg: Yes, try and act frightened, he's got such atrocious aim, I kind of feel bad for the fellow.
Grug: <Hits the dirt> WHOA THAT WAS CLOSE! (The Rock lands woefully short)
Thorg: <Nudges Grug> Maybe they're just trying to WARN us! <Snicker>

Deacondark · 11th July 2011, 09:37 AM

Here is an article http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-r...roject-news-5/ on Cryptomundo that shows that the BBB gives Melba Ketchum's DNA Diagnostic business an "F" rating. There is even a list of complaints, a few of which show that she gave results that were not possible for the type of animal she was testing.

parnassus · 11th July 2011, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by Drewbot

Maybe the early humans felt sorry for the Bigfoots. After all, they have all of this muscle and grace, and have TERRIBLE aiming skills. I mean, those rocks never hit anybody.

Grug: LOOKOUT THORG! The Bigfoot is throwing rocks!!
Thorg: Yes, try and act frightened, he's got such atrocious aim, I kind of feel bad for the fellow.
Grug: <Hits the dirt> WHOA THAT WAS CLOSE! (The Rock lands woefully short)
Thorg: <Nudges Grug> Maybe they're just trying to WARN us! <Snicker>

/wants Steve Martin to play Thorg

parnassus · 11th July 2011, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by Deacondark

Here is an article http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-r...roject-news-5/ on Cryptomundo that shows that the BBB gives Melba Ketchum's DNA Diagnostic business an "F" rating. There is even a list of complaints, a few of which show that she gave results that were not possible for the type of animal she was testing.

Getting a complaint and dealing with it in a reasonable way and time frame is part of running a business in an ethical and successful way. 19 complaints to the BBB in two years. That's a lot. In most places the BBB is sort of a sham, such that many people never think of contacting them. So I would guess there are a lot more dissatisfied/defrauded customers who just threw up their hands.

One poster at Cryptomundo offered the "Oh, but Melba is so busy finding bigfoot DNA...." excuse.....sort of like Roger Patterson who never could get around to sending out his newsletter but kept the Boy Scouts' money anyway, at that of those who were stupid enough to send cash. Since Patterson had no bank account and everyone knew what he was up to, he couldn't cash checks. And soon someone will undoubtedly post the "even a hoaxer like Patterson/Ketchum can get lucky" mime.

The Shrike · 14th July 2011, 05:36 AM

Well, you know Parnassus, even a hoaxer like Ketchum can get lucky and have real bigfoot DNA. You gotta think about that.

parnassus · 14th July 2011, 08:44 AM

Originally Posted by The Shrike

Well, you know Parnassus, even a hoaxer like Ketchum can get lucky and have real bigfoot DNA. You gotta think about that.

Too late:

Quote:

"... BBB has nothing to do with the science of genetics, but rather the business end of the operation. DNA Diagnostics appears to have a slight problem getting it's work out on schedule (which conforms quite handily with the timeline on this project unfortunately).

NOTHING has been demonstrated to show that their DNA analyses are of poor quality, or that Dr Ketchum's credentials in DNA analysis are in question."

(None of which is true, by the way.)

Deacondark · 14th July 2011, 09:54 AM

Actually, at least two of her complaints stated that the results obtained were impossible from the samples given. One said that, given the colors and markings of the cats the DNA was from there was no way they got the right results back, and that they had to have gotten samples mixed up. Not sure how far I'd trust her "lab".

Volsquatch · 14th July 2011, 11:30 AM

Deleted per request

LTC8K6 · 14th July 2011, 12:09 PM

Why, you could have gotten the samples from a board with screws in it that had been sitting outside in the weather for months...

Oh wait...

mustbeso · 15th July 2011, 09:30 AM

There is a wealth of (dis)information on Robert Lindsay's blog concerning the shooting of two bigfoots in California. He roams from a government conspiracy to cover up bigfoot to black helicopters taking away the remains, yet in another post says that it was really two bears that were shot. There are several posts on his blog too numerous to link but just a hoot to read through. This is Creekfreak stuff all over again

parnassus · 15th July 2011, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by mustbeso

There is a wealth of (dis)information on Robert Lindsay's blog concerning the shooting of two bigfoots in California. He roams from a government conspiracy to cover up bigfoot to black helicopters taking away the remains, yet in another post says that it was really two bears that were shot. There are several posts on his blog too numerous to link but just a hoot to read through. This is Creekfreak stuff all over again

The sad thing is that Dfoot is putting his reputation* on the line over this insane story, yet he really can't verify it. He is just swallowing the whole story as it was told to him.
* Well, I mean, his reputation among the footers.

Drewbot · 16th July 2011, 03:36 AM

wait, how is Dfoot involved? i missed that part.

parnassus · 16th July 2011, 08:12 AM

He is in the Olympic Project footer group, who are apparently putting out a lot of trailcams. He was contacted by one of the parties to the purported shootings and believes their story to be true. He seems to have advised these guys about what to do. Basically he seems to be vouching for them, but that's not his biggest problem. Being associated with killing a Bigfoot (I know...) is a mortal sin to many of the "heavily committed" bleevers....I seriously would not like to be in his shoes.

William Parcher · 16th July 2011, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by parnassus

He is in the Olympic Project footer group, who are apparently putting out a lot of trailcams.

Parn, you are going to cause a lot of confusion if you use the name Dfoot (Jeff Pruitt) instead of Derekfoot (Derek Randles).

5th July 2011, 04:21 PM	#121
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Leeches ("bloodsuckers") are a good deterrent to would-be swimmers. Seriously, story telling is a whole thread or forum section in itself. War stories, fish stories, Hoosier daddy, dog ate my homework, "telephone," not to mention translation issues. Oh and tribal people didn't have eyeglasses, not to mention cameras, note pads or embedded reporters.
	__________________ 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; 5th July 2011 at 04:25 PM.

5th July 2011, 04:26 PM	#122
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,509	Originally Posted by The Shrike . . . And if the risk of abduction was higher in certain areas of "no man's land" between tribal boundaries, then you'd be likely to warn your young'ns to never go there. Of course, if you tell those young'ns that they can't go there because our enemies are there, then you're basically daring them to go to prove their bravery. If, however, you tell them some mystical, giant, shape-shifting, uber-cunning monster/spirits live there, you might have some better luck keeping your kids closer to home. I'm pretty sure this is why my parents took us to see "Boggy Creek" - so we wouldn't wander too far on our own in the woods. (My kids are easy - I just say "ticks" and you can't pay them enough to go there.) Why not tell your kids that they will be eaten by a bear, cougar, lion, wolf or smilodon?
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

5th July 2011, 04:32 PM	#123
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Originally Posted by William Parcher The random Bigfooter in Oklahoma who says he watched a Bigfoot and that there is no way that he was mistaken or hoaxed. What "real thing" is his monster originated from? Whoa, we were talking about the origins of Native American legends. The "knower" in OK is a misidentifier, a hoaxer or a hallucinator. He likely got the idea from Patterson, not from the PNW tribal legends.
	__________________ 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

5th July 2011, 05:00 PM	#124
Blackdog Critical Thinker Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 470	Originally Posted by William Parcher Why not tell your kids that they will be eaten by a bear, cougar, lion, wolf or smilodon? For the same reasons he listed as a known enemy. The unknown enemy is always more frightening than the known. After all, those animals you listed were all defeated by humans, the boogyman never has been without supernatural effort, abilities and intervention.
Blackdog Critical Thinker Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 470

5th July 2011, 05:02 PM	#125
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 8,509	Originally Posted by parnassus Whoa, we were talking about the origins of Native American legends. The "knower" in OK is a misidentifier, a hoaxer or a hallucinator. He likely got the idea from Patterson, not from the PNW tribal legends. I understand but I'm trying to put it into perspective for the NA. We don't really know how many Salish claimed to see Sésquac when they were out and about. A fella comes running into camp. I just saw Sésquac over by the lake! Were there any Sésquac skeptics in the tribe? Did they suggest that he had a misidentification, hallucinated or was just telling a lie? Did any Salish ask for proof of the existence of Sésquac? Did they all just believe? Did they even have a concept of something that can be talked about but does not exist at all?
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

5th July 2011, 05:23 PM	#126
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	A PNW tribe of short hairless people is attacked by a wandering tribe from the Plains whose men are taller and hairier. The Plains tribe comes out of the forest at night while most of the men are away hunting seals and attacks the village, and wins because they are bigger and stronger and better fighters; and they take women. Only a few survivors tell the tale and the stories conflict. But they all agree that the attackers were not of The People ie not us. The attackers never return. Over 16 generations the story becomes slightly distorted. Now the attackers were very big and very hairy and not people. Now some Strain type comes to the tribe and says, "hey, bigfoot exists; you got any giant hair covered forest beast legends?" "DO WE EVER !!??!"
	__________________ 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; 5th July 2011 at 05:37 PM.

5th July 2011, 05:52 PM	#127
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,692	The hairless tribes never won any of the fights?
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

5th July 2011, 05:55 PM	#128
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Back on topic, Ketchum herself showed up to call Stubstad a liar. http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/.../page__st__600
	__________________ 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

5th July 2011, 06:07 PM	#129
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	Exactly Parnassas. Native American lore is full of stories that cannot possibly be completely true. They are exaggerations and fabrications designed to teach lessons. Stories of snakes marrying Badgers. Wolves turning into men and marrying women. All kinds of things. Native lore cannot be taken in a literal sense.

5th July 2011, 06:13 PM	#130
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	"Parnassus" My bad.

7th July 2011, 02:34 PM	#131
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	There seems to be some feeling amongst the footers that Bigfoot may seek retribution for the killing of a mother and young squatch (which resulted in a tissue specimen being sent to Ketchum for DNA). So all of us in Northern California better take bigfoot repellent into the woods with us. (Of course, I wouldn't be without it; have carried it for 40 years and it works perfectly. Canon is the brand name; various models.)
	__________________ 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

7th July 2011, 04:20 PM	#132
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	I can 100% guarantee that there will be no bigfoot retaliation. I read that link, and can't believe they are seriously entertaining that thought.

7th July 2011, 05:34 PM	#133
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Originally Posted by Deacondark I can 100% guarantee that there will be no bigfoot retaliation. I read that link, and can't believe they are seriously entertaining that thought. You can't?
	__________________ 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

7th July 2011, 06:01 PM	#134
HarryHenderson Muse Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: All up in your business Posts: 706	Originally Posted by Deacondark ...and can't believe they are seriously entertaining that thought. The fact we, supposed 'smart people' here at the JREF, have 'seriously entertained the thought' of writing more than one or two words addressing this 'Bigfoot DNA' aspect - as if it deserves even one or two words - is what I can't believe. Sadly, this is the type of inane JREF thread (and there are many) where one proves they have way too much free time on their hands.
	__________________ "The very existence of flame-throwers proves that some time, somewhere, someone said to themselves, you know I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done." - George Carlin

7th July 2011, 07:41 PM	#135
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by HarryHenderson The fact we, supposed 'smart people' here at the JREF, have 'seriously entertained the thought' of writing more than one or two words addressing this 'Bigfoot DNA' aspect - as if it deserves even one or two words - is what I can't believe. Sadly, this is the type of inane JREF thread (and there are many) where one proves they have way too much free time on their hands. Would they have had to have mapped bigfoot genome to make the statements they are making? DNA shows bf is "between humans and chimps" etc How long would that take and how much DNA? NA legends and big hairy ape abductors: Maybe like the Egyptians who never "lost" a battle, is it also possible that NA males would rather have lost their women and children to "monsters-men" than mere men?
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Last edited by atpeace; 7th July 2011 at 07:42 PM.

7th July 2011, 09:06 PM	#136
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Originally Posted by atpeace Would they have had to have mapped bigfoot genome to make the statements they are making? DNA shows bf is "between humans and chimps" etc How long would that take and how much DNA? No; a moment; and none. In other words, it's a lie.
	__________________ 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

7th July 2011, 11:46 PM	#137
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by parnassus No; a moment; and none. In other words, it's a lie. Of course it's a lie, I never thought otherwise. But I wondered just how ludicrous a theory it was, (besides the obvious fact of bf's nonexistence). I was trying to figure out how you get "halfway" between humans and chimps". If a humans and chimps genome are the same except for x < 4% Bf would be x amount of that x<4% therefore they would have had to have mapped a lot of DNA?
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208

8th July 2011, 07:46 AM	#138
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,592	If you're going to use math regarding bigfoot issues you will probably first need to study up on 'Bigfoot Math' which is a specialized part of 'Bigfoot Science'.
GT/CS Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 3,592	__________________ 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

8th July 2011, 09:19 AM	#139
RioBravo New Blood Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 15	Originally Posted by parnassus No; a moment; and none. In other words, it's a lie. You know this how?
RioBravo New Blood Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 15

8th July 2011, 10:03 AM	#140
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by GT/CS If you're going to use math regarding bigfoot issues you will probably first need to study up on 'Bigfoot Math' which is a specialized part of 'Bigfoot Science'. Yes, every JREF BF thread has one obvious twist, a nonexistent subject that should end all threads, but I just wondered exactly what the "halfway" DNA claim would mean had they really had DNA. Is it as simple as saying "we drew this conclusion overnight with our brand new shiny DNA evidence"? Suspension of disbelief is definitely required to answer my question but that is not unusual in bf discussions in relating bf "science" and "math" to real science and math and psychology and anthropology and.... "Oh, what a tangled web [they] weave..."
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208

8th July 2011, 12:29 PM	#141
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	Originally Posted by parnassus You can't? OK, I can believe it. But I wish I didn't. It never ceases to amaze me what these guys will come up with.

8th July 2011, 12:34 PM	#142
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	Originally Posted by HarryHenderson The fact we, supposed 'smart people' here at the JREF, have 'seriously entertained the thought' of writing more than one or two words addressing this 'Bigfoot DNA' aspect - as if it deserves even one or two words - is what I can't believe. Sadly, this is the type of inane JREF thread (and there are many) where one proves they have way too much free time on their hands. I hear ya'. I've always been interested in Bigfoot. As a child I was a believer, now I'm a non-believer. The subject, however is still compelling. Mostly the human aspect: what makes people believe? Why? Why do they so need this hairy forest dweller to exist, to the point of believing the unbelievable, and even fabricating evidence? I have a feeling I'll never have answers. But, I'm a musician, so I've got loads of free time on my hands.

8th July 2011, 01:22 PM	#143
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Originally Posted by RioBravo You know this how? That's my opinion. What's your opinion of the likelihood of it being the truth? That Human mtDNA didn't come from a human? That it came from a stable, fertile, robust hybrid of modern humans and something like a chimp, that human women are being held in Bigfoot clans, that they never escape, that they birth Bigfoots; that this source is reliable, that there even is a creature at all, that it possesses abilities beyond what could considered natural for a primate, that there is no tangible evidence for a real animal of such characteristics.... What is your opinion? That it "might" be true? All of it? Like, the Pope is going to ring your doorbell in the next 30 seconds and give you all the assets of the Catholic Church? If I were you I wouldn't put off my golf game. Call me closed- minded.
	__________________ 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; 8th July 2011 at 01:29 PM.

8th July 2011, 07:04 PM	#144
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	What a simple, poorly thought-through idea. Here we have Bigfoot DNA that is manifestly Human, yet we have a creature with a flexible midfoot, gigantic, covered with hair, without apparent tool-use abilities. What's more, the creatures have been stealing human women, raping them, raising the children as their own. The humans never hunted down these monsters? never spitted their heads and displayed them on the way to their villages? never locked them up? never gathered a lynch mob and rounded up the lot of them? (a la Frankenstein)
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

8th July 2011, 07:18 PM	#145
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Originally Posted by Drewbot What a simple, poorly thought-through idea. Here we have Bigfoot DNA that is manifestly Human, yet we have a creature with a flexible midfoot, gigantic, covered with hair, without apparent tool-use abilities. What's more, the creatures have been stealing human women, raping them, raising the children as their own. The humans never hunted down these monsters? never spitted their heads and displayed them on the way to their villages? never locked them up? never gathered a lynch mob and rounded up the lot of them? (a la Frankenstein) Maybe if BF abducts a scientist's daughter....
	__________________ 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

8th July 2011, 07:19 PM	#146
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208	Originally Posted by Drewbot What a simple, poorly thought-through idea. Here we have Bigfoot DNA that is manifestly Human, yet we have a creature with a flexible midfoot, gigantic, covered with hair, without apparent tool-use abilities. What's more, the creatures have been stealing human women, raping them, raising the children as their own. The humans never hunted down these monsters? never spitted their heads and displayed them on the way to their villages? never locked them up? never gathered a lynch mob and rounded up the lot of them? (a la Frankenstein) I figure these early people just made impressionist drawings of them, howled, banged a tree or two and moved on. Apparently, we never learn.
atpeace Guest Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 208

11th July 2011, 06:24 AM	#147
Drewbot Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3,846	Originally Posted by atpeace I figure these early people just made impressionist drawings of them, howled, banged a tree or two and moved on. Apparently, we never learn. Maybe the early humans felt sorry for the Bigfoots. After all, they have all of this muscle and grace, and have TERRIBLE aiming skills. I mean, those rocks never hit anybody. Grug: LOOKOUT THORG! The Bigfoot is throwing rocks!! Thorg: Yes, try and act frightened, he's got such atrocious aim, I kind of feel bad for the fellow. Grug: <Hits the dirt> WHOA THAT WAS CLOSE! (The Rock lands woefully short) Thorg: <Nudges Grug> Maybe they're just trying to WARN us! <Snicker>
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

11th July 2011, 09:37 AM	#148
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	Here is an article http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-r...roject-news-5/ on Cryptomundo that shows that the BBB gives Melba Ketchum's DNA Diagnostic business an "F" rating. There is even a list of complaints, a few of which show that she gave results that were not possible for the type of animal she was testing.

11th July 2011, 11:02 AM	#149
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Originally Posted by Drewbot Maybe the early humans felt sorry for the Bigfoots. After all, they have all of this muscle and grace, and have TERRIBLE aiming skills. I mean, those rocks never hit anybody. Grug: LOOKOUT THORG! The Bigfoot is throwing rocks!! Thorg: Yes, try and act frightened, he's got such atrocious aim, I kind of feel bad for the fellow. Grug: <Hits the dirt> WHOA THAT WAS CLOSE! (The Rock lands woefully short) Thorg: <Nudges Grug> Maybe they're just trying to WARN us! <Snicker> /wants Steve Martin to play Thorg
	__________________ 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

11th July 2011, 11:41 AM	#150
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Originally Posted by Deacondark Here is an article http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-r...roject-news-5/ on Cryptomundo that shows that the BBB gives Melba Ketchum's DNA Diagnostic business an "F" rating. There is even a list of complaints, a few of which show that she gave results that were not possible for the type of animal she was testing. Getting a complaint and dealing with it in a reasonable way and time frame is part of running a business in an ethical and successful way. 19 complaints to the BBB in two years. That's a lot. In most places the BBB is sort of a sham, such that many people never think of contacting them. So I would guess there are a lot more dissatisfied/defrauded customers who just threw up their hands. One poster at Cryptomundo offered the "Oh, but Melba is so busy finding bigfoot DNA...." excuse.....sort of like Roger Patterson who never could get around to sending out his newsletter but kept the Boy Scouts' money anyway, at that of those who were stupid enough to send cash. Since Patterson had no bank account and everyone knew what he was up to, he couldn't cash checks. And soon someone will undoubtedly post the "even a hoaxer like Patterson/Ketchum can get lucky" mime.
	__________________ 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

14th July 2011, 05:36 AM	#151
The Shrike Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: USA Posts: 1,818	Well, you know Parnassus, even a hoaxer like Ketchum can get lucky and have real bigfoot DNA. You gotta think about that.

14th July 2011, 08:44 AM	#152
parnassus Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: California Posts: 2,565	Originally Posted by The Shrike Well, you know Parnassus, even a hoaxer like Ketchum can get lucky and have real bigfoot DNA. You gotta think about that. Too late: Quote: "... BBB has nothing to do with the science of genetics, but rather the business end of the operation. DNA Diagnostics appears to have a slight problem getting it's work out on schedule (which conforms quite handily with the timeline on this project unfortunately). NOTHING has been demonstrated to show that their DNA analyses are of poor quality, or that Dr Ketchum's credentials in DNA analysis are in question." (None of which is true, by the way.)
	__________________ 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

14th July 2011, 09:54 AM	#153
Deacondark Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 331	Actually, at least two of her complaints stated that the results obtained were impossible from the samples given. One said that, given the colors and markings of the cats the DNA was from there was no way they got the right results back, and that they had to have gotten samples mixed up. Not sure how far I'd trust her "lab".

14th July 2011, 11:30 AM	#154
Volsquatch Scholar Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 77	Deleted per request
Volsquatch Scholar Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 77	Last edited by Volsquatch; 14th July 2011 at 12:09 PM.

14th July 2011, 12:09 PM	#155
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,692	Why, you could have gotten the samples from a board with screws in it that had been sitting outside in the weather for months... Oh wait...
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?