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 6
Night Walker

Sasquatch nests eDNA study

435 posts in this topic

Quote

New methods of surveying all DNA to be found in a soil sample (eDNA) may assist in the search for sasquatch. Soil samples taken from ground nest sites, attributed to sasquatch on the basis of construction and hair samples, are ideal candidates for eDNA analysis. Samples have been collected from nests at a site in the Olympic Penninsula, WA and await analysis. Cost is approximately $1000 per sample.

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/sasquatch-nests-edna-study-science#/

Interesting. Something that everyone with an interest in Bigfoot could support. Am pleased with the participation of Dr. Todd Disotell...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool, but not needed. The creature is real, and whether or not mainstream scientists manage to acknowledge that reality is inevitably irrelevant. It is out there regardless of their acknowledgment. Although it is somewhat amusing watching them struggle to provide the proof they so desperately need, while the truth is more or less already right in front of their faces. 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be eagerly awaiting the results. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, PrisonerX said:

Cool, but not needed. The creature is real, and whether or not mainstream scientists manage to acknowledge that reality is inevitably irrelevant. It is out there regardless of their acknowledgment. Although it is somewhat amusing watching them struggle to provide the proof they so desperately need, while the truth is more or less already right in front of their faces. 

 

It's amusing watching scientists attempt to gain proof of existence?  

Oxford recently sought out sample hairs from people who claimed to have found bigfoot hairs.   36 in total.   None of them panned out.  

 

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Myles said:

It's amusing watching scientists attempt to gain proof of existence?  

Oxford recently sought out sample hairs from people who claimed to have found bigfoot hairs.   36 in total.   None of them panned out.  

 

Not to be pedantic but it wasn't Oxford, there was a bit of a fuss about Bryan Sykes claiming that. In fact it was just Sykes, who invented an Oxford institution to appear to be the head of. He was attached to the university in the past though. Sykes is a bit of a loon, see his latest book on Zan and Khwit. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

34 minutes ago, oldrover said:

Not to be pedantic but it wasn't Oxford, there was a bit of a fuss about Bryan Sykes claiming that. In fact it was just Sykes, who invented an Oxford institution to appear to be the head of. He was attached to the university in the past though. Sykes is a bit of a loon, see his latest book on Zan and Khwit. 

That could be and it wouldn't surprise me.

After seeing it stated on several sites, including Time and National Geographic, I assumed it was pretty accurate. 

 

 

http://mashable.com/2014/07/02/bigfoot-dna/#JaNKhttlksqM

http://time.com/2949457/bigfoot-dna-bear-animal/

http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2014/07/01/yeti-bigfoot-dna-hair-study-science-animals-himalaya/

 

Either way, the tests were done an the results were known animals.  

Edited by Myles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Myles said:

Either way, the tests were done an the results were known animals.  

Indeed they were, even the 'surprising' ancient polar bear component of some of the Himalayan samples. Other researchers re examined those and found them to contain nothing of the sort and to be unremarkable representative of the local brown bear species. 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Myles said:

It's amusing watching scientists attempt to gain proof of existence?  

Oxford recently sought out sample hairs from people who claimed to have found bigfoot hairs.   36 in total.   None of them panned out.  

 

Yes, it is amusing, considering a body, or substantial portion of one, isn't really needed to be able to discern the truth of the matter - yet they cannot manage to recognize that truth without one. There's humor in that for me. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, PrisonerX said:

Yes, it is amusing, considering a body, or substantial portion of one, isn't really needed to be able to discern the truth of the matter - yet they cannot manage to recognize that truth without one. There's humor in that for me. 

 

Depends on who's doing the considering. I'd have to agree though there is absolutely no need to look for a body, if it hasn't turned up by now, it really isn't going to. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oldrover said:

Depends on who's doing the considering. I'd have to agree though there is absolutely no need to look for a body, if it hasn't turned up by now, it really isn't going to. 

Maybe one will, maybe one won't. With regards to the truth, it's inevitably irrelevant whether or not mainstream scientists manage to get their hands on one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PrisonerX said:

Maybe one will, maybe one won't. With regards to the truth, it's inevitably irrelevant whether or not mainstream scientists manage to get their hands on one. 

Or anyone, even a little tiny bit of one. A hair, for example. Anything at all. So far nothing, 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, oldrover said:

Or anyone, even a little tiny bit of one. A hair, for example. Anything at all. So far nothing, 

Irrelevant to reality. It is real nevertheless. That they've failed to confirm it is merely their failure, it changes nothing.

Only for those such as yourself who are reliant on their confirmation does it matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PrisonerX said:

Only for those such as yourself who are reliant on their confirmation does it matter.

No, I don't need 'their' conformation, just some sort of evidence. Anything really. Just not a few rather empty anecdotes or the reinforcement of a personal position. You know, something real.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PrisonerX said:

Irrelevant to reality. It is real nevertheless. That they've failed to confirm it is merely their failure, it changes nothing.

Only for those such as yourself who are reliant on their confirmation does it matter.

I just covered this on the other thread:

Quote

Sykes whittled down 95 samples to 37 that were most interesting based on the circumstances of their collection.

Of those 37, the team was able to extract DNA from 30. “A lot of them turned out to be very ordinary animals in their natural habitats,” Sykes says. As the team reports July 1 in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, supposed yeti and bigfoot samples turned out to come from bears (brown, black and polar), horses, raccoons, one human, some canines (the test didn’t narrow down if they were wolves or dogs), cows, sheep, a North American porcupine, a Malaysian tapir and a serow, which is a known animal similar to a goat or antelope.

But two hair samples from the Himalayas were a surprise. These hairs, both brownish in color, perfectly matched a short stretch of DNA once extracted from the jawbone of a 40,000-year-old polar bear. The hairs did not match modern polar bears. One hair came from an animal shot 40 years ago in Ladakh, India, by a hunter who reported that it behaved differently from typical brown bears.

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/gory-details/finally-some-solid-science-bigfoot

Now, what have you got to beat this?....oh thats right, you got nothing, but your belief., where did you get your info from?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, oldrover said:

You know, something real.  

apparently that is irrelevant. :whistle:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, PrisonerX said:

Irrelevant to reality. It is real nevertheless. That they've failed to confirm it is merely their failure, it changes nothing.

Only for those such as yourself who are reliant on their confirmation does it matter.

Actually it is the failure of everyone who ever tried to say they have evidence of bigfoot.  

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oldrover said:

No, I don't need 'their' conformation, just some sort of evidence. Anything really. Just not a few rather empty anecdotes or the reinforcement of a personal position. You know, something real.  

Yes, you do. Your post here is proof of that, as you've spoken dismissively and rather foolishly of the multitude of eyewitness accounts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

 

1 hour ago, freetoroam said:

I just covered this on the other thread:

Now, what have you got to beat this?....oh thats right, you got nothing, but your belief., where did you get your info from?

Irrelevant straw man. Like I said, that those individuals have failed thus far to provide the proof you so desire is meaningless with regards to reality. The creature is real, and it gives me great pleasure to witness you reveling in your ignorance of that reality.  

Edited by PrisonerX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Myles said:

Actually it is the failure of everyone who ever tried to say they have evidence of bigfoot.  

The failure is yours, as you're unable to properly discern the truth from the available information. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PrisonerX said:

The failure is yours, as you're unable to properly discern the truth from the available information. 

The truth is that you have no evidence to prove what you believe, while I have lots to prove you wrong.  Many hoarders have been found.  Many hairs have been disproved.  

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, PrisonerX said:

Like I said, that those individuals have failed thus far to provide the proof you so desire is meaningless with regards to reality.

You have it all wrong. What was being done is tests on what some were claiming to be evidence of bigfoot. The tests were not wanting to disprove it, but as it happens, it did.

only those making a claim have to back it up with evidence...they can not.

i would like to see proof of bigfoot...but no one can provide that. Are you getting it now?

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, PrisonerX said:

The failure is yours, as you're unable to properly discern the truth from the available information. 

The "available information", in this case, being none.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

10 hours ago, Myles said:

The truth is that you have no evidence to prove what you believe, while I have lots to prove you wrong.  Many hoarders have been found.  Many hairs have been disproved.  

It is you who lacks the proof you require, not I. Belief is your problem. It is not a matter of belief for me, the creature is real. 

Edited by PrisonerX
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

Eyewitness accounts aren't worth a pile of ****. People often misconstrue what they see and often lie, even if they don't mean to, when retelling a story.

Wrong, they're worth quite a bit taken as a whole. People often tell things exactly as they've happened. Your inability to glean the worth in them is your failure. 

1 hour ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

The "available information", in this case, being none.

Patently inaccurate, and quite laughably ignorant. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.