|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Mar 30, 2013 6:21:40 GMT -8
I ran across this youtube video a few weeks ago. I would call myself a cautious skeptic, but after listening to this man, I must admit I was "scratching my head". He was a very well educated man, and his reasoning was based on scientific data. As a graduate from Berkley, with a masters degree, his opinion bears a good deal of credibility and respect. This should be of some interest to anyone who considers themselves a naturalist. Tom
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Grinter on Mar 30, 2013 17:50:43 GMT -8
Clearly seems to be an intelligent man, but an engineer does not make for an expert in genetics/zoology. He is obviously misguided. I'd trust him to build a bridge (or whatever he engineered) - but not to understand raw molecular data. What isn't clear from the video is that the samples they are talking about are from DIFFERENT sources. They didn't get both nuclear/mtDNA from the same sample - but form different ones. Sample 1 is the toenail which mitochondrial DNA shows was human. Same 2 was non-human, whatever it was. But for some reason they are connecting these dots (which any scientist should know you can't connect 2 non-related things). Not to mention these samples must have been ridiculously contaminated. Sequencing human DNA requires a ridiculous level of care to guarantee your results - one single skin flake and you're results are wrong. If you handled a clump of fur from a bear and sequenced it with human primers I'd practically guarantee you'd find human DNA. So instead of trying to do the science right they now they think this is a "human-hybrid" creature living in the woods that is "more human than ape". Face-palm. There is a great analysis of this ridiculousness here: www.livescience.com/27140-bigfoot-dna-study-questioned.htmlPoint by point this entire story is nonsense. It's horrible science being done by people who don't understand what they are doing. |
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Mar 30, 2013 20:10:44 GMT -8
After reading the article you posted, it seems as though the author was a bit biased. Anyhow, I must admit I agree with you that there are lots of "empty spaces" in this so called research. One big question I have is...If the evidence is so compelling, why is Dr. Ketchum so secretive, and why did she so readily dismiss the parties she got the samples from in the first place? Why did she hire a lawyer to draw up a ridiculous agreement, and then expect her colleagues to sign it,(all the while probably knowing they wouldn't!). Something rather strange going on here.
That being said, there still remains the fact that there are many sightings each year, and by very credible people. Also there are casts of footprints with such detail as dermal ridges, that experts agree could not be hoaxed. I know I am stating this at the risk of being ridiculed, but remember I am not claiming any of this as fact, just what I have researched for my own curiosity. I guess this will be mulled over by skeptics and believers until some real hard evidence comes about. Anyway my position is still cautiosly skeptimistic. Tom
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Mar 31, 2013 10:46:27 GMT -8
How is it that we have fossil records of such things as saber-toothed cats in North America as well as a host of other ancient mammals, but no fossils of hominids other than humans in North America? If bigfoot was an actual animal why are there no fossil records? I'll tell you why: because bigfoot is an apparition from the spirit world. A poltergeist, if you will. Same for UFOs. They can be seen on camera but they never leave behind broken tail lights or other physical evidence. Not to mention they violate the laws of physics. The UFOs are also spiritual phenomona. Not from outer space, but from inner space. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.  |
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Mar 31, 2013 14:38:15 GMT -8
Well, OK then! I personally think that everyone has the right to believe in whatever they choose, be it religion, politics, science, or spiritual matters. I have always been the kind to question something, at the same time keeping an open mind. I suppose thats why I have had a personal struggle with the belief in a religion that says I must have "faith", in order to believe and be "saved". This presentation by Lloyd Pye, is an attempt to make some sense out of all the evidence that has been accumilated. Although some of his viewpoints are somewhat far fetched, at the very least arbitrary, he does a good job of backing up his reasoning. See what you think. Tom
|
|
|
|
Post by 58chevy on Apr 3, 2013 16:41:01 GMT -8
The best scientific treatise on the Bigfoot question is the book "Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science" by Jeff Meldrum. Dr. Meldrum is an anthropologist who specializes in the evolution of bipedalism. Good read. Available on Amazon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by papilio28570 on Apr 3, 2013 18:40:05 GMT -8
It continually amazes me that no one has yet to connect the dots. The truth of the matter is that Sasquatch are the ETs that fly the UFOs....
Duhh...
The reason why there is no fossil evidence is that they are extremely careful to not contaminate our planet. Ever hear of the butterfly effect?
Now you know!
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Apr 4, 2013 10:21:35 GMT -8
Hmmm...I hadn't thought of that.  |
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Apr 4, 2013 15:55:58 GMT -8
I hadn't either. Whether or not you believe, is in my opinion your right as stated before. Many of the same people that laugh at others about their belief in sasquatch are very religious, and yet they believe very firmly in something they have not seen, basing their entire case on a book that was written very long ago. Perhaps it is a threat to their belief, somehow proving evolution. There is in fact a great deal of evidence that supports the existence of these creatures, which in my opinion is not spiritual, but biological. The questions asked by skeptics regarding thier existence can be explained logically. Why has no-one ever found a skeleton or corpse of bigfoot? Fact is no-one has ever found the skeleton of a bear or mountain lion that died of natural causes....ever! We know they exist. There is no fossil record of sasquatch. True, but it is a fact that there is no fossil record of Homo sapiens, and we know we exist. Truth is, in order to produce a fossil, there has to be a very specific chain of events that take place over a very, very long time. The soils in most heavily forested areas where these creatures live is highly acidic, and therefore lends itself very poorly to the process of fossilization. I believe that if these creatures exist, the reason we haven't come very close to collecting a specimen could be due to the fact that they are quite intelligent, strategically superior to us in their habitat, therefore extremely good at avoiding humans. My guess is they would know more about us than we think, and are probably aware that a human carrying a high powered rifle is dangerous. If someone doubts their existence, then go into the Sierras, Rockies, or remote Appalachians alone, without a gun, and stay out there all day and night. Maybe your question will be answered.
|
|
|
|
Post by admin on Apr 4, 2013 16:31:30 GMT -8
I don't doubt their existence actually. I am proposing they are intra-dimensional beings.
|
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Apr 4, 2013 17:42:15 GMT -8
Im' not sure if they are truly real, but I am starting to lean towards seriously considering their existence. Aside from all the mounting evidence which includes casts of footprints that are so detailed they have been declared authentic by experts. Their findings are most compelling to say the least. Also consider that there were and still are reports of sightings by indigenous people, and tribes, that have no clue regarding any media attention these creatures have gotten, and they all report seeing the same kind of creature, thousands of miles apart. Then there are reports from certain people in modern civilization, some of which are rather popular, that are so well detailed, they simply seem very real! Here is one I find most interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Apr 4, 2013 18:23:45 GMT -8
Here is an interesting piece of footage by Paul Freeman in the Blue Mountains of Washington state. It has been highly regarded by many researchers, including Dr. Jeff Meldrum from Idaho State University. In my opinion it seems very authentic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Grinter on Apr 4, 2013 19:26:46 GMT -8
Guys - there are entomologists who trek the jungles of Papua to find the rarest insects on earth. Yet a population of 500lb giant apes live in the woods of Washington and we don't have a single shred of real evidence? No hair, scat, dna, bones, bodies, anything??? skepdic.com/bigfoot.htmlThe whole "dermal ridge" thing is not proof, just an incrementally better hoax. One guy who had better artistic skill did a better job of making a blend between his foot and an ape footprint. Show me the foot of bigfoot and we'll talk. I love that last video beetlehorn posted - "conforms to the known morphology of bigfoot". I'll translate to: "conforms to an idiot in an ape suit, just like every other idiot who has been in an ape suit pretending to be bigfoot" And in response to above - I have spent all night alone in the Sierras and seen nothing but lots of moths and a bear. And I have also come across bone fragments of bear, deer, racoon, ringtail cat, all kinds of animals when you're in the woods. I work in a natural history museum and people bring in bones they find in the woods all the time. It's mendacious to state there are no bones ever found of these animals, give me a break! |
|
|
|
Post by beetlehorn on Apr 4, 2013 20:23:31 GMT -8
Well there we have it. As I stated before, everyone has the right to believe whatever they choose. Chris, if you don't choose to believe in this, I will respect that. I am not saying that this is 100 percent proof, only evidence, which as stated by Richard S. is 97 percent. I never said no-one ever found bones of deer, raccoon, or whatever else you mentioned, I have found these while out in the woods on several occasions. I stated that while researching this material, there has never been an occasion where a bear or mountain lion skeleton was found that died from natural causes. That is not my opinion, but the knowledge of experts in this field who have on multiple occasions mentioned this. I have been an outdoorsman for some 35 years, hunting, camping, hiking, and have never seen a bobcat until this year, much less a skeleton. My point is there are some creatures that are extremely shy, and at the same time have a very low population density. So for you to say I was being mundacious, as to try and decieve anyone is rather condescending in my opinion. I am simply sharing what I have researched with other readers here, and let them make up their own minds. Maybe it would be refreshing to share a video that is definately fake, and rather humorous, just to break the tension a bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluemoth on Apr 5, 2013 13:30:32 GMT -8
I watch those BFRO shows on TV to see if those 4 folks ever find any thing legit on their wild goose chase for Big Foot. I always think that another normal person on the TV show is staged out there in the woods to tree knock or call back to the group to make it sound like there is a Big Foot near by. One show they had a hair sample but they never revealed the full analysis of it from the lab. What needs to be found is a body or bones of Big Foot and DNA analysis done to prove it is a Big Foot. Until this happens it will just be a wild goose chase to me or folks per tending to be Big Foots in Costumes on the videos that pop up once and a while.
|
|
