Bigfoot DNA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Coyote hide in the Grand Canyon. I've seen some farms where guys have tacked up dead coyotes, crows, and from photos in the olden days, hawks to their fenceposts. I never figured out if this was supposed to be a warning to the other "vermin" to keep out or a way to attract those scavengers in closer so they could be shot too.
 
I have a couple of questions for Cal:

I was listening to Steve Kull's show in archive last night because they had Bart Cutino on to talk about the boots. Evidently he is the one holding Justin's bloody boots from the shooting. He wants to get the blood spatters tested by someone other than Dr. Ketchum, basically someone who will be doing the test blind not knowing what they are looking for to rule out bias. According to him they only have one shot at this but he thinks he has a 60% chance of getting something from this sample.

1. How will they be able to get the contaminates out if they don't tell the person what they are looking for?
2. How degraded would the sample be after the boots have been worn about 20 times elsewhere after the blood got on them?

Thanks- Jodie
 
Jodie said:
I have a couple of questions for Cal:

1. How will they be able to get the contaminates out if they don't tell the person what they are looking for?
2. How degraded would the sample be after the boots have been worn about 20 times elsewhere after the blood got on them?

Thanks- Jodie
Click to expand...
Jodie,
blood on boots would bit tough. You will probably get DNA, but there is a lot of contamination sources. Thats primarily why sykes is wanting hair samples, he can desolve the hair sheath and get to the uncontaminated DNA inside.

Not sure on the blind samples stuff. i supose you could set it up as part of a test on various mammals, and just submit various blind samples from various mammals, and see if they get the knowns right, and then see what they get with the boot sample.

You can submit it to a sequence lab, they don't know or care what it is, they just send you or link you to a file of the sequence, so thats not an issue, but the researcher has to take those results, and process the results!

To tell you the truth, I am really leaning toward these guys as scheisters. Everything they are doing screams fraud! Everything they are doing screams - $ in their eyes.

CWB

It would be a long shot, if they got human contamination of course, then they would scream - SEE ! bigfoot is human! Get it as deer blood, and they will scream either incompetance (completely wrong, incompetance would lead to no ID, not a false positive) or the giant scientist conspiracy tentacles reaching out!
 
Drewbot said:
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/7875/genewild.th.jpg
Any word on the publication front?
Click to expand...
Why do I always have to be the one to give Drew the bad news. She's a complete phony. There is no paper. And one of the ways we know there is no paper is because it's been documented by virtually all her friends and associates that she's never once been seen in, went to, or even approached with serious intent, an office supply store, or superstore for that matter, to buy any actual paper. That's just so fishy. How can she "publish a paper" without any actual paper? I mean, c'mon. Seriously? Printers only use paper ma'am, not air. Sheesh. And it's documented. I said so above. Documented. She got documented alright. Right out of all that fame and fortune.

No paper. Ha! Perhaps she'll dabble in porn next?

Meanwhile...

We Know There Is No Bigfoot, We Know There Is No Paper, Yet We Also Know In Spite Of That, There's Still A Bigfoot Paper Caper™
 
calwaterbear said:
Jodie,
blood on boots would bit tough. You will probably get DNA, but there is a lot of contamination sources. Thats primarily why sykes is wanting hair samples, he can desolve the hair sheath and get to the uncontaminated DNA inside.

Not sure on the blind samples stuff. i supose you could set it up as part of a test on various mammals, and just submit various blind samples from various mammals, and see if they get the knowns right, and then see what they get with the boot sample.

You can submit it to a sequence lab, they don't know or care what it is, they just send you or link you to a file of the sequence, so thats not an issue, but the researcher has to take those results, and process the results!

To tell you the truth, I am really leaning toward these guys as scheisters. Everything they are doing screams fraud! Everything they are doing screams - $ in their eyes.

CWB

It would be a long shot, if they got human contamination of course, then they would scream - SEE ! bigfoot is human! Get it as deer blood, and they will scream either incompetance (completely wrong, incompetance would lead to no ID, not a false positive) or the giant scientist conspiracy tentacles reaching out!
Click to expand...

Thanks Cal- My take on Bart is that he is a little bit more educated than the average BF'er and seems sincere, if there is any con stuff going on, I see him as just one of many still not quite sure what to believe about this story. I think if he gets anything at all, he will see it realistically, it might be others that claim differently.
 
Jodie said:
. . . Bart is that he is a little bit more educated than the average BF'er and seems sincere, . . .
Click to expand...

Is this the fellow from the Bay Area who was blown away by something he claims to have witnessed using a thermal camera some years ago?

If so, I concur. He's contacted me a couple of times and has been very polite, sincere, and he writes well. His public persona seems to indicate someone who genuinely was convinced by something he experienced, and he doesn't seem to fall for the "bigfoots are hanging out smoking behind my barn" silliness. Of course Meldrum seems sincere too, so here at the JREF we take such personal impressions with a lump of salt.
 
Jodie said:
Thanks Cal- My take on Bart is that he is a little bit more educated than the average BF'er and seems sincere, if there is any con stuff going on, I see him as just one of many still not quite sure what to believe about this story. I think if he gets anything at all, he will see it realistically, it might be others that claim differently.
Click to expand...
Jodie,
I pmed you.
 
The Shrike said:
Of course Meldrum seems sincere too, so here at the JREF we take such personal impressions with a lump of salt.
Click to expand...

Well I'm here at the JREF, and if you want to follow a herd mentality be my guest, my opinions are my own no matter how salt worthy they might be.

I don't have any information on this person, or Meldrum's character, to make me question their motives. When I have some facts to the contrary I will adjust my opinion accordingly.
 
Last edited:
Jodie...There is all sorts of evidence about Meldrum's character - it's just that you don't want to see it for what it is.
 
rockinkt said:
Jodie...There is all sorts of evidence about Meldrum's character - it's just that you don't want to see it for what it is.
Click to expand...

Well then show me, I don't recall ever reading anything about deliberate fraud or hoaxing.
 
I found it, what specific incidents are you referring to? I am on page 7. I see opinions that he is deluded but I don't see anything saying he is a con man and why.....
 
You won't see anything specific Jodie. Just speculation and conjecture. As long as people are allowed to do that and no one contradicts them or calls them out on it, they take a stance that they are right and 'win' by default.
 
The Shrike said:
Re: Coyote hide in the Grand Canyon. I've seen some farms where guys have tacked up dead coyotes, crows, and from photos in the olden days, hawks to their fenceposts. I never figured out if this was supposed to be a warning to the other "vermin" to keep out or a way to attract those scavengers in closer so they could be shot too.
Click to expand...

I had always understood it to be the former. A mistaken assumption that animals would somehow be frightened by the dead carcass of one of their own.
 
Jodie said:
I found it, what specific incidents are you referring to? I am on page 7. I see opinions that he is deluded but I don't see anything saying he is a con man and why.....
Click to expand...

There is something specific that can be looked at and that is his research not related to bigfoot. Is it as rigorous? Research can get messed up for a lot of different reasons that include miscalculating the mathmatics, performing expirements incorrectly, picking the wrong form of analysis, and so forth and so on to also include deliberate fraud.

The research that immediately comes to mind for me that fall into the fraud category is that related to the Dalkon Sheild research. The guy omitted data that affected the efficacy rating. The same thing happened with the research for the connection between autism and vaccines.

If there is a difference in rigor between what he does regarding bigfoot research and what he does for non bigfoot related research then I think you could definitely draw some inferences from that, does that exist?

I sincerely don't know since my take on Dr. Meldrum is that he is an expert in locomotion, anything else he comes up with is no better or worse than my own opinion. I'm not a big fan and don't take what he says outside of his expertise with any serious consideration so haven't read much of his material. However, I've not heard anyone ever say he was anything other than mistaken.
 
Jodie said:
There is something specific that can be looked at and that is his research not related to bigfoot. Is it as rigorous? Research can get messed up for a lot of different reasons that include miscalculating the mathmatics, performing expirements incorrectly, picking the wrong form of analysis, and so forth and so on to also include deliberate fraud.

The research that immediately comes to mind for me that fall into the fraud category is that related to the Dalkon Sheild research. The guy omitted data that affected the efficacy rating. The same thing happened with the research for the connection between autism and vaccines.

If there is a difference in rigor between what he does regarding bigfoot research and what he does for non bigfoot related research then I think you could definitely draw some inferences from that, does that exist?

I sincerely don't know since my take on Dr. Meldrum is that he is an expert in locomotion, anything else he comes up with is no better or worse than my own opinion. I'm not a big fan and don't take what he says outside of his expertise with any serious consideration so haven't read much of his material. However, I've not heard anyone ever say he was anything other than mistaken.
Click to expand...

Care to give concrete examples of him being "outside his expertise"?

The man is an accredited anatomist AND physiologist:

B.S., 1982, Zoology (Anatomy & Physiology), Brigham Young University

M.S., 1984, Zoology (Anatomy & Physiology), Brigham Young University

Ph.D., 1989, Anatomical Sciences (Physical Anthropology), State University of New York at Stony Brook

Postdoctoral Visiting Assistant Professor , 1989-1991, Duke University Medical Center

http://www.isu.edu/bios/Professors_Staff/meldrum_j.shtml
Click to expand...

His primary area of study has been locomotion.

Get your facts straight.

He is well-qualified to offer an opinion on more than just matters of locomotion, including the examination of displayed anatomy in images and from impressions.
 
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