Bigfoot DNA

[calwaterbear]

Good summary of the story and project in the BBC

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2012...-of-the-yeti/1

[Drewbot]

can't get link to work

[GT/CS]

Works for me.

What a ridiculous looking print.

[William Parcher]

Originally Posted by calwaterbear

Good summary of the story and project in the BBC

Quote:

But the fate of these kind of expeditions – and the entire field of cryptozoology - could soon be decided by (Brian) Sykes and his team. If the Oxford Lausanne project finds something interesting, it opens up the possibility of further attention from mainstream science. But another possibility is that the team races through all of the samples in the museum and proves that all of them come from species already known to science. Certainly history suggests this outcome is likely.

For example a "Yeti finger" that lay in the Royal College of Surgeons museum in London since the 1950s was tested in 2011, revealing that the remains were in fact human. Whilst in 2008, tests on hairs collected in India that were also said to have come for a showed they came from a species of Himalayan goat. Countless other examples have met with similar results.

If that is the case, the current saviour of cryptozoology could become its own worst enemy. And then, Dr. Michel Sartori, the Director of the Museum of Zoology in Lausanne in Switzerland says, it will be time for believers to put up or shut up.

"We are challenging the people who claim to have seen the Yeti or the Orang Pendek to show us real evidence, or otherwise hold your peace," he says.

Sartori doesn't really understand cryptozoology and its followers if he thinks "they" would ever shut up.

[Drewbot]

Originally Posted by William Parcher

Sartori doesn't really understand cryptozoology and its followers if he thinks "they" would ever shut up.

true dat.

[LTC8K6]

Remains? What remains?

[Gilbert Syndrome]

Remains to be seen....

[Castro]

Originally Posted by GT/CS

What a ridiculous looking print.

already bedunked!: http://www.redorbit.com/education/re...tan-blue-bear/

I wonder why bigfoots/yetis/siberian snowmen seemed to enjoy sharing their habitat with grizzlies/tibetan blue bears/siberian brown bears, before the internet and "bigfoot is everywhere" age...Maybe they were just good friends after all.

[parnassus]

bigfoots/yetis/siberian snowmen are good neighbors. They don't poop, nor do they eat anything, or kill other animals, or even take up any space. Mostly they hang out in their own dimension.

[Castro]

Nice guys! It's almost as if they didn't exist!

[GT/CS]

Originally Posted by Castro

already bedunked!: http://www.redorbit.com/education/re...tan-blue-bear/

I wonder why bigfoots/yetis/siberian snowmen seemed to enjoy sharing their habitat with grizzlies/tibetan blue bears/siberian brown bears, before the internet and "bigfoot is everywhere" age...Maybe they were just good friends after all.

The bear has a perfectly round big toe?

[Castro]

well, bedunked is not debunked ;-). I always wonder why Shipton took a close-up of a single print of a one-mile trail of footprints.
Here is a link with a possible explanation:
http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/20...ipton-snowman/
Actually, I think it's a fake.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Originally Posted by calwaterbear

Good summary of the story and project in the BBC

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2012...-of-the-yeti/1

After sifting through the hype about being the once-and-for-all "proof of bigfoot" one way or the other (the writer, not scientists):

Quote:

“There are far better ways to spend scarce funding for science than chasing mythological creatures and more than enough real and mind-boggling mysteries in nature to keep many generations of scientists busy,”

You can't prove a negative with DNA, which is great for everyone profiting via this latest fad in 'footery. You sure can produce DNA results for submitted samples, yeah - but the right DNA sample will always be around the next bend.

The right science to be applying is that of charletans, hoaxers, profiteers thereto - not whether bigfoot exists. This I do appreciate. A roll call of people submitting samples and their backgrounds; their alleged sightings - yes, this would be the most illuminating data to compile and analyze scientifically.

[calwaterbear]

ABP is correct, you cannot prove a negative - even with DNA. But assuming Sykes or someone else who had credibility identifies Smejas steak as coyote, or buffalo or whatever else: hers what that proves
1. Smeja is a confirmed liar
2. All who vouch for him and swear they have seen it and or been invloved - they are also liars
3. The Lie detector woman - either is completely incompetant, or a liar - and probably both!

[AttorneyTom]

Originally Posted by Spektator

Adjectival form: "I woke up this morning, man, and the Mystery Machine was like, all schnuffly!"

Adverbial form: "The bigfoot schnuffly examined the Mystery Machine."

Yes.. an active verb ! or a description of an
action... My bad ! Thanks Speck !

Was there a good imprint on the Mystery Mobile and did Scooby find it ?

[Spektator]

Originally Posted by AttorneyTom

Yes.. an active verb ! or a description of an
action... My bad ! Thanks Speck !

Was there a good imprint on the Mystery Mobile and did Scooby find it ?

Rye ron't row!

[AttorneyTom]

Originally Posted by Spektator

Rye ron't row!

I am just speculating here.. but with all that food left in the back of the "mobile" he probably was the catalyst for the find.

[xtifr]

Originally Posted by AttorneyTom

I am just speculating here.. but with all that food left in the back of the "mobile" he probably was the catalyst for the find.

So, in addition to Zagnut bars, BF is a fan of Scooby Snacks?

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by calwaterbear

ABP is correct, you cannot prove a negative - even with DNA. But assuming Sykes or someone else who had credibility identifies Smejas steak as coyote, or buffalo or whatever else: hers what that proves
1. Smeja is a confirmed liar
2. All who vouch for him and swear they have seen it and or been invloved - they are also liars
3. The Lie detector woman - either is completely incompetant, or a liar - and probably both!

I don't think Smeja can be proved to be a liar.

IIRC, Smeja says he found the tissue on his return to the site, many days AFTER he shot the animals and left them behind. So he cannot be held responsible if the tissue turns out to be from a common animal, or a human....he says just found this stuff, not connected to an identifiable body.

Now, there is a story about him having blood from the purported bigfoot on his boots. We don't know whether this has been tested but probably not. But if it were tested, and turned out to be some common animal or human, that is also easily explained away.

by bleever standards, Smeja's story about killing bigfoots can never be debunked, except possibly by confession.

[AttorneyTom]

Originally Posted by xtifr

So, in addition to Zagnut bars, BF is a fan of Scooby Snacks?

It must be so !!)

[Night Walker]

Originally Posted by parnassus

by bleever standards, Smeja's story about killing bigfoots can never be debunked, except possibly by confession.

An interesting social aspect of the 'footer subculture is that fakery and fantasy are ok so long as you don't admit to it...

[AttorneyTom]

Originally Posted by parnassus

by bleever standards, Smeja's story about killing bigfoots can never be debunked, except possibly by confession.

By Believer standards no sighting or statement or thing can ever be not about bf being a real creature. It exists. A confession of a hoax.. they dont believe it ?! A BF would show up.. take of its costume and say we are not real they would say it was just a diversion and a hoax to prove that there is a conspiracy against the existence of BF.

That makes a bit difficult to even have a dialogue. Well.. you know that better than me.

Tom

[LTC8K6]

Don't forget the sasquatch blood on the paper plate or whatever...

[GT/CS]

I still think it's gravy from Thanksgiving dinner.

[Jodie]

Why is the blood even blurry?

[AttorneyTom]

Originally Posted by Jodie

Why is the blood even blurry?

I am thinking that is because of the excitement and drama.. er.. trauma of it being found ? It is tough to hold a camera still when you are taking a pic of the wall covered with your ex mother in laws Swansons turkey/beef gravy !

Are the giblets on the floor ?

[jerrywayne]

Originally Posted by parnassus

I don't think Smeja can be proved to be a liar.

IIRC, Smeja says he found the tissue on his return to the site, many days AFTER he shot the animals and left them behind. So he cannot be held responsible if the tissue turns out to be from a common animal, or a human....he says just found this stuff, not connected to an identifiable body.

Now, there is a story about him having blood from the purported bigfoot on his boots. We don't know whether this has been tested but probably not. But if it were tested, and turned out to be some common animal or human, that is also easily explained away.

by bleever standards, Smeja's story about killing bigfoots can never be debunked, except possibly by confession.

True. Was the (coyote/bear) sample planted? Or was it coincidence?

Best to say hoax until proven otherwise. Smeja must be surprised that this thing has lasted as long as it has. Will he admit to the joke in the end, or carry on, like Gimlin, and become a Bigfoot phenomena superstar?

(Of coarse the joke might be on us -- he killed two homo erecti.)

[jerrywayne]

Originally Posted by GT/CS

Works for me.

What a ridiculous looking print.

It is incredible that an entire cottage industry of yeti books and information and theories were spun off this one photo of a doctored print. It has been suggested somewhere (I'll look it up if challenged) that this hoax was conceived with the hope that more funds for Himalaya climbing would be generated by the interest.

[tsig]

Originally Posted by AttorneyTom

I am thinking that is because of the excitement and drama.. er.. trauma of it being found ? It is tough to hold a camera still when you are taking a pic of the wall covered with your ex mother in laws Swansons turkey/beef gravy !

Are the giblets on the floor ?

Hopefully not your ex mother-in-law's.

[tsig]

Originally Posted by jerrywayne

It is incredible that an entire cottage industry of yeti books and information and theories were spun off this one photo of a doctored print. It has been suggested somewhere (I'll look it up if challenged) that this hoax was conceived with the hope that more funds for Himalaya climbing would be generated by the interest.

There have been whole religions created out of less.

[AlaskaBushPilot]

Originally Posted by jerrywayne

It is incredible that an entire cottage industry of yeti books and information and theories were spun off this one photo of a doctored print. It has been suggested somewhere (I'll look it up if challenged) that this hoax was conceived with the hope that more funds for Himalaya climbing would be generated by the interest.

That certainly was the effect, and a related development was the relative decline in lavish big game hunting expeditions as the conservation ethic eclipsed it through the 1950's.

One man alone, Peter Byrne, transitioned from tiger hunting expeditions directly to Yeti expeditions, doing five of them of up to 8 months each. He turned his tiger hunting concession into a game sanctuary and actually got the U.S. Congress to fund it. From government bureaucrats issuing permits to porters carrying baggage and barmaids - everyone benefits from the Yeti fiction.

[parnassus]

I see that SouthernYahoo, recent schoolee of Calwaterbear, is now whining that Bryan Sykes isn't paying him enough attention. Perhaps he should call Sykes up and tell him a thing or two about DNA.

IIRC, Sykes mentioned a sample size of 20. He was immediately inundated with offers of samples. It seems that Sykes is going to select which samples to run based on how good the "backstory" is. This is a hilarious development, imho. What it amounts to is (probably) the best liars and those who can spell will have their samples run. And the yahoos (nothing personal, SY) will get shut out, and of course will raise hell about it. So come the end of the year, when Sykes publishes his negative study, SY and the others who didn't make the grade will be switching horses, back to pinning their hopes and dreams on Ketchum's "bigfoot is human" paper (which I continue to believe will be published, albeit in some Parks and Recreation journal).

[mustbeso]

I too think Ketchum's paper or whatever it is, will be published but only on a bigfoot friendly website(s). The book/dvd will follow with much more yelling about mean old scientists and skeptics and then it will fade to black.

[parnassus]

Originally Posted by parnassus

...
So come the end of the year, when Sykes publishes his negative study, SY and the others who didn't make the grade will be switching horses, back to pinning their hopes and dreams on Ketchum's "bigfoot is human/hybrid" paper (which I continue to believe will be published, albeit in some Parks and Recreation journal).

corrected by me.

The bleevers, as I have mentioned before, will never run out of base pairs to speculate about. Theirs is not a struggle to learn the truth. Preservation of the belief system is paramount.

[Drewbot]

Originally Posted by parnassus

I see that SouthernYahoo, recent schoolee of Calwaterbear, is now whining that Bryan Sykes isn't paying him enough attention. Perhaps he should call Sykes up and tell him a thing or two about DNA.

IIRC, Sykes mentioned a sample size of 20. He was immediately inundated with offers of samples. It seems that Sykes is going to select which samples to run based on how good the "backstory" is. This is a hilarious development, imho. What it amounts to is (probably) the best liars and those who can spell will have their samples run. And the yahoos (nothing personal, SY) will get shut out, and of course will raise hell about it. So come the end of the year, when Sykes publishes his negative study, SY and the others who didn't make the grade will be switching horses, back to pinning their hopes and dreams on Ketchum's "bigfoot is human" paper (which I continue to believe will be published, albeit in some Parks and Recreation journal).

Is this what you are talking about Parn?

Quote:

I like how they are going to vet the samples before requesting them.

So whoever makes up the best stories will get their sample accepted into the study.

Tease the monkeys at the zoo until they throw a hunk of poo at you, then write a story about how Bigfoot was tossing rocks and howling at you, at your cabin in Wawa Ontario during the blue berry harvest, tell them you are a Native American Elder, a former Army Officer, and work in law enforcement, and have a biology graduate degree. Tell them how it swayed back and forth, broke branches, and howled like a coyote. Your langur doo will be requested stat.

http://www.forums.randi.org/showpost...postcount=1267

[AttorneyTom]

Originally Posted by tsig

Hopefully not your ex mother-in-law's.

It isnt conclusive. I would need or require a better picture ?

Such silliness !

Tom

[southernyahoo]

Originally Posted by parnassus

I see that SouthernYahoo, recent schoolee of Calwaterbear, is now whining that Bryan Sykes isn't paying him enough attention. Perhaps he should call Sykes up and tell him a thing or two about DNA.

IIRC, Sykes mentioned a sample size of 20. He was immediately inundated with offers of samples. It seems that Sykes is going to select which samples to run based on how good the "backstory" is. This is a hilarious development, imho. What it amounts to is (probably) the best liars and those who can spell will have their samples run. And the yahoos (nothing personal, SY) will get shut out, and of course will raise hell about it. So come the end of the year, when Sykes publishes his negative study, SY and the others who didn't make the grade will be switching horses, back to pinning their hopes and dreams on Ketchum's "bigfoot is human" paper (which I continue to believe will be published, albeit in some Parks and Recreation journal).

If I didn't try to submit a sample to him, it would look like I was dodging the bullet, He and Sartori are calling out the cryptozoologists, and I'm calling them out. We'll see what happens.

[parnassus]

The black hole that is Ketchum's DNA lab: specimens get sucked in, and nothing* ever comes out.
Via Robert Lindsay:

Quote:

Shocking news! “Dogman” is apparently real! Dr. Melba Ketchum team says Dogman is a separate entity from Bigfoot, apparently another species or subspecies. This is incredible news.

not to me...

Quote:

An anonymous commenter on the Bigfoot Evidence blog stated that the Ketchum team had sent someone to the warehouse at UCLA where the bones were stored to hunt down the Minarets skull. The skull was found, and somehow the Ketchum team reportedly is now in possession of the Minarets skull!

This WOULD be incredible news. If literally true, I would assume that either someone at UCLA is going to get fired, or someone on Ketchum's team whoever stole it is going to get arrested might be in some trouble with the law. University anthropology departments are not in the business of passing out their dusty Native American specimens to any Tom Dick or Melba who poses as claims to be might or might not be a legitimate researcher and comes in through a broken window in the middle of the night with their hand out.

But Lindsay says ThePaper will overcome the massive FUBAR gravitational forces of the black hole in either in two weeks or nine months. I assume that is subject to revision.
ps:
brilliant comment by "matt":

Quote:

Taxonomy of imaginary species… A brave new world for the life sciences.

*except radiation. I again state for the record that Ketchum's efforts will result in some publication or other. "The Wormrunner's Digest" is long defunct, but I'm sure there is some other worthy mag that will print "What I Did Last Summer and for the Last Three Years that Didn't Turn Out the Way I Thought It Would and Also Dogmen" co-authored by ten Ph.D.s and department chairmen. I keep watching the magazine racks at Safeway and Fry's. I can say that ThePaper has thus far not appeared in "Outdoor Photography", or "Popular Photography" or "Weddings". I'll keep you posted.

[The Shrike]

It doesn't matter where it gets published, there are multiple PhDs working on this now. P. h. Dees, man!

[Jodie]

Parn, I know you think you are funny but this time you aren't wrong.