Bigfoot DNA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jodie said:
Mulder, how can you write a whole book on the anatomy and physiology of a bigfoot when we don't have a type specimen? I stopped listening to Meldrum when he got into an argument with Bobby Short over whether bigfoot had a blaculum or not. I theorized with the best of them , it doesn't take credentials to do that when everyone is guessing.
Click to expand...

Firstly, are you certain you spelled your term correctly? I could find no reference to an anatomical term "blaculum"

Secondly, you can obtain bio-metric data from sources other than direct examination of a type specimen. Examining tracks and other body impressions, photos, etc can also yeild valuable information, and it is this later approach that Drs Meldrum, et al have had to take until a type specimen becomes available.
 
I agree with you Mulder, it is not right to paint anyone with a broad brush unless there is something concrete to the contrary that says this researcher falls in the category with the rest of the majority.

And Mulder, how much evidence have you seen from other bigfoot researchers claiming to be serious about what they do? It is a legitimate question, you may know more of them personally than I do.
 
Muldur said:
Firstly, are you certain you spelled your term correctly? I could find no reference to an anatomical term "blaculum"

Secondly, you can obtain bio-metric data from sources other than direct examination of a type specimen. Examining tracks and other body impressions, photos, etc can also yeild valuable information, and it is this later approach that Drs Meldrum, et al have had to take until a type specimen becomes available.
Click to expand...

Mulder, what if the tracks were hoaxed? It has happened.

Sorry, baculum, it's a penis bone. The whole debate I heard on whether bigfoot had one or not could have been a skit on Saturday Night Live.
 
Muldur said:
You know exactly what I mean.
Click to expand...

Cryptic ad-homs usually masquerade as "meaning something" by insinuation, but are vaccuous when asked for an explanation.

It is lower than low to compare BF researchers, including respected scientists like Dr Meldrum to Ted Bundy.:mad:
Click to expand...

What does "lower than low" mean other than an empty ad-hom? It's not just germane but vitally important that even serial killers on the surface appear sincere when underneath is savage, murderous intent. An angry smiley is not an argument. Well, it is a manipulative argument - I can't use anything that makes you angry. :rolleyes:

All of these examples from mere child cookie jar raiders to adult cannibal killers are actors. "Looking" or "sounding" sincere is the most basic requirement of lying, and is understood by a three year old. So it is silly to say "he sounded sincere" as a logical argument for woo. Of course they sound sincere. How stupid do you have to be not to?

And the objection to this elementary fact about lying is that the speaker (Merldumb in your case) is too stupid to understand he needs to sound sincere when lying.
 
Muldur on the BFF said:
In the case of DNA, the results are even more diagnostic. Assuming a good "read" on the sample, if it doesn't match anything in the database, then it, by obvious process of elimination must be from a new, undocumented critter.

ETA: we already have such a statement from Dr Sykes about at least one sample.

Quote
Bryan Sykes, Professor of Human Genetics at the Oxford Institute of Molecular Medicine and one of the world's leading experts on DNA analysis examined the hair. "We found some DNA in it," he said, "but we don't know what it is. It's not a human, not a bear not anything else we have so far been able to identify. It's a mystery and I never thought this would end in a mystery. We have never encountered DNA that we couldn't recognize before."

http://www.professorfringe.com/news_stories/bigfoot_dna_evidence.htm

Please carefully note the emphasized part.
Click to expand...


It seems you missed something, Muldur:

"...Sykes also analyzed hair samples from Bhutan attributed to the Yeti, which seemed to defy DNA identification. Interestingly, during our conversation I learned that further efforts were subsequently successful in determining that the hair originated from bear..." Jeff Meldrum.

http://www.isu.edu/rhi/pdf/Oxford PR.pdf
 
Last edited:
Apparently we all missed a rather important memo but our own Muldur got it: Bigfoot has been proven and we no longer need to concern ourselves with the "nonsense" (his term) of trying to prove its existence!
 
Damian Bravo at Bigfoot Evidence:
We now have Melba Ketchum DNA study camp going totally quiet and some are even forgetting that David Palaudis [sic] explained in a private message to Snow Walker Prime that the Ketchum DNA will not prove that Bigfoot is human or that these creatures exist.
Click to expand...

!!
 
Last edited:
Nevermind, I just googled it.....I'm not sure whether I need to laugh or cringe.
 
Last edited:
Is this the current trend?

I don't keep up on all this stuff like i should, but it seems to me, that for the last 6 months or so, the wind was blowing in the "it's not an ape, it's human" direction.
i saw this as a direct result of the expected result from Melba. when she could not get her samples to say anything other than "human" she changed her methodology to a less sensitive test, so she could get a little wiggle room, and claim it's human!". A lot of believers bought into that, naturally!

So fast forward to now, and i am seeing cracks in the dam, Melba has apparently failed the believers, and their beliefs are under scrutiny from a real scientist (at least DNA wise), so I am now sensing a shift in the tide.

Seems to me, we are now starting to see a - Not only is it not human, but it's not even an Ape! school of thought!

Agnostic skeptic communists like me see that as a premptive strike, to gain a head start on plausdable deniability of DNA coming back as - you got nothing but bears and goats and humans!

They still haven't realized that the primers being used are universally used across all mammals, so if you are setting yourself up to deny the DNA results, essentially you will be forced to choose between 2 really bad explanations.

1. It's not a Mammal! in that case you need to explain the hair and breasts, 2 of the required elements to define a mammal. (3rd is 2 sets of teeth - ie baby teeth and permanent teeth)

2. Alternately, you could fall back on the supernatural explanation - BF is like nothing else on the planet, he has magic DNA that is unlike every other living plant and animal on the planet!

You do have to give these guys a little credit, they feel the direction of the wind, and get ahead of the story. They prefabricate their excuses explanations, with a keen eye on whats coming down the pike.

Whats interesting about that, however is that their prefabbed explanations keep cornering them into more and more ridiculous explanations!

Oh well,
back to work!
CWB
 
Last edited:
Meldrum is on the best path, simply invoking the rarity of his ape to explain the absence of unique DNA. He can retire in 10 years still saying that eventually it will be found, or that it would be found if only Science would organize an enormous SquatchHunt.

It remains to be seen whether or not the human hybridists/Melbists will survive the siege guns that Sykes and Meldrum will be firing at them in the next couple of years. A lot depends on whether or not TheMelba can get her ideas published in some form, somewhere, this year. I continue to believe she can, though my faith is dwindling. The lurid nature of the human hybrid concept/misconception has great mass market appeal, combined with the mumbo jumbo of footer pseudoscience. This camp would claim that the bigfoot mystery would be solved if only Science would sequence the complete genome of every "human" specimen the believers can find, for free.
 
Last edited:
I love it. Meldrum fighting Melba's junk science with his own junk science.
He knows exactly what he's doing, and he knows that all he needs to do is use more impressive technical jargon than Melba. He learned a long time ago with his midtarsal break nonsense that big words impress his core 'footer audience.
 
It couldn't be a sloth in Washington or Oregon because the PNW Tree Octopus would drive it out of the area.
http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/

Hey, wait a minute. When a tree octopus jumps to the ground it makes a huge splat that looks like a single large footprint. That may be why we have so many single bigfoot prints!

Actually, it looks like bigfoot is decimating the octopus population.
http://zapatopi.net/bsa/octopus.html
 
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