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

274 posts in this topic

--Why aren’t BF more like us? Tools, dwellings, fire, etc. BF, according to what we "know", seems to have “lost” most of its human traits except bipedalism.

There have been claims of Bigfoot using tools, fire, and dwellings. What Bigfoot is and does is dependent on which angle is considered to be dominant in the Bigfoot-lore and what is deemed credible by the individual seeker. Everyone is pursuing an agenda when it comes to Bigfoot - closely human, hybrid, relict hominid, Gigantopithecus, multiple species, interdimensional, alien, etc. When it comes down to it none are more or less valid/ridiculous than any of the others.

"Bigfoot" is really only the combination of many individual/local folkloric versions revolving around a common theme - the Wild/Hairy-Man. What Bigfoot really is is of little importance. What Bigfoot is to you (the individual seeker) is what matters and which version of Bigfoot is considered to be dominant within the lore is what matters most of all. We all experience Bigfoot according to our beliefs.

With the recent DNA claims pushing Bigfoot as a different human or human-hybrid you can be sure that it will be followed by more Bigfoot claims involving human-like behaviours and cultural activity. The Bigfoot-as-American-ape crowd have some highly influential advocates and, as much is at stake, they will not take this new threat to their position lying down so watch out for more claims supporting that side as well.

Try watching the unfolding chaos as part of the sub-cultural war for dominant position in the Bigfoot-lore. More conferences, merchandising, and TV shows to follow. To the victor goes the spoils ($$$ and cryptozoological fame/infamy) yet the mystery will remain elusive/illusive...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been claims of Bigfoot using tools, fire, and dwellings. What Bigfoot is and does is dependent on which angle is considered to be dominant in the Bigfoot-lore and what is deemed credible by the individual seeker. Everyone is pursuing an agenda when it comes to Bigfoot - closely human, hybrid, relict hominid, Gigantopithecus, multiple species, interdimensional, alien, etc. When it comes down to it none are more or less valid/ridiculous than any of the others.

"Bigfoot" is really only the combination of many individual/local folkloric versions revolving around a common theme - the Wild/Hairy-Man. What Bigfoot really is is of little importance. What Bigfoot is to you (the individual seeker) is what matters and which version of Bigfoot is considered to be dominant within the lore is what matters most of all. We all experience Bigfoot according to our beliefs.

With the recent DNA claims pushing Bigfoot as a different human or human-hybrid you can be sure that it will be followed by more Bigfoot claims involving human-like behaviours and cultural activity. The Bigfoot-as-American-ape crowd have some highly influential advocates and, as much is at stake, they will not take this new threat to their position lying down so watch out for more claims supporting that side as well.

Try watching the unfolding chaos as part of the sub-cultural war for dominant position in the Bigfoot-lore. More conferences, merchandising, and TV shows to follow. To the victor goes the spoils ($$$ and cryptozoological fame/infamy) yet the mystery will remain elusive/illusive...

Yes, there are those who have and will claim how BF is like us in its habits and lifestyle but, we haven't found physical evidence of this. Finding a hair a long a path he was seen taking, would be far more difficult than human/intelligent design dwellings in areas he and his clan supposedly reside.

And it is true that what he is is of little importance because he is a myth not a real creature. At least for me.

But I still wanted to understand how these "scientists" fit their theory (ies) into the history of humans since the thread article claim is "Part Human!"

Edited by QuiteContrary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, there are those who have and will claim how BF is like us in its habits and lifestyle but, we haven't found physical evidence of this. Finding a hair a long a path he was seen taking, would be far more difficult than human/intelligent design dwellings in areas he and his clan supposedly reside.

Well, that depends on one's definition of "evidence". Those whose belief in the reality of Bigfoot claim there is much evidence - so much so that it is incredulous that Bigfoot isn't officially recognised as a species. There is evidence of tool use (stone tools too large for human use) and dwelling construction (tree bends and other stick formations). Of course, these aren't verified in any scientific manner but instead are examples of interpretive evidence - natural and artificial occurences/formations interpretted as signs of Bigfoot. (Will Bigfoot DNA be the same?) Although it may seem ridiculous to outsiders like us, such "evidences" are powerful reinforcers to those with the appropriate Bigfoot belief. The largest portion of Bigfoot claims these days are coming from people and groups who fully expected to see/experience Bigfoot via their pre-existing beliefs - this is something that needs to be explored further.

And it is true that what he is is of little importance because he is a myth not a real creature. At least for me.

But I still wanted to understand how these "scientists" fit their theory (ies) into the history of humans since the thread article claim is "Part Human!"

Well, Melba's seen Bigfoot. I'm not sure if Burtsev has seen a Yeti but he remains convinced by the Carter Farm Bigfoots which may have contributed samples to this study. I'm not sure if David Paulides (not a scientist but a key player in this drama) has seen Bigfoot but is a radical Bigfoot author who has been pushing this unique human tribe angle. I suspect these people are less interested in the actual history of humans and more about how they can interpret and promote the evidence in order to justify their pre-existing belief in Bigfoot.

Speculation about Bigfoot is part of the attraction of the phenomenon - because the experiences are largely subjective anyone can be an "expert". Who are the other scientists/players? Examine their pre-existing Bigfoot beliefs and I bet they are largely compatible to those of the other players.

Watch the statements of the powerful opposing Bigfoot-faction who have invested in giganto-speculation (like Meldrum and Moneymaker). I reckon we are on the cusp of the Bigfoot Wars. Science is coming to Bigfoot via Sykes DNA study so the players, factions, and speculations will have to appear more sciency to gain/maintain dominance. Or things might just get a whole lot wackier - the paranormal Bigfoot is lurking...

Interesting times...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Science is coming to Bigfoot via Sykes DNA" NW

NW, explain this a little more. Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember Henner Fahrenbach's 2008 conference?

LINK

Ketchup is old hat.

30 foot strides.......Damn

TY

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Once upon a time..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Science is coming to Bigfoot via Sykes DNA" NW

NW, explain this a little more. Thanks

I can't speak for NW but what it means to me is let's see what Dr. Sykes finds. Link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iv heard that Bigfoot could just be a Shaman thats chosen to live in the wild and off the land and over the years hes become more animal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iv heard that Bigfoot could just be a Shaman thats chosen to live in the wild and off the land and over the years hes become more animal

And travels all over the US and Canada?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak for NW but what it means to me is let's see what Dr. Sykes finds. Link

Thanks! Looks like we don't have long at all to wait.

I wonder what the results will prove to all the sides in this subject, as NW pointed out.

There is always wiggle room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Science is coming to Bigfoot via Sykes DNA" NW

NW, explain this a little more. Thanks

I can't speak for NW but what it means to me is let's see what Dr. Sykes finds. Link

Yeah, that's the one. The peer-reviewed Bigfoot DNA study minus shenanigans. Interesting to see how it will turn out...

Iv heard that Bigfoot could just be a Shaman thats chosen to live in the wild and off the land and over the years hes become more animal

And travels all over the US and Canada?

There is no one answer fits all when it comes to Bigfoot. The Shaman explanation may account for a small proportion (also in Australia, too) of alleged sightings but due to the secret/sacred nature of the Shaman it is difficult for outsiders to explore such possibilities...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tracks for me are most compelling. DNA is great too but a track is something much more personal. I've never seen a BF track but know from tracking other animals and people (for fun) that you can tell a great deal about what you are tracking from the tracks they leave. And, I find it very hard to beleive that a hoaxer with intimate knowledge of anatomy and engineering for that matter, (one would need to engineer a foot that moves according the individual physiology of individual BFs) is making tracks in the middle of now where for people to find, without leaving his own tracks. I think the animal is intelligent and more attune to its environment and able to escape detection easily. After all, have you seen the people looking for this thing? Flashlights, talking to each other as if the thing is deaf or something. They need to step up their game if they want to really find the thing. Hire some special forces people that can actually go in undetected.

After reading the announcement, DNA as they are describing cannot be faked.

Edited by jsowersby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tracks for me are most compelling. DNA is great too but a track is something much more personal. I've never seen a BF track but know from tracking other animals and people (for fun) that you can tell a great deal about what you are tracking from the tracks they leave. And, I find it very hard to beleive that a hoaxer with intimate knowledge of anatomy and engineering for that matter, (one would need to engineer a foot that moves according the individual physiology of individual BFs) is making tracks in the middle of now where for people to find, without leaving his own tracks.

Where are these tracks documented? Most likely the people who make the tracks are the same as those who "find" them and "report" it. Furthermore, it doesn't take an intimate knowledge of anatomy and engineering to fake a track which somebody believes to be real. Belief/bias distorts one's perceptions to suit. Not much of a mystery, really...

After reading the announcement, DNA as they are describing cannot be faked.

DNA cannot be faked but people's claims about what the DNA really tells us sure can. This is the World of Bigfoot, after all...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where are these tracks documented? Most likely the people who make the tracks are the same as those who "find" them and "report" it. Furthermore, it doesn't take an intimate knowledge of anatomy and engineering to fake a track which somebody believes to be real. Belief/bias distorts one's perceptions to suit. Not much of a mystery, really...

DNA cannot be faked but people's claims about what the DNA really tells us sure can. This is the World of Bigfoot, after all...

Claims can be faked, otherwise know as lies. I suppose there is financial gains to those claims. It was pretty straight forward what was in the DNA samples, what left it is not clear. The tracks that have been documented with plaster casts vary in quality but the most intriguing tracks show ridges in the skin, different arches than human feet, old injuries meaning injuries that have healed over time and left the foot slightly deformed, and physiologic shifts where the movement of the bones of the feet are moving while the print is being left. Depth of the print, length of stride, width of the prints, direction, location are things to look at. Tracks in a line indicate traveling to a known location like food or water sources. You're right in saying if someone wants to find a track they will see tracks everywhere. But, the best plaster casts of BF tracks are compelling. If someone is faking such tracks, they are wasting their time as a hoaxer and should be in special effects.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Claims can be faked, otherwise know as lies. I suppose there is financial gains to those claims. It was pretty straight forward what was in the DNA samples, what left it is not clear. The tracks that have been documented with plaster casts vary in quality but the most intriguing tracks show ridges in the skin, different arches than human feet, old injuries meaning injuries that have healed over time and left the foot slightly deformed, and physiologic shifts where the movement of the bones of the feet are moving while the print is being left. Depth of the print, length of stride, width of the prints, direction, location are things to look at. Tracks in a line indicate traveling to a known location like food or water sources. You're right in saying if someone wants to find a track they will see tracks everywhere. But, the best plaster casts of BF tracks are compelling. If someone is faking such tracks, they are wasting their time as a hoaxer and should be in special effects.

"the most intriguing tracks show ridges in the skin, different arches than human feet, old injuries meaning injuries that have healed over time and left the foot slightly deformed, and physiologic shifts where the movement of the bones of the feet are moving while the print is being left. Depth of the print, length of stride, width of the prints"

Who has made these claims? Where is mainstream peer review documentation of these tracks with the same amazing conclusions: 1) These characteristics are indeed true for some tracks. 2)Some tracks are real and indicate an as of yet undocumented animal.

Only my opinion, but what scientist worth his salt couldn't/wouldn't share with colleagues and get other scientists on board with this evidence to have pushed Sasquatch into the mainstream by now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whole thing rings false as usual. the kind of jump-the gun hyperbole and conclusion grasping that scientists with careers to worry about don't tend to do. ><

Her career must be really at rock bottom to pull a stunt like this though... because when it (almost certainly) proves to be nonsense, it's kinda hard to come back from that and enter respected circles...

I think an earlier comment about her conducting her research from a meth lab sounds worryingly believable.

Anyway, at least her name will have a ring to it when she begins employment at mcdonalds.

Edited by ad hoc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whole thing rings false as usual. the kind of jump-the gun hyperbole and conclusion grasping that scientists with careers to worry about don't tend to do. ><

Her career must be really at rock bottom to pull a stunt like this though... because when it (almost certainly) proves to be nonsense, it's kinda hard to come back from that and enter respected circles...

I think an earlier comment about her conducting her research from a meth lab sounds worryingly believable.

Anyway, at least her name will have a ring to it when she begins employment at mcdonalds.

Not when it comes to the Bigfoot community......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"the most intriguing tracks show ridges in the skin, different arches than human feet, old injuries meaning injuries that have healed over time and left the foot slightly deformed, and physiologic shifts where the movement of the bones of the feet are moving while the print is being left. Depth of the print, length of stride, width of the prints"

Who has made these claims? Where is mainstream peer review documentation of these tracks with the same amazing conclusions: 1) These characteristics are indeed true for some tracks. 2)Some tracks are real and indicate an as of yet undocumented animal.

Only my opinion, but what scientist worth his salt couldn't/wouldn't share with colleagues and get other scientists on board with this evidence to have pushed Sasquatch into the mainstream by now?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe it's Shaq jogging in remote regions of the U.S., for centuries... An undiscovered tribe of very big humans, dressing in ape costumes? A hoaxer(s) making prints in the wilderness for thousands of years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am aware of Dr. Meldrum's work. Where are his mainstream colleagues who agree? This would be a once in a lifetime discovery.

Why are his claims ignored?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, Dr. Meldrum has actual physical evidence for colleagues to look at and study. Meldrum is not just quoting hearsay and first-person stories. But claims actual hold in your hand evidence that show "ridges in the skin, different arches than human feet, old injuries meaning injuries that have healed over time and left the foot slightly deformed, and physiologic shifts where the movement of the bones of the feet are moving while the print is being left."

Why then the skepticism in the scientific community?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am aware of Dr. Meldrum's work. Where are his mainstream colleagues who agree? This would be a once in a lifetime discovery.

Why are his claims ignored?

Mainstream scientists are often not willing to consider the possibility, simply due the lack of approval they may receive from colleagues, the potential negative impact on their careers or loss of reputation. There are politics in science.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mainstream scientists are often not willing to consider the possibility, simply due the lack of approval they may receive from colleagues, the potential negative impact on their careers or loss of reputation. There are politics in science.

Yes, I certainly am not speaking from the experience of being a part of the scientific community, and I know that.

But for me, I can't just ignore the skepticism in the scientific community either and blame it on politics or any number of other possibilities, other than scientific reasoning itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mainstream scientists are often not willing to consider the possibility, simply due the lack of approval they may receive from colleagues, the potential negative impact on their careers or loss of reputation. There are politics in science.

Sorry, this does not work. As discussed in another topic where Dr. Meldrum made a few replies, Idaho State University is paying Dr. Meldrum to teach there, and he has taught at other places also. ( resigned and moved on for better positions ). They are also helping him with a Bigfoot Blimp project ( handling the donations for the project ). They let him use the campus for Bigfoot lectures.

They also let him store, and work on his Bigfoot castings on the campus.

If the " Scientific " community frowned on this, and Scientists were afraid to speak up, this would not be happening.

As a matter of fact, main stream scientists do not accept the possibility do to the lack of ( no ) evidence to support it. Not to mention, the many things that show it to be impossible. They are not out there thinking Bigfoot exists, but afraid to say how they feel....They do say how they feel.

Edited by Sakari
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Claims can be faked, otherwise know as lies. I suppose there is financial gains to those claims. It was pretty straight forward what was in the DNA samples, what left it is not clear. The tracks that have been documented with plaster casts vary in quality but the most intriguing tracks show ridges in the skin, different arches than human feet, old injuries meaning injuries that have healed over time and left the foot slightly deformed, and physiologic shifts where the movement of the bones of the feet are moving while the print is being left. Depth of the print, length of stride, width of the prints, direction, location are things to look at. Tracks in a line indicate traveling to a known location like food or water sources. You're right in saying if someone wants to find a track they will see tracks everywhere. But, the best plaster casts of BF tracks are compelling. If someone is faking such tracks, they are wasting their time as a hoaxer and should be in special effects.

Faked Bigfoot claims are only "lies" if you take them seriously in the first place. "Stories" are a more accurate term and without the negative connotations of "lies". Everyone tells stories (Do parents lie to their children before bedtime or do they tell them stories?) and Bigfoot stories are an example of folklore-in-action. No more, no less.

The so-called "dermal ridges" found on some Bigfoot tracks are artifical artifacts formed by the casting process:

http://www.csicop.or...igfoot_evidence

http://madsciencewri...ng-bigfoot.html

http://orgoneresearc...eview-material/

Where are the best plaster casts of tracks? The bulk of Professor Meldrum's collection was inherited from well-known hoaxer Paul Freeman and his Meldrum's book also contained photos of Ray Wallace's stomper impressions which he somehow considered to be authentic. Perhaps Meldrum saw "physiologic shifts in the movement of bones" with those too. But that's the thing - if you believe in Bigfoot then you will fall for fakery which confirms your pre-existing beliefs time and time again. Is this not the lesson of Bigfoot? You don't have to be a special effects wizard to fool someone with fake tracks - you just need a basic level of craftiness and to be able to spin a good yarn while people's pre-existing beliefs fill in the details...

1 person likes this

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.