*DISCLAIMER* If you haven't seen this documentary yet, DO NOT READ ON! I just wanted to post this while it was still fresh in my mind.


I just finished watching the History Channel's Monster Quest. This one was about bigfoot. It had some really interesting finds.

The team traveled to northern Ontario, Canada. They stayed in a cabin with a history of bigfoot encounters. Some very compelling things happened. A group of fishermen who stayed in the cabin a year or so ago, left a piece of plywood with screws sticking out of it, pointed upwards. This is layed down in front of the entrance to the cabin, for when the group goes out on prolonged fishing trips, to protect the cabin. Well in this particular instance, something with an apparently large print stepped on the screws. It left blood, hair, and tissue samples. Well, they gathered these things, and would analyze them later.

In the meantime, they showed other various stories, including a diary found in the cabin from ten years ago, describing more possible bigfoot evidence in the area.

The last night the team was there, they got rocks thrown at them! One guy even threw a rock back into the woods, and immediately a rock was hurled back from at them from the woods. Cool stuff!

Anyways, the hair underwent visual observations, and the scientists determined it to not be any known animal, or human.

They were able to extract DNA and determined that it was not human and not known ape, but somewhere in between. It should be noted that they only so far have gotten one sample of DNA, and it is ONLY a 1 in 5,000 chance that the DNA, from the blood is human. So this looks promising. Feel free to add anything I am forgetting, or elaborate further onto what I have mentioned.

Ah! I heard about that show on history channel, but I'm not a big foot fan all that much. History channel's usually good quality. That's intresting about the DNA, though if it were ever discovered to truly be linked I'm sure it'd be in the major headlines...

Darn I missed it last night but I can watch it this weekend. I'm actually surprised at the results. This is the first time I have seen someone say that the DNA is somewhere between man and ape. Although, this is not convincing enough to lead me to believe that there is bigfoot. It could just be another undiscovered primate. But I am definitely excited about watching it since it seems to be better than last week's episode.

hey i saw that show
it was incredible
it got me into believing more

If I recall, human and chimp DNA has 20 something or so different markers between it. This DNA was identical to human DNA less ONE marker. Which means at the very least its some form of mild human mutation, hence the 1 in 5000 chance its NOT human, unless I got that backwards. Overall, pretty interesting, and I hope they keep up the research in this direction. By the way, the hair appeared to be human, and was fairly long, but it was uncut. It had a natural end, like maybe an arm or leg hair, but...it was oddly long. To me, that was the oddest bit of physical visual evidence.

I don't buy any of the DNA evidence. They had to do chemical isolation on the inhibitors and the only person who did it was the guy the show was about. The independent lab didn't get squat. I don't trust it. Also, Meldrum has finally lost any and all scientific credibility (if he had any left) with his huge leaps of logic based on no evidence. Note as well, the naturalist looking at the hair is dead wrong about bears in the winter. It is not that unusual for black bears to break hibernation at times during the winter.

actually to tell you the truth its not common
it actually is unsually for a bear to break hibernation and wander off
it can happen but its rare
also the lab results were very acurate

Black bears are actually known to sleepwalk in search of food in the winter. They will also leave a den if there is a couple days of warmer than usual weather feed then return to their den if it gets cold again. As for the lab results, all I'll say is, how do you know? These aren't published findings that can be reviewed. This is just some guy on a sensationalist TV show, with a vested interest in the show, saying what HIS findings were. Findings that weren't even backed up by an independent lab or published in any journal. It's TV. What kind of show would they have if he didn't at least say something was strange?

Capeos right we have major year long problem with what I am sure is the same bear.

I'm still intrigued by the DNA. I sincerely hope these folks are being honest and genuine. Tho it would not be the first time I was disappointed and called for the head of some dill-weed out to make a buck!

Any evidence they find will be "inconclusive", that's the way these shows work, they'll give you just enough to come back for more. IMO, any honest and sincere investigations done on 'Ol Footy, are...unfortunately...the ones you never hear about, until they actually have something concrete. Those are the researchers with integrity, the rest are P.T. Barnum incarnate...IMO.

I only saw part of the show, and missed the rock-tossing and lab testing.

I think they should send the CSI team into Bigfoot country. They'll have Biggie ID'd, cuffed, and booked within an hour.

Then afterward, Marg Helgenberger can come over to my house for 'tea and debriefing'.

Helgenberger grew up in a neighboring town. A friend's brother dated her in high school. Mmmmmmm, Marg.

Man, I hate living in third world country wihout a cable TV!

Well I wonder about a couple things here.

1. Seeing as how most would consider cryptozoology a psuedoscience, is it possible that they would be hesitant to publish their results? Because admittingly they still haven't found anything conclusive.

2. Yes, it is TV, but the whole investigation, was sponsored and backed by the History Channel. Couldn't it be possible that since it is a History Channel production, anything that is found, would have to wait until the program comes on, to be released?

^Fair enough, keep me informed, Bbal. Word up mah brotha!

1. Proper protocol would still be to have three or more independent labs concur with your findings before even announcing them. That's the problems I have with these shows. They're less science and more sensation and they always amount to nothing.

2. Such isn't the case when they are actually following real researchers. Everything of scientific important that I've ever seen covered by the Discovery Channel family of networks I've read published material about it long before a show was made of it. Mainly because new scientific discoveries must be published and reviewed prior to a researcher coming out with bold claims. Now, in the last decade I've watched a steady decline in the quality of the science on display on DC and NG channels. They've moved to more and more towards simplified or sensationalist, ratings grabbing junk, which is disappointing. They also have no problem with hosts of their shows implying completely unfounded claims. It seems like only PBS doesn't think we're all idiots nowadays.

uhhhh isn't that what "Big Foot" is??

Wow, I must admit, that if this is true and not some TV sensation then I am impressed. But that's an if.

can someone find me Ostman's audio I wanna hear it again.

Why doesn't someone record this damned show and release it on the Internet for us Canadians? =(

I agree though, I'd have had the samples analysed at several different labs and had some nice analyses written up. Seems odd, somehow, the way it sounds like they went about it, and of course very coincidental that they happened to have an experience while there. xD