Forums → WEPR → Bigfoot DNA?
| 20 | 11231 |
Dr. Melba Ketchum is claiming that hair samples are from a Sasquatch and it turns out that Bigfoot is a human hybrid.
"DALLAS, Nov. 24--A team of scientists can verify that their 5-year long DNA study, currently under peer-review, confirms the existence of a novel hominin hybrid species, commonly called âBigfootâ or âSasquatch,â living in North America."
I'm failing to see how they can jump to his conclusion. Eve if the sample does indeed turn out to show it to be from a human hybrid as they claim.
The point that the study hasn't been put through peer review also raises suspicion. We don't know if the study was conducted properly or if the samples had been tainted before hand. Right now they are just making a claim and not showing their work.
http://www.medicaldaily.com/articles/13303/20121128/bigfoot-real-one-researcher-proof.htm#eYuKZJFuLdfXvfo9.99
http://www.dnadiagnostics.com/press.html
So what are your thoughts?
- 20 Replies
It's currently under peer review, so I suppose waiting is the best course of action.
I do have to say though, I'm highly, highly skeptical of any Bigfoot or Sasquatch claim. If such a species existed, why have we found no remains of them? Why can no one find them? No evidence for them in droppings or nests, and certainly there would need to be some sort of thing to "hybrid" with in the first place.
Pretty much I think it's bunk to begin with.
Well, there is evidence of a ancestor of humans named gigantopithecus existing, and that is what believers theorize bigfoot is. However, I too am highly skeptical that anything will come of this. Gigantopithecus died out a long time ago.
It's currently under peer review, so I suppose waiting is the best course of action.
^this, of course.
But also, her mode of operation is dubious from the start; she claims to have found unknown DNA sequences and calls them "Sasquatch nuclear DNA" without further reasoning; to me, "distinctly non-human, non-archaic hominin, and non-ape sequences" does sound like the probe was contaminated. She has found a strange amalgam of sequences, I'm sure of that, but there is no positive evidence for a sasquatch or a bigfoot in there. If I've learned something about strange findings, is that jumping on conclusions usually lead in disappointment.
**** yourself. This section is for intellectual conversation, which is why I'm never here. You don't wanna see a bunch of posts about astrology on here do you?
The birth of a, "Big foot" or a hominin hybrid species is possible. There have been human disorders, so who says animals don't have any, too? This, "big foot" may just be your average animal that has a disorder.
But I think the study listed above is false. Same reasons. Never been put through peer review, and immediate jump to conclusions.
This, "big foot" may just be your average animal that has a disorder.
Well, the study said they found clearly human mtDNA, which means there must have been a human mother at some point. If what they claim is true, that is.
Well, the study said they found clearly human mtDNA, which means there must have been a human mother at some point. If what they claim is true, that is.
I suppose.
THen it must be a human with a disorder. It doesn't seem as logical as an animal with a disorder, though.
Anyways, I still don't believe their study is true.
Even though I'm not giving any credit to the study as a whole either, I'm sure they would have noticed it if they had found a human sequence warped by a disorder, and wouldn't have written "distinctly nonhuman". Although, you never know.. ^^ But I'm still more fond of the simple contamination thing.
I'm just wondering about the date they gave for the assumed hybridisation event, ca. 15'000 years ago. Their only means of finding that out would be the mtDNA, Even if it turns out to be a big mistake, how come the mtDNA is so old?
Another issue I'm seeing with this is what we know of hybrid species. In almost all cases a hybrid animal will be sterile. So if this is real, Bigfoot couldn't be an ongoing species.
This adds another element to the mix as well. If we are to consider the hybrid Bigfoot and Bigfoot is mostly sterile. That would mean not only do we have an as yet undiscovered half human running around, but also another undiscovered species of ape running around alive and well that has gone undetected along with Bigfoot.
"suggests that the legendary Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago as a hybrid cross of modern Homo sapiens with an unknown primate species."
They clearly suggest the hybridisation happened long ago and led to a stable species they call sasquatch and apparently is the origin of the sample. Enough time for both the "sasquatch" and the unknown primate species to go extinct.
It is possibly true I mean I believe in bigfoot!
Something is possibly true just because you believe in it. Things either are or aren't, and while we may not know which is which in every instance, our individual beliefs don't affect reality.
Something is possibly true just because you believe in it.
Isn't*...
Change date stamp 4 times? Check.
Add edit button? Nope.
They clearly suggest the hybridisation happened long ago and led to a stable species they call sasquatch and apparently is the origin of the sample. Enough time for both the "sasquatch" and the unknown primate species to go extinct.
It also states that they need to be protected from those who will go out to hunt trap and kill them. This indicates they are talking about something still alive today and a belief that there is more than one.
"Government at all levels must recognize them as an indigenous people and immediately protect their human and Constitutional rights against those who would see in their physical and cultural differences a âlicenseâ to hunt, trap, or kill them."
Ya, I think ultimately it all boils down to what that ominous hair sample is exactly, where they got it from and all that. I'm really curious to hear about that, especially keeping in mind that the "yeti scalps" hoarded by tibetian monks where found to be made from local goat hair (distinctly nonhuman, non-ancestral hominin, and non-recent primate).
You must be logged in to post a reply!