Who is Richard Stubstad and what does he know about Bigfoot DNA?
 |
| Richard Stubstad |
Who is Richard Stubstad? Where did he come from? How does he know so much about the Bigfoot DNA project? What did he learn while working with Dr. Melba Ketchum? All these questions are answered below in a bio written by Richard Stubstad himself.
Richard Stubstad
Engineering and Statistical Analyst
Richard Stubstad is a Registered Civil Engineer and Statistician who graduated from U.C. Berkeley (MSCE) in 1969. He lives in Ojai, California and is married to Zitta Stubstad. The couple has five grown sons and one grown daughter living in various parts of California, plus a second daughter who lives in Indiana during her husband’s 5-year residency program as a physician.
Richard had neither any interest in nor knowledge of sasquatch until the summer of 2009, when he attended a Stubstad family reunion in Kansas and his cousin Gordy insinuated he was “narrow minded” for not bothering to look into the matter. Since this insulted Richard to no end, he reluctantly agreed to do so ASAP.
Much to Richard’s surprise, the documented evidence in favor of the existence of a hominid called sasquatch (or bigfoot) was convincing enough to further perk his interest. Suddenly it dawned on Richard that the science of DNA forensic analysis had matured and had already been utilized for various kinds of scientific proof, including the mapping of the evolutionary tree of life from a genetic point of view and the placement in this tree of life of a well-known, extinct hominid—Neanderthal man. Ergo—by obtaining DNA samples from several purported sasquai (the plural version of sasquatch—hereby officially coined) and “connecting the dots” as it were, it could be determined once and for all whether or not such a hominid actually exists—without needing a “type” specimen (a body). In Richard’s mind, killing or maiming such a creature would be ethically and morally wrong, especially since they reportedly look so human-like and, most likely, very few (if any) of these creatures remain—at best living in scattered, remnant pockets within some of the heavily wooded and more remote areas of the United States and Canada.
Within a few months, Richard made contact with Adrian Erikson, Robert Schmalzbach (“Java Bob”), Shannon Sylvia and Dr. Melba Ketchum, among others, and initiated the mitochondrial sequencing of several purported sasquatch samples through Dr. Ketchum’s DNA Diagnostics Laboratory in Texas. Much to his surprise, once again, the first two samples—submitted by two totally independent and disparate researchers and from habituation sites in two widely separated states or provinces—turned out to be intimately related to one-another, DNA-wise, making the statistical probability of two independent hoaxes or misidentifications somewhere in the 2-3 % range. Accordingly, Richard’s statistical conclusion from only having analyzed the mitochondrial (prehistoric maternal origins) sequencing of these first two samples alone is that there is a 97-98 % certainty that the sasquai indeed exist—right outside of our own
back door, so to speak.
Meanwhile, further DNA testing of both the mitochondrial and/or nuclear genomes of a number of additional purported sasquatch samples continues, reportedly by more than one laboratory in the U.S. and abroad. Since a 97-98 % certainty level in statistics is not considered to be conclusive scientific proof, more data are needed and indeed have likely been or are being analyzed as of this writing (April 2011). All that remains, then, is to connect the rest of the dots.
Currently, Richard continues to assist, as needed, as a statistical DNA data consultant with various interested parties in completing and publishing the DNA-based proof of the existence of a living hominid—sasquatch. The rest of the story, ladies and gentlemen, will soon be history. Read my lips—no red herring this time around!
Engineering and Statistical Analyst
Richard Stubstad is a Registered Civil Engineer and Statistician who graduated from U.C. Berkeley (MSCE) in 1969. He lives in Ojai, California and is married to Zitta Stubstad. The couple has five grown sons and one grown daughter living in various parts of California, plus a second daughter who lives in Indiana during her husband’s 5-year residency program as a physician.
Richard had neither any interest in nor knowledge of sasquatch until the summer of 2009, when he attended a Stubstad family reunion in Kansas and his cousin Gordy insinuated he was “narrow minded” for not bothering to look into the matter. Since this insulted Richard to no end, he reluctantly agreed to do so ASAP.
Much to Richard’s surprise, the documented evidence in favor of the existence of a hominid called sasquatch (or bigfoot) was convincing enough to further perk his interest. Suddenly it dawned on Richard that the science of DNA forensic analysis had matured and had already been utilized for various kinds of scientific proof, including the mapping of the evolutionary tree of life from a genetic point of view and the placement in this tree of life of a well-known, extinct hominid—Neanderthal man. Ergo—by obtaining DNA samples from several purported sasquai (the plural version of sasquatch—hereby officially coined) and “connecting the dots” as it were, it could be determined once and for all whether or not such a hominid actually exists—without needing a “type” specimen (a body). In Richard’s mind, killing or maiming such a creature would be ethically and morally wrong, especially since they reportedly look so human-like and, most likely, very few (if any) of these creatures remain—at best living in scattered, remnant pockets within some of the heavily wooded and more remote areas of the United States and Canada.
Within a few months, Richard made contact with Adrian Erikson, Robert Schmalzbach (“Java Bob”), Shannon Sylvia and Dr. Melba Ketchum, among others, and initiated the mitochondrial sequencing of several purported sasquatch samples through Dr. Ketchum’s DNA Diagnostics Laboratory in Texas. Much to his surprise, once again, the first two samples—submitted by two totally independent and disparate researchers and from habituation sites in two widely separated states or provinces—turned out to be intimately related to one-another, DNA-wise, making the statistical probability of two independent hoaxes or misidentifications somewhere in the 2-3 % range. Accordingly, Richard’s statistical conclusion from only having analyzed the mitochondrial (prehistoric maternal origins) sequencing of these first two samples alone is that there is a 97-98 % certainty that the sasquai indeed exist—right outside of our own
back door, so to speak.
Meanwhile, further DNA testing of both the mitochondrial and/or nuclear genomes of a number of additional purported sasquatch samples continues, reportedly by more than one laboratory in the U.S. and abroad. Since a 97-98 % certainty level in statistics is not considered to be conclusive scientific proof, more data are needed and indeed have likely been or are being analyzed as of this writing (April 2011). All that remains, then, is to connect the rest of the dots.
Currently, Richard continues to assist, as needed, as a statistical DNA data consultant with various interested parties in completing and publishing the DNA-based proof of the existence of a living hominid—sasquatch. The rest of the story, ladies and gentlemen, will soon be history. Read my lips—no red herring this time around!
[via www.sciencealivenews.com]
Related:
Well, like a man bragging about his skills in the bedroom, the time will come when he has to venture into that arena and prove his boasts. So, I'm hoping that level-headed people such as Richard will shine a more healthy light on the subject. He's not running around in camo's hollering and pounding on trees. He's taking it from a statistical POV and scientific evidence review, so I'm hoping more guys like him will be the spokespeople of the "New Reality" when BF is proven to exist and to have earned a special place in the evolutionary chart for surviving in spite of man's intrusion.
ReplyDeleteSeriously Shawn thanks for this post!
ReplyDeleteI thought Ketchum had basically insinuated that Substad was the rumor starter this summer, is that wrong? Did she mean Lindsay?
ReplyDeleteThe problem with DNA evidence is that, no matter how convincing it may be, skeptics will always find a way to refute it. A capture or kill is needed.
ReplyDeleteDNA evidence is vital in any case.
ReplyDeleteSample Analysis