qxcontinuum Posted October 3, 2013 #26 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Where have they gotten the dna to be studied. Was a big foot ever captured? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafterman Posted October 3, 2013 #27 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Where have they gotten the dna to be studied. Was a big foot ever captured? It was gathered by various folks/groups and given to her. In fact, there will soon be some lawsuits from the donors demanding that Melba return their samples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawken Posted October 3, 2013 #28 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Maybe King Kong and Faye Wray had kids before he was shot down from a skyscraper. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted October 3, 2013 #29 Share Posted October 3, 2013 (edited) Where have they gotten the dna to be studied. Was a big foot ever captured? Melba claimed samples came from all over the US and even foreign countries. However, most of the 100+ samples: Hair and bark shavings, tissue, toenail, saliva, and blood, were mostly hairs: Taken predominantly from habituated and tracked Bigfoot in the Erickson Project. One method was to feed them on Tupperware plates and then collect the DNA. One sample (flesh) came from an allegedly shot and killed bigfoot: Sierra Kills and Justin Smeja Edited October 3, 2013 by QuiteContrary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keninsc Posted October 3, 2013 #30 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Why is anyone giving Melba the time of day. The woman is a fruitcake with extra nuts......lots and lots of nuts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted October 3, 2013 #31 Share Posted October 3, 2013 (edited) Why is anyone giving Melba the time of day. The woman is a fruitcake with extra nuts......lots and lots of nuts. 'Tis a shame what passes for news these days. Yet, she started it all and roped a lot of us skeptics in, watching for the train wreck, and I quite enjoyed reading the reviews of her study. Edited October 3, 2013 by QuiteContrary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExplainInTheAss Posted October 3, 2013 #32 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Uh... yeah well whose honestly gonna believe any of this until we see an actual bigfoot?.. Lets be forreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+DieChecker Posted October 3, 2013 #33 Share Posted October 3, 2013 In the peer reviews, one reviewer complains about the pictures she submitted with her report. So, Ketchum claims they have many more and better photographs, yet she fails to submit the good ones with the paper she wants to impress with and publish? How does that make any sense? She claims there was a supplementary video that was clearer to support the photograph. Sorry, too much par for her course, imo. That IS pretty stupid, IMHO. Why have "better" photos and not use them in your report? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lava_Lady Posted October 3, 2013 #34 Share Posted October 3, 2013 It would be wistfully awesome and sad if it were real. I rather love the mystery of these creatures. If ever there was conclusive evidence, I foresee droves of rednecks, in every state with a reported sighting, with weapons hunting them down. I'd rather this all be faked than for that to happen. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted October 3, 2013 #35 Share Posted October 3, 2013 It would be wistfully awesome and sad if it were real. I rather love the mystery of these creatures. If ever there was conclusive evidence, I foresee droves of rednecks, in every state with a reported sighting, with weapons hunting them down. I'd rather this all be faked than for that to happen. Although now adamant there is no evidence to support their existence, I've always said I'd love bf to be real and I'd kiss MM's boots if we ever get a body. But I fear not only anyone with guns hoping to make a nickel or darn big fur rug. But the thought of others ("protecting" the species) who'd stick the creatures in zoos, shipped around the world, for us to gawk at. It would be the same as killing them, imo. Either way or whatever, if they were ever proven to exist, we'd muck 'em up somehow, imo. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwin Posted October 3, 2013 #36 Share Posted October 3, 2013 This blog is funny! This is an mtDNA & nuDNA multiple lab study. Reading these comments makes one realize why the US comes in so low in the edu rankings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeWitz Posted October 3, 2013 #37 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Help out some of us less-than-stellar-scientific-types, Kwin. What are we missing? I reviewed the peer reviews and, although I know my human biology (gross anatomy, basic physiology), I'm the first to admit the DNA lab evidence is difficult for me to digest. However, the plain English of the reviewers was less than a ringing endorsement of the alleged hybrid findings. What can you add/subtract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belial Posted October 3, 2013 #38 Share Posted October 3, 2013 Just one question - who knows what 'bigfoot' DNA looks like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted October 3, 2013 #39 Share Posted October 3, 2013 This blog is funny! This is an mtDNA & nuDNA multiple lab study. Reading these comments makes one realize why the US comes in so low in the edu rankings. Her study is funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted October 3, 2013 #40 Share Posted October 3, 2013 There was an article posted by the Houston Chronicle Report. That did they're own testing on some of her DNA samples and all came back as actually being from different types of opossum. Also think about it if she did find DNA from a Hybrid of Homo-Sapiens and an unknown primate. You would be hearing about this all over over the internet and news. Instead your seeing it months later on this website. I think her findings are bogus. Exacto-mundo,,, opossum. which makes for for a very interesting question then,... "who is lying??" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earl.Of.Trumps Posted October 3, 2013 #41 Share Posted October 3, 2013 here is what I ponder.... $500K was invested in this. Ketchum's DNA evidence could so easily be debunked *if* the samples are opossum - or whatever, that the proposed docummentary may not ever get aired by any reputable network. meaning, NO PROFIT. Would the businessman take that risk?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PersonFromPorlock Posted October 4, 2013 #42 Share Posted October 4, 2013 What puzzles me is they got footage of a supposed sleeping sasquatch but if ,sasquatch is so elusive why would it just lie down for nap in the open ?. It was a married Sasquatch and its sleeping mate rolled their cloak of invisibility up around herself in the middle of the night. Any married he-hominim knows how that works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderOTD Posted October 4, 2013 #43 Share Posted October 4, 2013 here is what I ponder.... $500K was invested in this. Ketchum's DNA evidence could so easily be debunked *if* the samples are opossum - or whatever, that the proposed docummentary may not ever get aired by any reputable network. meaning, NO PROFIT. Would the businessman take that risk?? Don't underestimate the gullibility of the Bigfoot community. To even read the report you have to buy a copy for 30 usd. To even get their report published they had to buy an existing Journal, rename it Denovo and publish it. That action alone hurts the credibility of their finds, and the "HD" video they just released, LOL. I didn't know that Chewbaca was directly modeled after the North American Bigfoot!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted October 4, 2013 #44 Share Posted October 4, 2013 (edited) here is what I ponder.... $500K was invested in this. Ketchum's DNA evidence could so easily be debunked *if* the samples are opossum - or whatever, that the proposed docummentary may not ever get aired by any reputable network. meaning, NO PROFIT. Would the businessman take that risk?? "Funded by businessman Adrian Erickson, the five-year $500,000 study has sought to find definitive evidence that an unknown species of hominid is stalking the forests of North America." Imo: The only reason I can see for this whole namesake project of his, would be a financial pay off, in one of a couple ways. It is not to prove the poor Matilda (rug-wig-costume-bear-man-pig) is indeed a novel creature. Unless Erickson is extremely gullible or blinded by the lovely Ms. K, he has to know the field research is all bogus. I would guess the money is what paid for all the lab man-hours and the expensive equipment. I believe a DNA study did take place under the supervision of Ms. K. I don’t know if it will prove difficult finding someone to produce or air their alleged documentary. Considering what is offered on TV nowadays. Now, as they are, I’m sure, hoping to arouse more investors with their newsbites = more money to pay for alleged field "research", if the documentary somehow "fell by the wayside", I would not be surprised either. How easy to tell investors they can’t witness the habituated Erickson Project creatures in person because it could cause the creatures undue stress and ruin the trust they have built over the years. And "we had second thoughts about producing/airing the documentary for the creatures continued well-being and safety". Faking Foots is spensive Edited October 4, 2013 by QuiteContrary 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted October 4, 2013 #45 Share Posted October 4, 2013 here is what I ponder.... $500K was invested in this. Ketchum's DNA evidence could so easily be debunked *if* the samples are opossum - or whatever, that the proposed docummentary may not ever get aired by any reputable network. meaning, NO PROFIT. Would the businessman take that risk?? I think it will be fairly easy to get the $500,000 back. They have been on a marketing rampage and will be able to sell this to several TV networks. They won't include any opossum DNA evidence, only incunclusive. People are still looking to find the next "Patterson" film clip. Any business minded person knows that a bunch of money could have been made off the Patterson film, but it wasn't handled well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob008 Posted October 4, 2013 #46 Share Posted October 4, 2013 (edited) Folks, we Americans are not buying this story/research anymore than you all are. The videos do not offer any more proof of this animals existence than the original 1967 Patterson film ( which for the record I think is real) and Miss Ketchum's DNA finding have been debunked by many scientists. The one video that bothers me the most is one of the supposed sleeping Bigfoot. How come the person filming it, didn't stick around and wait for it to wake up and get better video, or maybe grap a big ole stick and wack it behind the head and now they got a live specimen! Edited October 4, 2013 by Rob008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderOTD Posted October 4, 2013 #47 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Folks, we Americans are not buying this story/research anymore than you all are. The videos do not offer any more proof of this animals existence than the original 1967 Patterson film ( which for the record I think is real) and Miss Ketchum's DNA finding have been debunked by many scientists. The one video that bothers me the most is one of the supposed sleeping Bigfoot. How come the person filming it, didn't stick around and wait for it to wake up and get better video, or maybe grap a big ole stick and wack it behind the head and now they got a live specimen! Well once undeniable proof of bigfoot is found, these self proclaimed researchers(i use that term lightly) would be out of the job and would no longer be able to peddle their shaky evidences via books, dvds, television shows etc. There is much more benefit to the community as a whole to never find conclusive evidence. This is just another bogus sham to promote their upcoming documentary, boost sales on the $30 report, and possibly pushing for a T.V. show of their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Posted October 4, 2013 #48 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Folks, we Americans are not buying this story/research anymore than you all are. The videos do not offer any more proof of this animals existence than the original 1967 Patterson film ( which for the record I think is real) and Miss Ketchum's DNA finding have been debunked by many scientists. The one video that bothers me the most is one of the supposed sleeping Bigfoot. How come the person filming it, didn't stick around and wait for it to wake up and get better video, or maybe grap a big ole stick and wack it behind the head and now they got a live specimen! Looked like the perfect time to get up close and they chose not to. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keninsc Posted October 4, 2013 #49 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Shoot, you prove Bigfoot is real and people will probably try and kill you to keep it out of the public domain because too many people will loose a livelihood. Matt Moneymaker will have to return to the law, which he claims to hate, but being a lawyer that means he isn't really qualified to do anything else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q-C Posted October 4, 2013 #50 Share Posted October 4, 2013 Folks, we Americans are not buying this story/research anymore than you all are. The videos do not offer any more proof of this animals existence than the original 1967 Patterson film ( which for the record I think is real) and Miss Ketchum's DNA finding have been debunked by many scientists. The one video that bothers me the most is one of the supposed sleeping Bigfoot. How come the person filming it, didn't stick around and wait for it to wake up and get better video, or maybe grap a big ole stick and wack it behind the head and now they got a live specimen! They claim to have more photos and footage of Matilda. She's been around for a few years. She is one of their habituated bigfoot. So they have had a lot of alleged up-close-and-personal interaction with her and others. So they could produce a body for science or take science to a body if the wanted. Apparently, they don't want to. They'd rather dazzle us with opossum hair! I'm all dazzled out... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now