Bigfoot DNA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Drewbot said:
Parn; you are lucky, if u get into any trouble, the keyword is SQUATCHY, we will call the FBI and tellthem the Footers took you.
Click to expand...

Ya know, as silly as a scenario as that is, I'd be damned If I didn't find it a perfect one. I would like nothing more than one of these "symposiums" or wtvr, to be held in my area and know some of you lot were in the mix. It would be so great, we could knock some sense into them (well ....maybe not ...) we could TRY to do as much. I have lots of friends down here, theres nothing these hucksters could pull, that could run us off.

I think that explains a lot about MELBA. She's all ears when she "knows" she has a willing target audience. Any sniff of dissent? no show... weakkk.

even the Rockies showed up to play the Braves this week
 
Oh DOG! Does that mean she's watching us RIGHT NOW? Or... wait. Who's the mole?
 
I see we are "setting the record straight" after having given no record to set straight:

Conceal what you're doing, but trumpet your doings loudly; blame people for falling into your trap of making them guess; state what you are NOT doing or what you DIDN'T do...

instead of just stating it. Anyone capable of making a power point can also post that same power point to the web where people can click through it to see what it IS. Posting that takes less effort. What could be clearer than the thing itself. Someone loudly started a facebook bage allegedly to give links and provide information. Oh really? Show us just one link!

Reminds me of when I was a boy going to the Smithsonian Institution. When I walked up to the astronaut stuff there were all kinds of posters and productions about what an astronaut wasn't. I know that they aren't farmers, plumbers, carpenters, race car drivers or mountain climbers. I read endless stuff setting the record straight about how astronauts did not say this, nor did they say that - nor was the picture of ET an astronaut. Very soon the Smithsonian will be showing what an Astronaut is, but until they do everyone will just have to be patient.
 
Last edited:
Ketchum's behavior mirrors an incident where Gimlin bailed out of a convention when he heard that some skeptics might be attending. Said incident is noted in Chris Murphy's Bigfoot Film Journal and can be read in Google Books. Sadly, my attempt to relocate that exact page took me to a preview that didn't include said incident. However, it does show a very telling incident where someone showed the film to some special effects artists and didn't want to results of the meeting publicized. Gosh, I wonder why?
 
Last edited:
She wants to control the conversation. This is why she bans people on Facebook and won't speak in front of live people at a conference. She can't control the message in a public conference. She can't hide behind supposed embargoes, non-disclosure statements, and journal rules at a conference. What she is doing is more akin to propaganda than science. Unfortunately for her, her fan base is dwindling. Reading comments on the blogs, you can see that many of the Bleevers have come to their senses, and realize that this is all a lot of hokum. There are a few holdouts who think the logging industry is trying to suppress her study, but many are calling BS. The no show was the final straw for many, or I should say a wake up call for many. I think the chance of thePaper ever coming to light has now dropped into single digits.
 
Last edited:
Parn- Was Autumn Williams there?
I would have showed up for that, but I heard she cancelled. Bummer, I'd love to hear her BF stories over a couple-three IPAs.
 
she cancelled. at least, that's what I read on the internets. I was just following on Bigfoot Lunch Club, but was disappointed that they didn't have info on anything but Arla Williams. Did it sound like I was actually there?! Wow, my literary talents are better than I thought....Meanwhile, I had a nice weekend in the warm California sun. By the way, you might want to check out the movie The Avengers. More realistic than bigfoot, and surprisingly entertaining (and I don't usually like these comic book movies, nor do I like Robert Downey Jr or Scarlet Johannson). We saw it in 3D.

I hate to use the word suckers, but anyone who would travel to that remote burg in Washington, just to have the main speaker phone it in, is close to qualifying for that description. Of course, they were lured there by false pretenses. A life lesson, I guess.

As for the claim that she got threats to her life, well, I feel sorry for her, regardless of the truthfulness of that claim. She has dug herself into a bad spot, it seems, and I hope she can safely extricate herself from the high expectations she has created for herself.
 
Last edited:
She is claiming on her Facebook page that she has posted to no blogs, and that any posts you see claiming to be her are from imposters.
 
So Patty walks into the bigfoot bar.

She's got the DNA print-out, and everyone is checkin' out the peaks and dimorphisms and someone says "where did you get the DNA results so quick?"

Patty sez "At Ketchum's drive through service".
 
ABP,
there are elements of a good joke there, but I'd suggest letting it grow a bit more before picking.

Seemingly unnoticed, Richard Stubstad yesterday made a new comment on an old post at Robert Lindsay's blog, in which he discloses something I don't think I have seen elsewhere, my bold :

May 7, 2012 at 11:44 AM

The 97% I proclaim is solely the result of two GenBank calculations, not what I believe based on circumstantial evidence. Considering the overall evidence, I’m almost as sure that sasquatch in more than one subspecies variations exists but i don’t have much of a clue about the various subspecies genetically speaking because we have almost zero information about the fraternal side (“Adam”); only the maternal origins (“Eve”).

Based on the mitochondrial sequences I have (3 complete genomes), I ran two statistical calculations:

1) Using the entire GenBank database, there was/is a 2.2% chance that two of the three mtDNA sequences would match up to an extremely rare stone age European haplotype randomly (eg. via hoaxing or just plain misidentification of two random North American modern humans). Using the GenBank database in this manner results in a 97.8% certainty level that sasquatch exists.

2) If the GenBank database is more heavily weighted towards European and native American haplotypes, the same calculation comes out 3.8%, or a confidence level of 96.2% that sasquatch exists.

Add to the above that three out of three nuclear DNA MC1R sequences were all outside documented modern human ranges, I split the difference and came up with a round number of 97% that sasquatch exists, regardless of my own personal beliefs or biases.

Richard
Click to expand...

I am not sure I have seen that bolded bit of info previously. Here is what was in the Ketchum copyright documents regarding MC1R (bolded):
A film and/or documentary, narration or audio book, supporting photos and literary paper/document/book that will follow the The Sasquatch Project, the scientist and the scientific testing and proof for the existence of Sasquatch/ Bigfoot. Information will include discussion of results including A New Tribe of Living Humans, the complete Sasquatch mitochondrial genome sequence and nuclear DNA variations and text will show complete mitochondrial (mt) genome sequences were identified from DNA, analysis of the assembled sequence unequivocally establishes that the Sasquatch mtDNA falls inside the range of modern human mtDNAs and discussions of the origins thereof. The proof that the Sasquatch is not only the closest living human relative but is actually a contemporary living human. Also discussed is nuclear DNA testing performed on the same samples and the variations found in various genes including MC1R gene RUNX2 and FOXP2 as well as other targets genes involved in the perception of sound, transmission of nerve signals, the production of sperm and the lactase gene. Also discussed is how testing has ruled out ape cross and any ancient contributor and that Sasquatch is indeed a modern human with some genetic mutations accounting for their physical appearance. Also included are discussion of the history of samples and circumstances surrounding the acquisition, their testing, the circumstances surrounding the entire Sasquatch DNA Project.
Click to expand...

So I wonder whether Richard has gone beyond what Ketchum wrote, and disclosed something he wasn't supposed to, regarding the nuclear DNA, which, if I recall correctly, he didn't pay for. And he makes it sound as though there is something inhuman found in the MC1R gene. I would remind that there are literally dozens and dozens of polymorphisms in the MC1gene...think of the entire spectrum of human coloration and then add in the polymorphisms that have no known phenotypic effect. Each time one of those mutations was discovered, did we think "Sasquatch!"?
Again, though he makes some appropriate qualifying statements, Richard is in deeper water than he thinks in trying to play probability theory with GenBank to determine what is and isn't human, and what does and doesn't indicate the existence of a 'sasquatch," whatever that is. To her credit, Ketchum doesn't try to make polymorphisms into "non-humans." Where she has a problem (and it is a huge one), is to show that the polymorphisms result in an identifiable "group" of humans with the characteristics of the popular bigfoot.
 
Last edited:
MC1R controls hair and skin color. I knew it was the DNA from the blue skinned people. They just happened to collect a sample from the redheaded, blue skin family. In all honesty, there is no way that thePaper can draw a Bigfoot conclusion. On a side note, I would love to see his math for the percentage calculation.
 
TheJackal said:
She wants to control the conversation. This is why she bans people on Facebook and won't speak in front of live people at a conference. She can't control the message in a public conference. She can't hide behind supposed embargoes, non-disclosure statements, and journal rules at a conference. What she is doing is more akin to propaganda than science. Unfortunately for her, her fan base is dwindling. Reading comments on the blogs, you can see that many of the Bleevers have come to their senses, and realize that this is all a lot of hokum. There are a few holdouts who think the logging industry is trying to suppress her study, but many are calling BS. The no show was the final straw for many, or I should say a wake up call for many. I think the chance of thePaper ever coming to light has now dropped into single digits.
Click to expand...

Shes one more ego trying to drive perception where they want it to be.
 
ABP, you mean MC1R isn't an indicator for night vision, super- and sub-sonic hearing, EMF detection, and telephathic communication. I am sure that science is just supressing that information. It would actually be refreshing to read something about Squatch that didn't require a suspension of disbelief.
 
Last edited:
Oh, and there is an MC1R gene in Neanderthals, Denisovans and Lemurs to name a few. Why the focus on the MC1R gene? can this gene alone show something as not human?
 
I would venture a wild guess that it is the only item tested that showed a polymorphism that wasn't cataloged in GenBank. Otherwise, the samples tested as "human." So, you build your case on MC1R because it's the only thing that wasn't "definitely" human from the tested samples. The problem is that just because it isn't cataloged in GenBank doesn't mean that it's not human or that it's indicative of Bigfoot.
 
If a BFcan morph why cant BF DNA polymorph ? I mean it is just a small adaptation ?

In other news:

I once new someone who knew of someone who actually had a pet Lemur ! And no he did not like to be petted, "allegedly".
 
apparently a woman named Arla Williams has been designated to head the putative sasquatch protection group, as conceived by Ketchum. There are rumors that Williams is the one who arranged for Ketchum to see the 5 bigfoots, in Oklahoma. she says she had her first encounter at age 6. (I guess she is still waiting for the DNA results on that one LOL). Williams was one of the speakers at the Richland Conference. She did some sort of invocation, which included a prayer song, apparently inspired by Native American culture. Whether she is actually of that tradition, I just don't know. She was also a speaker. See her on video here. Evidently she is in the habit of placing groupings of four stones in a square, apparently corresponding to compass points. Each stone signifies a stage of life, if I understand her correctly. One of these groups was in some wooded area "where nobody goes." On two occasions, if I understand correctly, she went there and found that one of the stones had been moved. This had great significance for her. Part II is here, in which she talks about bigfoot "birthing stations" and a cradle made out of sticks, featuring a four point cross. The significance of this "took her to her knees." Yeah.
 
Last edited:
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