Bigfoot DNA

[Deacondark]

Reading through this it's painfully obvious that every bit of "evidence" is a "so and so claims" type of deal. I wonder how long before it all blows up in their faces?

[parnassus]

My bad.

[parnassus]

It is now being reported that Dr. Ketchum is saying her paper may not be published until year end "and there is something to it...."

That should certainly reassure the Better Business Bureau.

[Deacondark]

How long can they keep pushing this thing back? I'm willing to bet the paper ends with the word "Inconclusive"

[mustbeso]

I doubt that anything will ever be published. It seems that most of the people involved in this are folding their collective tents. Even Robert Lindsay has gone strangely silent of late which makes me wonder if he has had an attack of sanity regarding the 'two dead bigfoots' and the bigfoot "steak" sent to Ketchum.

[Tontar]

Originally Posted by GT/CS

Well, at least we've been assured that it's a extremely professional research team! Looks like the results will hold up to the most rigorous scrutiny.

"Because of the apparently very high quality of the ongoing research efforts over several years, no information has 'leaked' into the public sphere to date. This speaks well for the professionalism and dedication of all of the individuals on Ed Smith's various research teams; covering up to 5 different locations, mostly in Oklahoma.

Because they have kept a tight rein on things the mainstream media has been kept entirely out of the loop - exactly where it should be - until all documentation and experimental repetition has been achieved and concluded.

What I can say is that their intention is to temporarily capture a juvenile BF for the purpose of filming the team of credentialed scientists as they take blood, tissue and hair samples for testing; after which the individual will be immediately released, unharmed, back into his own original territory. This will facilitate the scientific identification of the species once and for all. We all wait with 'bated breath."

Capturing a juvenile means that it will be small enough to fit normal human proportions, as in it will be easy to put a person in a suit and pull off an alien autopsy sort of video. Question the authenticity of the video, ask where the body is, well, they let it go.

[HarryHenderson]

Originally Posted by parnassus

It is now being reported that Dr. Ketchum is saying her paper may not be published until year end "and there is something to it...."

That should certainly reassure the Better Business Bureau.

Comedy!!

[ReverendClog]

I would greatly appreciate that readers of the following post understand that it was made in a humourous spirit and intends no offence to any person.


This DNA business can't end well for the protagonists of a 'real' Bigfoot, and while I have found several, (if not most), of those nice people on the BFF to be decent, albeit misguided folk, some of them are unmitigated fruitloops.
I do love the idea of Bigfoot, and from the first moment I saw the PGF as a child I wanted it to be real, but Bigfoot, like the tooth fairy and the Queen Mothers wooden teeth, always disappoint when common sense is applied.

Far more eloquent and knowledgeable people have discounted and recounted Bigfoot and its contradictory nature - from the elusive hairy man to the scientific contradictions of North Americas largest and most wide-spread unfound primate, the supernatural vanishing, eye-shining, bullet-proof, swamp dwelling, coastal, inland, temperate, cold weather, shy, gregarious and habituated, gentle and overtly aggressive Bigfoot.

I love Bigfoot and more specifically, I love the idea of 'super' big foot and I wonder if that is the attraction that the myth has for those who wish to believe at any cost. To these folk Bigfoot is an idealised 'superman', the archetypal obermensch, free from human morality and superior by virtue of his strength and improved 'animal cunning', all natural virtues which modern 'city folk' have lost.
After all one of the most common refutations from the Bigfoot crowd is, 'you don't know the land, man, natives have seen him and you won't 'cos they can smell that you are a fed/shill/forestry commission agent, etc.

Is Bigfoot behind the 'freeman on the land movement' ?, and is the Bigfoot movement racist?. Do we know of any instances where people of African-American ancestry have had sightings?. Is it racist to ask?.

The above seems oddly valid to me, for in my ignorance, I know of no sightings of Bigfoot that are testified to by African-Americans, so is Bigfoot a construct of the European, 'jungles and forests are home to devilish creatures', (a mindset that I doubt existed until the industrialised age, when people where turning away from the pioneer mindset and from being in a 'natural' habitat - the 'wild' became a place of caution and fear, rather than and environment in which man had and is supreme, from the invention of the spear, (100,000 bc ?), onwards.

I know that the above is full of gaps, from Gimlin to Marx, but I think it is time to give up on Bigfoot.

Goodbye Biggie, and thanks for all the shills.

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by ReverendClog

Is Bigfoot behind the 'freeman on the land movement' ?, and is the Bigfoot movement racist?. Do we know of any instances where people of African-American ancestry have had sightings?. Is it racist to ask?.

The above seems oddly valid to me, for in my ignorance, I know of no sightings of Bigfoot that are testified to by African-Americans, so is Bigfoot a construct of the European, 'jungles and forests are home to devilish creatures', (a mindset that I doubt existed until the industrialised age, when people where turning away from the pioneer mindset and from being in a 'natural' habitat - the 'wild' became a place of caution and fear, rather than and environment in which man had and is supreme, from the invention of the spear, (100,000 bc ?), onwards.

There are very few AAs involved in Bigfootery or who claim encounters. It is very disproportionate compared to the population in general. It seems to be an intrigue/pastime of "white folks" more than anybody else. Within that group there also seems to be an overrepresentation of fundamentally religious (evangelical) people. That's my observation but others have said the same.

[ReverendClog]

Thanks William Parcher, I have wondered. Do you think it is worth raising as an issue over at the BFF, ".

I did not know that it had been commented on before, are you able to indulge me and provide a link or direction to such. It is okay if not I understand and very much respect you.

[William Parcher]

It has come up on occasion here and on the old BFF. I doubt that they would object if you start a thread on the topic.

The old and new BFF forbid the discussion of religion and politics. This has a lot to do with there being many Bigfooters who are quick to argue for creationism. Yeah, it has a disproportionate number who are fundamental religious and also Republican/Conservative politics.

[ReverendClog]

Is it possible that Bigfoot is a phantasm of politics, rather like the 'ubermensch' of Nazi politics?. I ask because I am a relative virgin with regards to Bigfoot politics.

[William Parcher]

I don't know. About the only explanation you'll get from a believer is that they believe (or know) because it's out there (not in their heads).

Bigfoot is a cultish folk tale. You know, we're getting off topic for this thread. There are other threads that would be better for this talk.

[William Parcher]

Some sociologists recently checked out Bigfootery...

Here.

Quote:

In general, the devoted Bigfoot researcher is male, college educated, above average income, and politically and religiously conservative. Lots of evangelical religious into Bigfoot.

And here.

Quote:

Bigfoot hunters were perhaps the most surprising group, (Christopher) Bader said. They defied all stereotypes of paranormal pursuers who wear flowing clothes and commune with spirits.

Instead, they were very serious, extremely conventional and often highly professional. In fact, their beliefs contradicted their lifestyles so much that many of them were plagued by anxiety, which drove them even further to stick to their beliefs.

"Their friends and family consider them kooky," Bader said. "Everyone is saying they're nuts. So, they have a real aggressive style and seriousness of purpose. They want to prove everyone wrong."

For one hunter, the search began one day when he was out in the woods and, he swears, he saw Bigfoot cross his path.

"Imagine the stress that would put on your life," Bader said. "You consider yourself a normal, smart guy, and you think you just saw a giant monkey walk in front of you. Now, you have to fit that into your life."

"These are not people trying to explain a crazy world," he added. "They are trying to prove to themselves that they aren't crazy."

[John Albert]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

The old and new BFF forbid the discussion of religion and politics. This has a lot to do with there being many Bigfooters who are quick to argue for creationism. Yeah, it has a disproportionate number who are fundamental religious and also Republican/Conservative politics.

Maybe I'll make up some "I believe in Bigfoot and I vote" bumperstickers to hawk on the BFF.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Quote:

"They are trying to prove to themselves that they aren't crazy."

Which is interesting because an illusion, being a hoax victim, a subliminal suggestion, or any other explanation is possible for the brain seeing a bigfoot that is not there.

You aren't crazy for seeing it. So this neurosis being described is of their own doing. What's the big deal admitting an illusion, hoax, suggestion, etc is possible?

[Drewbot]

Seeing Bigfoot doesn't make them crazy, thinking that other people will think they are crazy, makes them crazy.

[parnassus]

Dynamic Duo Decide to Disclose Details of DNA

David Paulides and Melba Ketchum are on the sched for a footer hoohrah in Honobia OK on Oct 1. They did not make a joint announcement and they are not together on the program. Long/short: I'm guessing Dr. Ketchum is pulling out of the Bigfoot ballyhoo business while she still has a barely viable reputation as a vet/forensic lab, leaving Paulides (and Erickson et al) to try and convince the world that human DNA came from a Bigfoot.
I could be wrong. She is on the proverbial tiger's back... Jumping off may be more dangerous than staying on...

[William Parcher]

Why would she go to a Bigfoot conference to announce that "this DNA stuff isn't Bigfoot and I'm outta here"... instead of just simply saying that to a few different people and maybe also posting it with her BFF account?

[LTC8K6]

Why would she go just to announce that it's 100% human, or that it's inconclusive, or that it's cow?

None of those is going to go over well...Patty certainly couldn't be 100% human, unless she was BH...

[William Parcher]

Conference organizers know in advance what the speaker topic is going to be about. If her talk is a personal bail-out or total collapse of the project (her saying it isn't Bigfoot), then a lot of attendees are going to be angry with the organizers for not warning them.

[LTC8K6]

My money is on the 100% human announcement and then ROFL type ridicule...

They all call out "I am bigfoot!"

[River]

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

My money is on the 100% human announcement and then ROFL type ridicule...

They all call out "I am bigfoot!"

Funny enough, that is close to the truth. It is those enthusiasts that often "find" or create bigfoot evidence.

[Deacondark]

All of the stalling and shell game stuff just reeks of people trying to find a way out of their claims. The so called "bigfoot toenail" picture has caused Erickson to send nasty threats to several websites, demanding that they remove it from their page. On page even replaced it with their own artists rendering, and The EP demanded that they remove that too.

[parnassus]

WP
I have been to a bigfoot conference and i seriously doubt that speakers submitted their content in advance. Maybe not even a meaningful title if the speaker is known.

I can't imagine she will be a viable forensic lab or witness if she pursues this much longer. Word gets around very quickly in the legal community. All it takes is one probing cross examination and her forensic business is caput.

What would be your guess on what she's gonna say?

[GT/CS]

Regarding letting the organizers know the details of the speakers' material, the Henner orgy fiasco comes to mind.





That should make for some interesting Google hits!

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by parnassus

What would be your guess on what she's gonna do?

"We've got the DNA profile for Bigfoot and we're working on getting it published in a journal."

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by parnassus

I can't imagine she will be a viable forensic lab or witness if she pursues this much longer. Word gets around very quickly in the legal community. All it takes is one probing cross examination and her forensic business is caput.

It's already too late now. Try putting her name into a Google search and see what you see. Bigfoot. Bigfoot. Bigfoot. The Scarlet Letter "B" is on her forehead.

[Deacondark]

What I find disturbing is that, if you look at this from the 'footer's point of veiw, they cant go wrong.

Say the DNA tests as "human" which is the rumors I keep hearing: In their mind they have no doubt that it came from a Bigfoot, so the "human" reading just makes them a relative of ours. They can't fathom the possibility that it came from a person. It's a sickness really.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

"We've got the DNA profile for Bigfoot and we're working on getting it published in a journal."

Well, that is sure the wrong way to get it published in a journal.

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by parnassus

Well, that is sure the wrong way to get it published in a journal.

But couldn't that also be said about her October 2010 Internet radio show interview where she said that she has Bigfoot DNA for sure?

[RayG]

Originally Posted by parnassus

What would be your guess on what she's gonna say?

Stuff that's already been said in the past. Stuff like:

The initial series of tests haved proved inconclusive, but they are potentially very exciting and promising. (2008)

or

The DNA has proven impossible to identify, and I've never encountered any DNA that I couldn't identify before. (2001)

RayG

[William Parcher]

But she already said last year that this time the test is conclusive and it is Bigfoot.

[Deacondark]

Originally Posted by RayG

Stuff that's already been said in the past. Stuff like:

The initial series of tests haved proved inconclusive, but they are potentially very exciting and promising. (2008)

or

The DNA has proven impossible to identify, and I've never encountered any DNA that I couldn't identify before. (2001)

RayG

I'm just wondering how long they think they can play this hand. Eventually someone is going to call them on this stuff, right? Or do they just ignore it when it happens?

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by Deacondark

I'm just wondering how long they think they can play this hand. Eventually someone is going to call them on this stuff, right? Or do they just ignore it when it happens?

She already publicly said last year that if her paper is rejected by scientific journals it is because of anti-Bigfoot bias not because she made any error(s).

[Deacondark]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

She already publicly said last year that if her paper is rejected by scientific journals it is because of anti-Bigfoot bias not because she made any error(s).

It's never a good sign when someone sets up an "out" before the fact. Seems like she already knows they will be laughing at her.

"Footer Logic" strikes again.

[Drewbot]

'The findings are unlike any thing we've seen, however the Scientific Community has blackballed us and will not publish our findings. Until we publish we cannot give out any details about our findings'

[Deacondark]

Originally Posted by Drewbot

'The findings are unlike any thing we've seen, however the Scientific Community has blackballed us and will not publish our findings. Until we publish we cannot give out any details about our findings'

"But keep sending those checks, so we can continue justifying your beliefs, er, continue our important research."

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

But she already said last year that this time the test is conclusive and it is Bigfoot.

Well, I can't argue with that logic if that is a quote, though I do think this time it will hit the wire services, not fly under the radar.

[Deacondark]

A careful examination of Dr. Ketchums Facebook page reveals that she has a large interest in the "Twilight" Saga. Not much new info about Bigfoot DNA though.