Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Socio

Sasquatch DNA Study Announcement

275 posts in this topic

Great quote! New sig.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

coff ~coff okay so can we all say like any other time in history at sum point some one got horny and had a kinky time with eather a big foot or a human and say after 9 months "big foot " poped out lol cross breeding has been going on how long now? since the garden of edan? yeah okay keep on with your kinky self i wanta see a super human say 15 feet tall dont care if its male or female i just wanta see it and no blurry damn pics or distorted vids maybe a breeding vid would be nice hell proove it can happen at the lest appeal to the kinky side of thangs.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to keep the mystery of Sasquatch alive! I love the thought that there could be an unknown species amongst us. I don't care what anyone says, it's an entertaining enigma that I want to read, watch documentaries about, & see vague, blurry pictures of!!

I joined this forum to be in touch with the most updated news of the unexplained mystery type and I expected some heathy skepticism but seems like no one shares my love of the "possibility" of anything... :'(

Anyone that expresses belief gets heckled and made fun of... ~ sigh ~ :( guess it's the nature of the game. I'm ready... Let em fly.

Also, I'm very aware there are tons of hoaxers that basically ruined out for everyone. I'm just wishing we could say maybe.

Edited by Lava_Lady
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that the hair follicles(the bulbing hair root) are needed for DNA. Not just hair.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't care what anyone says, it's an entertaining enigma that I want to read, watch documentaries about, & see vague, blurry pictures of!!

I think a lot of people agree with you, which is one reason that it is profitable to some to keep coming up with new dna analysis and photos and such.

I look at bigfoot like professional wrestling. I know it is fake, but it's still fun to watch the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that the hair follicles(the bulbing hair root) are needed for DNA. Not just hair.

you are indeed correct.

http://scienceonstage.net/IDoaHairDNATest.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think that's enough already about bigfoot

there are no such creatures. if there were we would have found them by now. we have been pretty much everywhere that they would supposedly inhabit.

why are people so gullible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bullsheet.

I must disagree. It's boolsheet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to keep the mystery of Sasquatch alive! I love the thought that there could be an unknown species amongst us. I don't care what anyone says, it's an entertaining enigma that I want to read, watch documentaries about, & see vague, blurry pictures of!!

I joined this forum to be in touch with the most updated news of the unexplained mystery type and I expected some heathy skepticism but seems like no one shares my love of the "possibility" of anything... :'(

Anyone that expresses belief gets heckled and made fun of... ~ sigh ~ :( guess it's the nature of the game. I'm ready... Let em fly.

Also, I'm very aware there are tons of hoaxers that basically ruined out for everyone. I'm just wishing we could say maybe.

I'd love to run into one, on a dark night, in the woods. Or, even a Burger King parking lot.

But he keeps letting me down. It's like getting stood up repeatedly on a date.

After years you get sick and tired of it and for some of us a bit bchy

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are called stalker......not the same thing really.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one want to see what it is they supposedly have that can be Verified. What will get through Peer Review?

A google search turns up some other Fringy sites that have picked up the story. No big news outlets yet. :whistle:

http://doubtfulnews.com/2012/11/melba-ketchum-announces-bigfoot-dna-results-without-the-data/

http://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2012/11/dna-consulting-company-is-intrigued-by.html

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to run into one, on a dark night, in the woods. Or, even a Burger King parking lot.

But he keeps letting me down. It's like getting stood up repeatedly on a date.

After years you get sick and tired of it and for some of us a bit bchy

I can understand that. I often feel that same sense of disappointment after looking at photos/videos of Sasquatch that some idiot had obviously faked but in the long run I have had a lot of fun wondering if it's real, analyzing photos/videos and making fun of testimonies from the crazy ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are called stalker......not the same thing really.

Sasquatch stalking people through the woods at night are some of my favorite reports to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, let me tell you Missy. When you get hauled up in front of a Judge with no sense of humor about stalking................. :geek:

Ok, maybe I've said too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spotted this however the announcement does not include any scientific data which would make it more convincing.

http://www.cryptomun...atch-dna-study/

If you read just the press releases, which is all we have right now, it seems to me that Dr. Ketchum (really?) is not going for the most parsimonious anwser which is that he has a human sample that was contaminated with animal DNA because it was found in the wilderness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More like, Bigfootsheet.

Let's face it, just saying you have Bigfoot DNA is really no different than saying you have a Bigfoot body in a freezer...and we all know how that one turned out.

Well, this sample was collected by some well known bigfoot hunter who sent it to three independent labs for testing. I do not think the sample origin is in question and it appears that the person who collected it believes it to be from bigfoot. The problem is that the mitochondrial DNA is completely modern human and the nuclear DNA is part human and part unknown animal. To say it was actually hybrid they would need to exclude all possible contamination and identify the unknown DNA. Since mtDNA is easy to get from hair and I am assuming this is a hair sample and nuDNA degrades quickly in hair, the most obvious answer is that this is a sample of human hair. I am curious to see what the other labs have to say. It seems extremely unlikely to me that a modern human woman mated with an unknown primate male sometime after the time of neanderthals and produced a fertile offspring that has been roaming the forests of North America ever since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that the hair follicles(the bulbing hair root) are needed for DNA. Not just hair.

It is needed to get good nuDNA, but not good mtDNA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read somewhere that on average, the average human has 4% Neanderthal DNA. How can we tell that it's Neanderthal and not Human in this case? And could this "it's human and a bit of something else" DNA just be a human with a disproportionately high amount of Neanderthal DNA?

The average non-African modern human has from 1% to 4% Neanderthal DNA. Keep in mind though that since both lines, Neanderthal and AMH (anatomically modern human - us) are members of the genus Homo that they are BOTH human. As to how can it be known if the sample is Neanderthal and not AMH, Neanderthal mitochondrial DNA differs significantly from ours.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one want to see what it is they supposedly have that can be Verified. What will get through Peer Review?

A google search turns up some other Fringy sites that have picked up the story. No big news outlets yet. :whistle:

http://doubtfulnews....thout-the-data/

http://www.bigfootlu...trigued-by.html

here you go , its all over the news now lol

'Bigfoot' is part human, DNA study claims

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2012/11/27/bigfoot-is-part-human-dna-study-claims/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No known relation to apes, neanderthal of primitive hominids? That leads directly to... Aliens? :alien:

Anyway, if the mtDNA is entirely human then there is no Female Bigfoot bloodline, right? Somewhere back in time, a male proto-bigfoot breed with a human. Making a hybrid race that somehow became stable. (Maybe by further hybridization with more humans?) A range of percentages of human blood would explain why some bigfoots are 10 feet tall, others are 8 feet tall, and some are 6 feet tall. Might also explain the various differences in footprint morphology and such. This could open up the Discussion to all kinds of "What if"s.

Betcha someone tries to tag the hybridization onto..... Gigantopithicus? That way the "giganto lovers" and the "human=Bigfoot" will both be right. They mentioned that they compared the DNA to ape, ancient humans, but not to ancient apes. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15,000 years ago the only hominin species left was us. So any group that broke off that far back were modern humans to begin with. And at that point in time modern humans were migrating into the Americas while there is no evidence of a pre-existing group of hominins here.

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15,000 years ago the only hominin species left was us. So any group that broke off that far back were modern humans to begin with. And at that point in time modern humans were migrating into the Americas while there is no evidence of a pre-existing group of hominins here.

cormac

That we know of.... Dun, dun, duuuuuunnnnnn!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That we know of.... Dun, dun, duuuuuunnnnnn!!!

Eurasians share 1% - 4% autosomal DNA with Neanderthals, yet significantly different mtDNA from them but we are supposed to believe that the Bigfoot hybrid is reversed. I'm not buying it.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eurasians share 1% - 4% autosomal DNA with Neanderthals, yet significantly different mtDNA from them but we are supposed to believe that the Bigfoot hybrid is reversed. I'm not buying it.

cormac

So, modern human mtDNA has some neanderthal mtDNA in it? Wouldn't that mean that there are male and female neanderthals in the modern human ancestory? If only male neanderthals had shopped around, then wouldn't there be zero neanderthal mtDNA in modern human mtDNA?

So what they are saying is possible, but not terribly likely? Even if it is one in a billion chance, stranger things have happened.

Several of the articles have stated that such a hybrid would be sterile, like a mule. Yet not all mules are sterile. Some female mules are fertile. However no fertile male mules have ever been recorded, so no Mule self propogating species has ever been started.

From what I understand the same is true of Lion-Tiger and PolarBear-BrownBear hybrids. Some few are fertile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.