Merged Bigfoot follies

[William Parcher]

The Footers were already hot on Sykes back in old BFF1 days. His stuff was quoted and referenced. I wouldn't doubt that many Bigfoot believers were contacting him.

 

[Drewbot]

Robin Bellamy is not Robin Lynn

http://cfz-canada.blogspot.com/2011/06/meet-canadian-bloggers.html

 

[Castro]

What motivated Sykes and Sartori to launch this "Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project", according to the BBC:

The idea for the project came about in 2011 when Sykes visited Dr Michel Sartori, the Director of the Museum of Zoology in Lausanne in Switzerland. Out of sheer curiosity, Sykes had gone to view the museum’s extensive library of books on cryptozoology, including over 40,000 documents and photos from a collection donated by the late Belgian-French scientist Bernard Heuvelmans. He was a trained zoologist, who also spent much of his life looking for cryptids. The museum holds many of his books, such as In the Wake of the Sea-Serpents, which records “sightings” of giant squids and whale-like animals.

During the visit, the pair began to wonder if they could build on Huevelmans’s work and expand the museum’s display. “We started to think it would really enhance the collection if we also had specimens of ‘cryptids’ on show,” says Sartori.

And so the Hominid project was born.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120815-in-search-of-the-yeti/2

 

[LTC8K6]

What motivate Sykes and Sartori to launch this "Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project", according to the BBC:

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120815-in-search-of-the-yeti/2

Sounds like he has indeed bought a house in Wonderland...

But I'll wait and see what he actually says before I start pointing and jeering.

 

[Resume]

What motivate Sykes and Sartori to launch this "Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project", according to the BBC:

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120815-in-search-of-the-yeti/2

He (Sykes) is also keen to point out that he is not – nor intends to become – a cryptozoologist. “I don’t not want to become completely eccentric,” he adds.

I guess we'll see soon enough.

And then, Sartori says, it will be time for believers to put up or shut up.

“We are challenging the people who claim to have seen the Yeti or the Orang Pendek to show us real evidence, or otherwise hold your peace,” he says.

In other words, show me the monkey already.

 

[William Parcher]

He (Sykes) is also keen to point out that he is not – nor intends to become – a cryptozoologist. “I don’t not want to become completely eccentric,” he adds.

But a Bigfoot believer is not completely eccentric?

 

[Drewbot]

I would still give Sykes the benefit of the doubt, the only reason we have to think he has gone over the Bigfoot deep-end, is testimony from a Bigfooter. We all know how much weight that should account for.

 

[Resume]

I would still give Sykes the benefit of the doubt, the only reason we have to think he has gone over the Bigfoot deep-end, is testimony from a Bigfooter. We all know how much weight that should account for.

Yeah I'd wait for something more substantial than the meanderings from a bigfooter's blog.

Like I said, it probably won't be long.

 

[William Parcher]

It will be interesting either way.

If Sykes does not believe that Bigfoot exists... then his new friend just told the world that he does. Sykes ought to then say this guy is no friend because he just lied about the status of his belief.

 

[Castro]

Quote:
"He (Sykes) is also keen to point out that he is not – nor intends to become – a cryptozoologist. “I don’t not want to become completely eccentric,” he adds."

I guess we'll see soon enough.

Yes, and I see at least an ambiguity, if not a contradiction, here. How do "scientists" looking for specimens of cryptids for a museum call themself?

I agree that it would certainly be interesting to hear some clarifications from Prof. Sykes himself.

 

[Resume]

More follies: http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2013/03/breaking-dr-melba-ketchum-might-have.html#moretop

BTW: in the comment section there's a cut and paste of one of my posts from here (600 lb bipedal ape); I didn't do that.

 

[TheJackal]

And the wheels on the bus go round and round .... how many times can the same geneticist cry "Bigfoot" ? So, once again they have tested Smeja's human DNA and found that somewhere in his lineage is DNA from another human population that doesn't yet exist in Genbank. Yeah, that would confirm that the samples aren't faked, shows hybridization, and supports the same time line. It's not the testing, it's how you interpret the test.

 

[Resume]

And the wheels on the bus go round and round .... how many times can the same geneticist cry "Bigfoot" ? So, once again they have tested Smeja's human DNA and found that somewhere in his lineage is DNA from another human population that doesn't yet exist in Genbank. Yeah, that would confirm that the samples aren't faked, shows hybridization, and supports the same time line. It's not the testing, it's how you interpret the test.

And as the bus careens around corners the lead is being buried; counted in the number who submitted samples there are those who claim to know the exact location of footie-foo-foo. Why waste time with DNA testing when a sample specimen is but a competent collection away.

I wonder why this simple solution hasn't been implemented?

 

[TheJackal]

And as the bus careens around corners the lead is being buried; counted in the number who submitted samples there are those who claim to know the exact location of footie-foo-foo. Why waste time with DNA testing when a sample specimen is but a competent collection away.

I wonder why this simple solution hasn't been implemented?

Well, in my best footer voice, they are people you know. We wouldn't treat people that way. We wouldn't tranquilize, net, shoot, or otherwise capture a person, would we ? That's the beauty of the Bigfoot is human argument. You have to associate human rights to the mythical beasts. Well, that only partially explains why they can't be photographed, studied, etc. I mean, we can find "lost" tribes in the Amazon easier than we can find groups of Bigfoot that people apparently interact with and share the occasional blueberry bagel.

 

[Resume]

Well, in my best footer voice, they are people you know. We wouldn't treat people that way. We wouldn't tranquilize, net, shoot, or otherwise capture a person, would we ? That's the beauty of the Bigfoot is human argument. You have to associate human rights to the mythical beasts. Well, that only partially explains why they can't be photographed, studied, etc. I mean, we can find "lost" tribes in the Amazon easier than we can find groups of Bigfoot that people apparently interact with, and share the occasional blueberry bagel.

Yeah, there's going to be a lot more follies as the Ketchum people are now claiming there are mtDNA mutations, allegedly bigfoot, found in five different states. Don't know how they'll back up these claims given their dubious history.

Think she's all jealous over the footer attention drawn from her to Sykes?

 

[tsig]

Well, in my best footer voice, they are people you know. We wouldn't treat people that way. We wouldn't tranquilize, net, shoot, or otherwise capture a person, would we ? That's the beauty of the Bigfoot is human argument. You have to associate human rights to the mythical beasts. Well, that only partially explains why they can't be photographed, studied, etc. I mean, we can find "lost" tribes in the Amazon easier than we can find groups of Bigfoot that people apparently interact with and share the occasional blueberry bagel.

Once you break bread with them the the rule of hospitality is invoked and it is more binding than NDA's.

 

[jerrywayne]

Here are Ketchum's comments:

"We just heard from some mtDNA geneticists and they have found uniqueness in our mtDNA findings that prove that 1. The data is real and couldn't have been hoaxed 2. That it shows relatedness amongst a large percentage of the samples 3. Supports our hybridization theory 4. Supports our timeline. I am estatic. We are asking permission to make these findings public. As soon as we have it, we will post them."

Since Ketchum's argument is that the mtDNA samples are 100% human, how does that support the hybridization theory? Would not the nuDNA be the source of Ketchum's alleged proof for Bigfoot? Isn't the "uniqueness" in the nuDNA, not the mtDNA?

Am I misunderstanding something here?

 

[jerrywayne]

The Footers were already hot on Sykes back in old BFF1 days. His stuff was quoted and referenced. I wouldn't doubt that many Bigfoot believers were contacting him.

Funny thing: Sykes is the one who claimed a "Yeti" sample was from an unknown primate. Later, one of his grad students did further testing and found that it was a contaminated bear sample.

Did Sykes give up on the sample too soon? Or is something else involved here?

 

[Resume]

Did Sykes give up on the sample too soon? Or is something else involved here?

I had the same thoughts when I first read about this; I'm waiting for Sykes to comment on his little sabbatical to footer nation.

 

[jerrywayne]

Concerning Paulides.

Oh I doubt he leaves for good, the first whiff of some new money and back on the bandwagon he goes.

The interesting thing to me is that he claimed the issue closed: Bigfoot exist! Ketchum's paper proved it.

I predict this will be the new trend in Bigfooting. We now know BIgfoot exists, no body necessary. We just want to study its life from afar.

I think I read a Derek Randles comment to the effect that he does not feel he needs to prove Bigfoot existence anymore. All that is needed is to study how the creature lives and survives, etc. Roger Knight, creator of "scoftic," once argued that Bigfoot advocates no longer need to prove the existence of Bigfoot, the real issue is the collection of more evidence in a scientific, organized fashion, so as to better understand the creature.

So, despite the never ending askance of science to involve itself in the quest for a large land mammal know as Bigfoot, Bigfooters themselves are seeming to appear more and more like run of the mill paranormals: Believing in existance prior to confirmation.