• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Bigfoot DNA

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't understand your questions? typos? are you asking is there a "height" gene? height in humans is multifactorial. One gene was discovered a few years ago that could influence height by one cm.

yes, the bili apes are interesting. You didn't mention glowing eyes, and ability to avoid photography and ride railroad trains.

are you trying to make a point or "just saying?"

do they have modern human mtDNA? Do you think that they could have come over on that land bridge between the Congo and, you know, the Pacific Northwest, abducted Shaqille O'Neal's sister and started a tribe of bigfoots in Oregon? LOL
 
Last edited:
cbartow said:
Questions:

  • Are variants in conserved regions affecting size and other traits with other cataloged primate species?
  • Is it actually something that has been documented?

In the spirit of those questions, I do find these Chimpanzees very interesting - The Congo Bili Apes
(see wikipedia and search on "Bili Ape")

Sorry, I don't have enough posts to post live links just yet...

Some particularly interesting points in the the overview (if the information is indeed accurate):

1. They are significant in size and hold the largest confirmed great ape foot size at 11 - 14" in length.

2. They are a chimp sub-species but are massive and over two times the size of regular chimps at 200 - 270 lbs.

3. They look like large chimps but also exhibit some Gorilla-type features not found in standard chimps including large saggital crests and complete body hair 'graying' (often at relatively early ages.)

4. They are knuckle walkers but are often observed walking bipedally as well.

5. They build ground nests like Gorillas and often snap smaller trees in half to provide low ground canopies over their nests

6. The wild groups seen by scientists will circle and inquisitively observe humans that traverse through their territory.

7. Their diet is mainly fruit-based but they have been witnessed stalking and charging territorial intruders stealthy (NOT open aggressive display bluff charges and vocalizations as Gorillas do.) Their bluff charges include stealthy following/stalking before the charge - i.e. predatory behavior... Though I have not found affirmative accounts of witnessed predatory kills... the locals do refer to them as the 'lion killer' apes...

8. First documented in the Congo by scientists in 2003, it is now estimated that up to 10,000 of these apes exist in the Congo.
Click to expand...

Very cool.

So what?
 
Some comments:

- In conducting a quick search for Bili Ape in scholastic papers, I don't see where it has been positively identified as a new species of Chimpanzee. It appears that there is still controversy surrounding the Ape. I am too lazy to do an exhaustive search at this time.

- If Bigfoot sightings were prevalent in the Republic of the Congo, I could see a correlation between those sightings and the possible existence of a large Chimpanzee. However, we are talking about North America, where to my knowledge, there is no fossil record of a native primate, or no known native primates (escaped pets nothwithstanding). I get the inference that there is a possibility for an new species of great ape to exist, but I am not sure how that fits into an area with no known native primates.

- In relevance to this discussion, because there is a known population, and there is a type specimen available, with supporting DNA and an iron clad chain of custody, I can accept that there is a possible new great ape in the Republic of the Congo. In the case of Bigfoot, there is no type specimen, no verified population, and no DNA with a verifiable chain of custody.

Yes, I will grant you there is a slim possibility there is an undiscovered North American primate, but to date, I have not personally seen compelling evidence to support that claim.
 
For all the Bili Ape sensationalism, every time I use some Google Fu to learn more about current research on them I see nothing more than run of the mill chimpanzees and the run of the mill primatologists studying them. They (the Bili chimps) seem to be good tool-users, but not a population of bloodthirsty, gorilla-sized, lion-eaters as early accounts made them out to be.
 
I love the "ground dwelling building ". I guess the main thing is that these primates are documented ? sort of....
 
In the illustrious words of Master-Blaster in Beyond Thunderdome "Embargo Off". Someone finds a "genetics" article with a press embargo that expires on the 26th. It must be thePaper, right? According to blogger Lindsey, the news is imminent. The anticipation is killing me (not).
 
There is no such thing as a Bigfoot .. There is no such thing as Bigfoot DNA. These things do not exist. They have never been proven to exist. There is also no such thing as a PGF Suit. No proof.

There is a Brooklyn Bridge ??
 
It just dawned on me that the apparent desperation from the Ketchum Hokum isn't necessarily related to the publication of thePaper, but an attempt to shore up her eroding credibility amongst the Footers. Reading the non-anonymous comments on the blogs, even the Bleevers are growing tired of the drama. Snow Walker Prime's 11 minute rant, I believe, summarizes the general feeling amongst the Bleevers. The stick structures, the promise now of mind blowing pictures and videos (sidebar: couldn't they previously detect cameras and avoid them?), and all the other unrelated information she has released over the last few days seems to be a "follow me if you want to see Squatch" move (cue thick Austrian accent). The problem is, she has cried "Squatch" one too many times. The wheels on the Ketchum express are off, the brakes have failed, and that on coming light isn't the end of the tunnel. This is not going to end well.
 
BravesFan said:
btw way, have any of you seen snow walker prime's videos? They are total Bigfoot gold. he says what we all think

Click to expand...

That was pretty funny. The five stages of a bigfoot hoax. Last one is claiming you were hoaxed, which Ketchum has available to her.

I didn't see the pictures on facebook. But this guy was merciless.

Edit: I saw the stick structure. Oh my God. Far worse than I thought possible. Meltdown.
 
Last edited:
parnassus said:
I don't understand your questions? typos? are you asking is there a "height" gene? height in humans is multifactorial. One gene was discovered a few years ago that could influence height by one cm.

yes, the bili apes are interesting. You didn't mention glowing eyes, and ability to avoid photography and ride railroad trains.

are you trying to make a point or "just saying?"

do they have modern human mtDNA? Do you think that they could have come over on that land bridge between the Congo and, you know, the Pacific Northwest, abducted Shaqille O'Neal's sister and started a tribe of bigfoots in Oregon? LOL
Click to expand...

To clarify, I posted the bili ape points in relation to your prior post on DNA variants and their resulting effect on size in humans:

...Many if not most variants have little effect or no effect, and some make me look like me instead of like Brad Pitt. But none are known that make modern humans stand 8 feet tall and weigh 600 pounds
Click to expand...

Related to that, are Bili Apes a DNA variant example causing large size differential in a verified extant primate?

I am not a scientist and don't pretend to know the answers to these questions... other than to say, something is obviously going on here with these chimps as size does not lie.

I also thought it is an interesting correlation to the human DNA variance and size topic you were discussing, hence why I brought it up.

I am in no way trying to imply this is... "why Bigfoot exists". Not in the least. I have a healthy skeptical approach to this topic.

As another poster mentioned, the available information on Bili Apes is not rock solid to begin with - no published studies I've found and there appears to be disagreement on species/sub-species taxonomy amongst scientists.
 
Last edited:
no one disputes that some species are bigger than some other sub/species...elephants, mammoths, even humans. Is something "going on?" of course: natural selection. Are chimps getting bigger, or are they getting smaller? are the bili apes the more recent adaptation, or are regular chimps? who knows? do you? does it matter? wouldn't both likely be a niche adaptation to their local environment? Have either species spread over the entire world? no. At this point, we can't say whether their genetic height determinants are different than man, so I would go with multifactorial until proven otherwise. In the Congo is it safer for a species to be big or small? In the US is it safer for a species to be big or small? I'll leave that for you to puzzle on, but I'd say big is good when man isn't much of a factor. On the other hand: Absent intervention by government, which is more likely to survive in the US,
grizzlies or black bears?
wolves or coyotes?
saber toothed cats or mountain lions or bobcats?

small wins every time in the US. Because man extinguishes threats with ease and loves big food items and trophies. It's been that way for thousands of years. Did bigfoot escape man? and never leave a fossil/bone/body/photograph while doing it? naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.

Let's not be naive here, you listed a laundry list of characteristics that you thought were comparable to the popular "bigfoot" reports, tied to an implication that chimps were to bili apes as man is to bigfoot. Fun, but that's all it is.
 
Last edited:
parnassus said:
Let's not be naive here, you listed a laundry list of characteristics that you thought were comparable to the popular "bigfoot" reports, tied to an implication that chimps were to bili apes as man is to bigfoot. Fun, but that's all it is.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you re-read what I posted, my list of comparisons detail how these chimps compare to normal chimps and gorillas - you know, the real creatures that are verified to exhibit said behaviors...

The only wildcard behavior is the predatory silent stalking... which I have not read is a BF or other primate behavior anyways (unless now we know what happens to to all those missing hikers! "...When Sasquatch Attacks..." LOL :D ) The 'monkey hunts' standard chimps do certainly aren't silent or stealthy...
 
I am not going to post the drivel here, but the Ketchum Hokum is now claiming "it's not a hoax" and "I have double digit authors" on thePaper. ABP what part of the Trunk scheme is this ? Is this the vehement denial phase ? I think it's funny that she thinks listing a bunch of authors somehow gives the paper merit. The desperation is palpable, but she is getting a lot of what she wants: attention.
 
There has never been a doubt in my mind that she would publish a paper somewhere. She's been trying for a long time now, and it will come out. When, where, and exactly what, I really can't guess. She is now claiming to have video, but then so do I: the best of Dan Ackroyd is one of my favs....

I haven't seen anything official about her participation in the Washington state convention in early May.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't there a guy who got in a lot of hot water for writing a fictitious paper trying to link autism to measles vaccines who stuffed his paper with co-authors who had never even read the paper nor heard of it?

This could be what's going on with "THE PAPER"
 
Yes, but I sort of doubt that is happening here. I think that she has actually brought on board some more scientific people who are in a better position to evaluate what she has and to write the paper. She quoted one of them as saying it was "interesting." Interesting would not be the word I'd expect if she had proof of a new species. So I suspect she has "interesting" modern human DNA and "interesting" DNA from known animals. So they will write it up as "interesting" DNA submitted by people who claimed it came from bigfoot, and it will be accepted somewhere and published in the not too distant future. Footers will claim victory, while the rest of the world yawns.
 
Last edited:
Today on BE, there is an article with quotes from her denying a hoax and saying that she has "dozens" of co- authors including"PHD's and Department Heads"

No elaboration..... Would she be barred from naming these contributors and co-authors?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom