This Must Hurt...
Thanks to Steven Streufert for posting this screen grab of a comment left on Dr. Melba Ketchum's page by a former supporter of hers. According to Streufert, Dr. Hart was a supporter until he found out the truth behind the supposed Bigfoot DNA data. Streufert also posted the following quote that may have been part of the conversion that's missing in the screenshot.
"I know Galileo, and Dr. Ketchum, you are no Galileo."
It's unclear whether or not Hart made the statement above, but it had to hurt a little.
Hart posted this message on his Facebook wall on October 17th claiming he "will forever debunk" Ketchum's Bigfoot DNA paper:
Haskell Hart
October 17
My paper on the Ketchum results has been submitted. It will forever debunk this poor attempt to identify sasquatch/bigfoot.
"It's a bear, a human, and a dog." (Samples 26, 31, 140, respectively). When it is accepted for publication, I will put it on here.
I can not understand how Ketchum can be so stupid as to not know it was actually the Catholic church who condemned him. How he dealt with them? He didn't. His work was only published after his death.
ReplyDeleteI've always thought of Dr. Melba Ketchum as more of a Charles Manson rather then Galileo. idk is it just me. lol
DeleteThat's how the folks at BE think.
DeleteIm first penderhos!!
ReplyDeleteGreat false first, congrats!
DeleteMy taterhole alarm is going of like a buck during rutting season.
DeleteThat guy.
Two words:
ReplyDeleteAncient fucking aliens.
One word: fuctard
DeleteYep thats it!! Ancient friggin aliens.
ReplyDeleteEEP OP ORP A A
ReplyDeleteOOOH--EEEE----OOOH-----AH-AH....
DeleteDING DANG WALLA WALLA BING BANG.
DeleteThese are comments on Doubtfulnews from Haskell Hart, while he was a suporter. He actually was her supporter after he ran his own tests, not the other way around, as the article states. What happened after, I dont know.
ReplyDeleteHere are the comments to the Breaking Bio video:
Haskell Hart
February 28, 2013 at 5:51 PM
This video is misinformation. The nDNA sequences WERE given in standard FASTA format in the DeNOVA on-line paper at the very bottom. I used them to do my own blast searches. Even the mtDNA mutations in Supplementary Data 2, though in PDF format, can relatively easily be converted to a text file, then to an EXCEL spreadsheet which was convenient to compare to the mtDNA genetic tree. Most samples matched fairly well. Other human haplotype identification entries are in error and should have been recognized as such immediately. So I wonder…. Finally, EVERYBODY, $30 for access to an on-line journal article is not unusual. All journals charge in the range of $25-35$US. Let’s not be petty in our criticisms. Those who are reveal their lack of scientific background. The data ARE presented in the paper. If you don’t think so, you are not qualified to criticize the paper because you can’t recognize the data or use it. I’m a physical chemist and I was able to do the necessary BLAST searches and mitochrondrial mutations checks in short order. It was not even necessary to be a geneticist. The fur is not POSSUM fur. Its nDNA does not match the possum nDNA in the GenBank.
Haskell Hart, PhD
------
Haskell Hart
February 28, 2013 at 10:56 PM
“Curious without bias?”. Not entirely. We’re all “curious” or we wouldn’t be on this page. Bias is another matter. They haven’t reported their independent evaluations of her results yet. She used independent established labatoratories. Either the samples are suspect, or the analyses are. But before that can be decided, at least critically evaluate whether the results: FASTA nDNA files for samples 26,31, and 140 and the mtDNA mutations in Supplementary Data 2 support her conclusions. I have and they do to some degree, but not entirely. More later.
idoubtit, and what are your scientific credentials? My deleted comment was directed to the particular graduate students in the video, who spoke and acted unprofessionally and without knowledge in some cases.
He speaks to Sharon Shill in last paragraph (I Doubt It) presumably about her deleting his comment, apparently about the Aussie podcast attack on the Ketchum results.
DeleteIn her comments section is where you can find her raging and screaming, while warning others to be civil or they are deleted or banned.
I doubt Hart was uncivil enough to warrant removal of his comment on the Ausse-Cast, but that is Sharon Shill for you. His point about that podcast was surely reasonable, but unacceptable to her. I wonder if she threatened him with banning.
She should change her I Doubt It site to her fav phrase, former username, and ideology: Bigfoot Is BS.
May as well. Maybe Sharon Shill is BS would be better.
I knew that bitch was medicated from day 1. This shouldn't matter but it does matter because now you know where the nonsense comes from.
DeleteYou're all BANNED!!!!!
DeleteWhen it came time for Sykes to take a serious look at Bigfoot from a DNA perspective, there were no samples left worth examining. Seriously. Melba used all the good stuff, or threw it away or secreted it away where it would never see the light of day. And now Sykes is coming. He's coming with dog, opossum, raccoon, bear, ancient polar bear, hair from Dan Campbell's scrotum. There's nothing left. And it makes me sad. Makes my eyes rain. Gone are the skunk in the drainpipe JC had. All the good and unique stuff. Kelly Shaw had some interesting hair. I mean the Ketchum thing not only set Footers back millennia but it took our best samples too. Shit Fire and Save the Matches Boys. I'm a little upset about that fact. M,
ReplyDeleteLol dude. Firstly take a deep breath.
DeleteRight ok you with me.
Now melba ran the tests blind from various labs so we have the data and its not bigfoot. It doesnt matter that melba was involved. Sykes would have found the same thing with the same tests. No monkey.
I wouldn't get upset. Bigfoot just isn't out there. If it was we would have no problem proving it. If I were you I would just accept that bigfoot don't exist and enjoy the world for what it is. Its an incredible beautiful place even without a magic monkey man.
I do enjoy the world as it is. You have stated fairly well the case for there not being such a subject. It's just difficult to dismiss it based on that study. If Sykes truly has nothing and we know he was given the best samples the field had to offer. (Do We?) I may do just that. I'll still keep feeding the Bigfoot on my property. But I will deny their existence till judgment day. Not on this blog of course. I made a dumb ass bet to Campbell I have to honor.
DeleteYou are feeding known animals not bigfoot. If you think its a bigfoot point a trail camera at the food and you will get that million dollar photo. Footers try this and after getting only photos of known animals then make some radical leap of faith that it proves bigfoot can avoid cameras. Wait. What? You haven't even proven there is a bigfoot there in the first place how do you know its avoiding the camera? These are just some of the standard hoops footers have to jump through.
DeleteAn 8 foot animal. Just think for a second how big that is. It should not be hard to find traces of this animal. There should be an abundance of trail camera photos. This creature would have to spend most of its time hunting in which case how could it be always aware of its surroundings and cameras while doing this, every single day... ridiculous. Not to mention there would be no benefit to a creature evolving bipedally to 8 foot tall. It has no evolutionary benefits what so ever. There is no trace of evidence that this is even a viable hypothesis. The whole thing is ridiculous and what it boils down to is unexperienced people in the woods getting scared and misidentifying shadows and sounds as bigfoot, liars, and hoaxers. No monkey anywhere ever.
Ok. I've got a Nat Geo guy whose done some great work coming. I hope he says the same thing. It'll uncomplicate my life rather quickly. I'm not debating one word you've typed. I hope you are seeing that.
DeleteSamples like scat and hair have been sequenced as Unknown primate DNA and then people like the guy above claim it's not there? It's like the dumb example I use where people condemn two, three, four, five, TEN eyewitnesses after another, and then come out with 'if these things were real we'd see them everywhere'... Only someone as stupid or as desperate to censor information would suggest there is no evidnece and then deny it's ever been there without bringing so much as a decent counter argument; that tends to be the way skeptics like to work.
DeleteI know hunters of 30 years that have never come across bear bones. Why should we come across Bigfoot bones? Are bears real because we don't find bones? Secondly, Bigfoot bury their dead; this is why the field is changing and mainstream science is starting to ask questions, because that implies culture and a higher intelligence to that of a dumb animal. This suggests how calculative and methodically evasive they are towards us.
When you have the frequency of sightings that are in complete conjunction with what one would expect to see from a highly intelligent nocturnal creature, paired with the amount of evidence there is to suggest there 'could be' something to it... The decision to not investigate is far from the scientific method that skeptics keep implying is keeping this subject in the realms of 'reality'. When that doesn't happen, and you have numerous reasons to suspect that the economy would have to suffer for habitat, then it is not too unrealistic to those who wonder why this subject doesn't move out from dogmaville.
If skeptics were impartial and fair, then they wouldn't dismiss every account as either money making schemes or lies. In their effort to dismiss people they consider liars of swindlers, they forget that the majority of researchers are just that to replicate experiences they have had that have changed their lives.
Dermals, an accumulation of accounts ie. 100 years of written news media, diaries & tens of thousands of eyewitness testimony (much of it multiple person), along with ten thousand years of acknowledgement, a transcribed complex language... scat, hair, unknown primate DNA... Is in fact reason enough to acknowledge that there is at least something to this. It made me chuckle he other day, that in the face of such evidnece, it is people like the guy up top that would express such closure desperation at two Asian bear samples debunking all that I have listed previously.
If I was to request evidence that Bigfoot doesn't exist, you provided that and I dismissed it without providing an explanation, you'd be all over it and that is the biggest contradiction and hypocrisy in the world the reason why you fall flat on your face.
You have a chip on your shoulder that makes you feel you don't have to explain your theories, but in the world of scientific research, you must provide at least an equivalent level to dismiss research...
"But this has been debunked before" you'll no doubt say next... No, it hasn't because every counter point you make can be kicked back at you with an enthusiasts explanation.
Peace .
Good Morning Joe. You forgot the White Settlers Journals. And you damn well know they're my favorite. Hope today finds you happy and well.
DeleteFurthermore... These creatures are nocturnal. Do you understand how quiet you have to be in the wilderness at night to not be heard? If you have a creature that has evolved in such a habitat, negotiating such terrain in the day time would be so easy for it, it wouldn't make a sound. You wouldn't even know it's there... Ever tried locating gorilla's in a photograph? There are examples of this on Google Image Search.
Delete(Not that I'm contradicting myself and now suggesting they are great apes... They are people who have evolved animalistic attributes to survive).
Check this post out from a few months ago...
"Hey Joe, just FYI. I was on an overnight trip last Thursday/Friday with the law and public safety class students I teach. We were in the field as I was teaching night surveillance, etc. I showed the students the difference between Generation 1 plus night vision and Gen 3. We used both to observe/collect data in total darkness. Gen 1 night vision uses the same technology that Infra-red trail cameras use at night to take photos without utilizing the "flash" that the trail camera uses during the day to take pics. (According to the trail cam manufacturers, the game will not spook because of the lack of flash). When using the Gen 3 technology at night it does not omit an infrared beam. The Gen 1 plus uses infrared to enhance its night vision. Although IR is invisible to humans, it is clearly visible to any animal that has nocturnal vision. I proved this to the students by allowing them to observe me using the Gen 1 plus while they viewed me using the Gen 3. The Gen 1 plus omits what looks like a huge flashlight beam when observed through the Gen 3. Although the Gen 1 plus cannot be seen with our naked eye, it is glaringly obvious with the Gen 3. Although I used this training to drive home a point about never using Gen 1 for surveillance (the bad guys may have Gen 3 or better night vision and they will know you are there, etc.) some of the students who are hunters immediately said, "any animal who sees in the dark could see the gen 1 plus."
For those who are skeptical of this info. test it for yourself.
Archer1"
... that was from my friend who is a hunter of many years.
This is not a dumb bipedal gorilla. It has had along time to study us and learn that is in it's best interests to stay away from us... Ten thousand years to learn this is fact.
These are a type of people. There are examples of some tribes were it was thought that photographs would take a part of their soul... Who's to say what a wild person would assume to such technology, not to mention that humans carry guns and often attempt to hunt AND kill them.
Peace.
Ok... What would be the one thing that would make all the evidnece I've suggested up top real to you? Biological evidnece??
DeleteWhat if I was to provide you with sources, printed news media in fact, of giant skeletons being found up and down your country?
JiggyPotamus -
http://bigfootforums.com/index.php/topic/42772-possibility-of-large-bones-being-found-in-north-america/#entry779766%20%20MMG
... There is printed media in libraries all around the country that state quite clearly, with consistent details what they came across. Pretty hard to debunk eh?
And low and behold, there we have evidence of skeletons being found in burial mounds, particularly in New England, that we're found due to the industrial revolution and then covered up as quickly as possible because you cannot destroy a culture to make way for your own, and celebrate it at the same time.
For further reading of this... Check out some Jim Vieira on YouTube.
Peace.
Joe I didn't read a single thing you wrote after you said they have unknown primate dna. This is a classic footer lie. No they don't. If they do please link me to the published results Thanks.
DeleteSchooled by 'Monsterquest Sasquatch Attacks' episode.
DeleteAnd a failure to acknowledge any counter points is merely a fear of being wrong... It's a personality trait that is very consistent with skeptical trolls on this site which align with expressing hate where they are not welcome. They can easily help themselves feel better by staying away.
Schooled.
That turned out to be a bear. Pwned. Everything else you have said rendered null and void by that lie.
DeleteThe only 'lie' is your comment... Unknown primate DNA successfully sequenced I'm afraid.
DeleteThe only problem with that is; you need more of it before it can be perceived as 'repeatable evidnece'.
Still... Two Asian bear samples are enough to debunk an American Bigfoot eh?
Schooled.
Peace.
Once again joe. There is no unknown primate dna. If there is then you would be able to link me to the published paper/news reports. You can't. There is none.
DeleteSchooled my Monsterquest.
DeleteAnd you were very welcome.
Peace.
Joe hunters are not trained to find bones, we are looking for the live animal. If you want bones paleontologists, archaeologists or zoo archaeologists are the people you want and these people find bones on a daily basis.
DeleteC A Charles
I am not suggesting hunters find bones though? Merely trying to draw attention to the fact that bones have been found.
DeletePeace.
Joe Fitzgerald ladies and gentlemen.
DeleteSmoked to freaking bone.
Give us a link Joe. NOW.
... And importantly; documented.
DeletePeace.
I provided you the episode title, now learn to use YouTube and exercise it.
DeletePeace.
Joe Fitzgerald-
DeleteI know hunters of 30 years that have never come across bear bones. Why should we come across Bigfoot bones? Are bears real because we don't find bones?
C A Charles-
Joe hunters are not trained to find bones, we are looking for the live animal.
Joe Fitzgerald-
I am not suggesting hunters find bones though? Merely trying to draw attention to the fact that bones have been found.
Joe you are contradicting your self that Charles guy is smoking you
HA HA HA HA!
DeleteI think you are trying too hard to find contradictions as opposed to trying to counter my points. I think you will find hunters in respect of animal carcasses, do come across bones.
As for burial mounds, that is another point altogether regarding the evidence of giant bones.
I would learn to separate points made in comments before you suggest anyone else is contradicting themselves.
Unlucky.
Joe. Hunters do come across bones but completely accidentally never intentionally. All it will take is light foliage and a hunter will miss them. Also most american hunters are not real hunters they put up a blind and sit and wait.
DeleteI have friends who are very experienced hunters in the States that claim to never come across the bones of apex predators. This sentiment is echoed by many top researchers, like John Bindernagel for example.
DeletePeace.
Joe it's the Canada guy these bfs are not nocturnal they just like us u can still see at night once your eyes adjust they sleep night and lay down during day time on west side of hills and slopes thought I'd let u now sorry! Have a good one! I'd expand but just don't feel like it !
DeleteI think what these people are trying to tell you Joe is hunters are not out looking for bones. Most american hunters do sit and wait for game and the majority of this is done on farms and close to civilization. The people trained to look for fossilized bones are the ones who should do out looking for the bones of a bigfoot. If hunters are your only hope you will be disappointed. A hunters role in finding a bigfoot will be to bring one back.
DeleteCanadian guy joe fitz don'tl
DeleteLesson to these guys about hunters not finding bones bunch of bull cause almost every year we hunt and friends we all come across dead animals espially during hunting season weather it be ribs and body of whatever animal to a whole dead moose laying in a cut and any MNR person can support that here cause most get reported so these guys can go eat there hat they don't have a clue what there talking about keep it up joe F your on the right track! Have a good one !!!!!
Canada guy... I really want to talk to you off this blog man.
Delete7:54...
Because I'm trying to work and blog at the same time, I can't be sure but I think the bones were brought up to state that they have been found and documented, which would support the sightings in the way of biological evidnece. Me bringing the fact that hunters seldom come across the remains of apex predators was to highlight another point that you can't get anymore apex than a Bigfoot.
I mean no disrespect to anyone and very much respect the views of experienced hunters and out doorsman... In fact depend upon in due to where I'm from.
Peace.
In regards to the prior anonymous comment about 8ft tall animals not being able to avoid trail cams. Your hypothesis would seem to be correct using a common sense approach when looking at it from a human's perspective. BUT, if you have spent extensive amounts of time in the woods (whether it be hunting, trapping, wildlife study, etc.) you will learn that big game animals learn how to survive and thrive by avoiding any/all forms of danger. One example I will give you: I lease over 1,200 acres of land in southern WV. I use this property for hunting. The property is posted with no trespassing signs and every road is gated. I have found signs of deer rubs on trees that were easily 24inches in diameter yet I have rarely been able to obtain trail cam photos of these large deer. In 2009 I harvested a 165 inch P and Y buck. This buck had left tracks, tree rubs, scrapes on my property for several years yet I could never locate or even get a picture of this buck on a trail camera. Finally in early September of 2009 I managed to obtain three photos of this buck using a Reconyx trail cam. Keep in mind that Reconyx will take three pictures per second with an immediate "wake up" trigger speed with no delay. This buck was old and wise enough to recognize my camera and run away from it. The deer was standing almost thirty feet away when it detected the trail cam and bolted off into the forest. The picture was taken during the day w/o the need for any type of flash too. These are the only photos I had ever obtained of this buck prior to killing him later that year.
DeleteI realize that I was able to kill this buck which could reinforce the "it is impossible for Bigfoot to avoid humans argument" but a large primate would have the brain cavity three to four times the size of a deer. If this large primate is hardwired to avoid danger at any cost, it would be easy to see how a BF would avoid a trail cam. The animals of the forest live there. A hunter, hiker, etc. visits their home. I know when someone has been in my home and messed with things. Surely a higher thinking primate could use the same type of evasive techniques that I have observed deer to demonstrate on numerous occasions.
It is pointless to argue this point with me. Remove sasquatch from this equation and replace it with human. Could an human being of average intelligence who has decided to live in the wilderness be able to avoid a trail cam in the area in which they live and know every square inch of? I say yes. Simply based on my experience of hunting big game animals.
Archer1
Where have you been bro??!!!!
DeleteMuch respect Archer1, and I hope you haven't minded me using your comment as a reference?
You should post more often.
Peace.
So archer1 if you place a camera straight away it will be reguarded as a danger but you leave it there for 6 months to a year only going to it to change the memory card and battery. Would this have a effect on the outcome?
DeleteMaybe, maybe not. 4:42 thinks it's an animal we're looking for and it's not it's basically a person but it may be a person with certain special abilities we can't fathom. Like interdimensional travel perhaps, lots of clever people suspect there are several other diemnsions than the ones we know about. We only master a few the bigfoots may master others, the powers that be know of this so a ridicule scam was set in place much like after Roswell to hide the truth from the public. Bigfoot seems to fall into the same category.
DeleteDamn.. You were doing good until the Space-man crap. I agree with the human part but the spin some of you seem to be putting on it, is that it is a lineage of Homo-Sapiens-Sapiens that went feral and then developed superpowers.
DeleteI think that it is a cousin in our genus. (Maybe something we do have record of.) But you lost me with the realm jumping. But with that said, I don't think the old "Government Genetic Experiment Cover-up" is as far-fetched as I used to think. (If they can trigger genes for eye color and such, why not Gigantism and Hypertrichosis.)<--And I will never admit this again either lol. If you think Sasquatch is an alien, cloaks it's self, or jumps different realms, keep it to your self for now. The scientific community has a hard time looking at Sasquatch as a true possibility as it is. Now that there are credible people looking in to this, now is not the time to scare them away with "spooky language."
Oh.. I need to address this.."
Delete"AnonymousThursday, October 24, 2013 at 4:42:00 AM PDT
You are feeding known animals not bigfoot. If you think its a bigfoot point a trail camera at the food and you will get that million dollar photo. Footers try this and after getting only photos of known animals then make some radical leap of faith that it proves bigfoot can avoid cameras. Wait. What? You haven't even proven there is a bigfoot there in the first place how do you know its avoiding the camera? These are just some of the standard hoops footers have to jump through.
An 8 foot animal. Just think for a second how big that is. It should not be hard to find traces of this animal. There should be an abundance of trail camera photos. This creature would have to spend most of its time hunting in which case how could it be always aware of its surroundings and cameras while doing this, every single day... ridiculous. Not to mention there would be no benefit to a creature evolving bipedally to 8 foot tall. It has no evolutionary benefits what so ever. There is no trace of evidence that this is even a viable hypothesis. The whole thing is ridiculous and what it boils down to is unexperienced people in the woods getting scared and misidentifying shadows and sounds as bigfoot, liars, and hoaxers. No monkey anywhere ever."
And you are experienced?
#1 Different regions have different descriptions. The 8ft variety are mainly reported in the Pacific North West, where being 8ft tall makes perfect sense. The prey is large (Elk) and the competition is large (Bear, Wolves, Cougars.), not to mention the terrain.
As for Texas... MOST of the reports from Texas and the deep south are of 4ft-6ft tall creatures that are either short and bulky with round heads or tall and lanky with conical heads and having longer hair. Even those reports ( made-up or not) also have an evolutionary benefit as in mosquito protecton.
If you want to see a creature with absolutely no evolutionary benefit what-so-ever, try looking in the mirror. Take away a humans clothes, medicine, and tools and what exactly are we adapted to? Tropics climate wise, but tropical-parasites kill us faster than anything and most of them are waterborne or spread by insects. I'd say the reported descriptions of Bigfoot type creatures all have something we do not.. True evolutionary benefit.
Kelly, if you are listening. Send me a tuft or two. If like to have some Bigfoot Hair Extensions made. Never did no what to get my rich ex wife for Xmas.
ReplyDeleteJust what if she is right?
ReplyDeleteRight about what , the hybridization theory? That's she's being persecuted .....it looks more and more like the Smeja, Randles, Hersom, Cutino sample was a golden colored black bear. I root for Melba. I do. But she made more poor decisions during that period than I make with my Bookie every NFL Sunday
DeleteMMG pretents to be intelligent while also believing in a magic monkey. Hilarious.
ReplyDeletepretents...........DAMN YOU ARE REALLY INTELLIGENT,
DeleteFOR A DUMB ASS!
A self-chewing if there ever was one.
DeleteI find tards hilarious!
MMG
Bleeves in magic apes^
Deletespells genius with a j,as in jeanius.^
DeleteWhat we humans don't understand is often called magic that's how it seems to us yet the socalled supernatural is perfectly normal, we're only being sheltered from it by science et al.
DeleteI would also like to substitute some Sasquatch Hair into a Hotly contested DNA Child Custody case. "Your honor let the record reflect that not only should my client not have to pay child support, but it is quite clear that this Harlot he once called his wife was cheating on him all along with an unknown primate!"
ReplyDelete4:07. You think Sykes is going to show one positive test for an unknown?
ReplyDeleteSorry. There's two 4:07s. One Ketchumite and one skeptic. I'll take an answer from either.
ReplyDeleteYEA thier ARE 2....407s. you and yourself !! I would love to answer your question..... SEE A SHRINK !!!
Deleteum yeah just you. so what is your answer?
Delete^ UPP DUP ERP NOG FERP,,
DeleteIn fact. I'd love to know whose left in Melba's corner. I'm quite neutral mind you. But I am a little pissed that we don't have Swuatch in the way of good samples left.
ReplyDeletehey ! mike Brookwhatever you can always come back as ...SMITER HUGHES !!!!! kinda has a RING TO IT HUH,,,
Deletewhat about " pretty puckerpuss"
Delete"FOLSOM BOY" ^
DeleteSo what's going to be the big reveal from Sykes on Bigfoot. My guess is that it'll come from genetic samples from living people with archaic DNA or a history of alleged hybridization. I would bet you both Adam Davies and LumberMidgetSmallfoot (tm)s hats on them. Sad. But true.
ReplyDeleteI can tell you what it won't be. A bigfoot.
DeleteIn the trailer evans doesn't look like he is taking any of smejas crap.
Hes already destroyed the yeti myth.
This week he will be destroying the North American ape myth.
Next week he will be destroying this zana russian nonsense showing they are just normal humans not hybrid bigfoots or whatever the fuck these looney toons claim.
Joe and mmg will leave the blog after getting utterly smoked and all will be good.
You know. I hope not. I HAVE to leave. But I hate to think of Joe and MMG gone. It's like the Henry Fonda as Tom Joad.... "Wherever there's a footprint, they'll be there, when're an ancient white settlers tale goes unrecognized, they'll be there..,,,". But for me. I honor my bad bets. It's why I'm broke and screaming at Romo at the end of every Subday.
DeleteMike i think that skeptics and some believers need to have experience in the wilderness before they make up their minds weather bigfoot exists or not including Joe. A lot of the points Joe comes up with are easily explainable. I believe if any one if going to prove bigfoot is will be either yourself John Jones or MJA if he manages to shoot one.
DeleteC A Charles
But I will note you have glossed over the revelations Sykes is supposed to make that will change the worlds view of evolutionary history. That's got more undertones than "who shot JR"
DeleteWell. I'm trying. I had a picture of a subject and the cantaloupe it bit but my sister threw it away. So I'm bringing in a real photographer. We shall see. I'd hate to have to commit murder to prove a point. But in the case of some of my old criminal law clients I was quite willing. :)
DeleteFrom what i have seen non believers have their minds made up nothing except a trip to the woods will change that. Most of them will hear a tree pop and shit their pants not knowing whats going on.
DeleteC A Charles
You seem very wise Mr Charles. I brought up stick drags the other day. Gouges in the earth where something in the middle of nowhere picked up a huge limb or small tree and drug it. Many miles from beaver habitat. Now. The tree or limb is gone. Only the trenched earth remains. It's things like that that challenge me. I mean. What did that? And for what purpose. I'm talking huge limbs and huge gouges in the earth.
DeleteI would be very interested to hear your 'easy explanations' to my points I make Mr Charles?
DeletePeace.
How deep would these gouges be Mike?
DeleteFurthermore...
DeleteI believe that he will find no Bigfoot in this series of documentaries and that the long term results of his peer review will either yield a genetic link from Asia to the America's or something that can be attributed to Bigfoot DNA... That is not backtracking, that is me being realistic and understanding that any major discovery cannot be put to the world in a documentary series, but must be peer reviewed. Now... It comes down to me 'hoping', not 'knowing' that the two samples he has that will reportedly 'change the world' so to speak... Will be what I want them to be.
Sykes is only as good as his samples.
Peace.
Lol^ sorry joe its too late.
DeleteYou were wrong.
For months you said sykes was coming with your bigfoot but you were wrong.
Its too late to change your mind now. You got smoked.
Please do yourself a favor and leave the blog while you can still salvage a bit of dignity.
The best results that Sykes can come up with is that bigfoot once existed. Weather or not bigfoot exists now will be for one of our fallow hunters to prove. Not necessarily shoot one but take a decent photo or video that can't be argued with. But for there to be no arguments one will have to be shot. The problem then will be if they are in existence the idiot city folk in the big house will already know about it and will put a stop to any thing that can change the dynamics of every day life.
DeleteC A Charles
With my belief for months that Sykes would deliver positive news to the enthusiasts was off the back off many researchers stating they felt that. I must also remind you, something that has conveniently been forgotten by you; that I was very, very clear in the respect of communicating that if Sykes should do the opposite, that he would be only as good as his samples. The only 'wrong' thing I did was to suggest a false sense of knowing what Sykes was delivering. As soon as I had to make an apology for being banned... I was quite clear in expressing that to everyone.
DeleteNow run along troll before I ruin your day.
Charles...
Answer me this; If two samples of Asian bear are enough to prove the existence of such in the eyes of most... Why is it that dermals, an accumulation of accounts ie. 100 years of written news media, diaries & tens of thousands of eyewitness testimony (much of it multiple person), along with ten thousand years of acknowledgement, a transcribed complex language, sequenced unknown primate DNA, along with countless opinions of credible people who include wildlife biologists, costume experts, forensic experts, forensic artists, forestry officers, doctors, lawyers, police officers, teachers, psychologists, historians...
Not be enough?
Peace.
95 out of 100 "encounters" are explainable using basic bush experience. This transcribed complex language means nothing with out proof of the animal it is coming from. Have you ever looked at a tree stump 500 yards away through a heat mirage? This looks very much like a moving animal this can account for a multiple person encounter. Costume experts, forensic artists, doctors lawyers, police officers, teachers and psychologists are not educated in the field required to prove the existence of a animal. All the rest are a very small minority and the large majority of them will call bullshit. History is only a rough idea what actually happened what really happened we will never know. Ketchums results mean nothing due to them not being sent off for a pair review. Dermals are very easy to fake. Also foot prints in dirt or mud 99 times out of 100 will not have dermal ridges in them. Clay if it is a very very freash print might but the chances of picking them up using plaster is next to none.
DeleteC A Charles
The percentage of encounters are agreed upon by most enthusiasts to indeed be the case, however what is left are not explainable by such a means, so I'm not sure what your point is exactly?
DeleteA transcribed language means a considerable amount in the respect that animals don't use language; language is culture and would further suggest a higher intelligence, which... In turn suggests an advanced ability to evade us effectively.
Heat mirages?Yes, you suggested his the other day, but there is a complete difference between a heat mirage and a hairy biped walking in front of you and roaring.
Costume experts, forensic artists, doctors lawyers, police officers, teachers and psychologists are not educated in the field no, but they are from a very respectable part of the community and last time I checked, you do not require to be an expert in a murder case and still be an eyewitness?
Bullshit? Arrrrgghhh, or is that merely struggling to counter the points?
Look out guys! Copy and paste coming up! Charles is new around here so I think you will forgive me...
Anyone who has spent ten minutes looking at numerous casts can see that there are many, many first time prints that have a similarity in style of dermal ridging in the same way that two sets of fingerprints from opposite sides of the country would look similar in style at first, regardless of apparent uniqueness under analysis. These casts cannot be explained away with desiccation because they have scar tissue and toe bending that many people who have done proper analysis have cited as the creature gripping into earth. There is a clear difference between desiccation marks and complex dermal markings. You can look for yourself on any image search engine and the fact that some have cited some casts that have been made poorly by amateur casters (these are mostly untrained civilian researchers, not perfectionists), as the main source to disprove such is at best desperate and ignorant of the wider picture of the sometimes difficult process it is to extract such prints. What a one in a billion lottery win chance that would be to somehow get the same pattern decades apart from opposite sides of the country?! The pouring of liquid into a cast can make desiccation wrinkles yes, but when done by amateur casters and there is so, so much more casts to counter that argument. Explain casts that are attained 40 miles into the interior of wilderness areas? The hoaxers would have to be either psychic or mind controllers to predict to the exact yard where the researchers are going to be to the exact moment eh?
I would suggest anyone in the remotest mindset to question casting processes to trot on over to the 'Fringe News: Sasquatch Canyon Bigfoot Tracks, Finding Bigfoot At the Discovery Museum, UFO in Bristol TN' blog page that was posted a couple of months ago, as there are some amazing threads from very experienced casters who outline this process for you all.
Peace.
C A CHARLES ERR, M .BROOKWHATEVER is NEW AROUND HERE??
DeleteJoe F = fuctard
DeleteThis is news? How stupid. Struefert is taking Facebook comments as a talking point? How the Hell can he even verify it was actually Hart that wrote it? What a moron. This is really stupid and Struefert is an Idiot. Shaun is even dumber to post such garbage. I'm not even defending her hare but just calling out how stupid this has gotten that people actually believe comments in Facebook as gospel truth and verified. Poor journalism and just stupid people digging for dirt!
ReplyDeleteI agree but be careful. You know how Shawn gets when people call Steven to task....
DeleteHere^
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ghosttheory.com/2013/10/23/ketchum-bigfoot-dna-results-accepted-at-zoobank
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you just give us the Cliff Notes. It's all I can do to blog here. I trust you. M
ReplyDeleteShhhh.
DeleteI have to go now. The Shhh troll has found me. You guys have fantastic day. As you all know. Always honor his wishes. Dear Shhhh troll. Enjoy your small victory. When and if Sykes fails to uncover new evidence ill be gone for good And I think you are going to miss me. Good Day ladies and gentlemen. The pleasure was all mine.
DeleteBYE MIKE,I MISS YOU ALREADY.
DeleteNot me..wooooooo!
DeleteShhhh recended.
DeleteCorrection , Shhhh rescinded
DeleteJoe likes to pull facts out of his ass such as "bigfoot bury their dead".
ReplyDeleteGet a load of this guy folks.
He also states they are calculatively evasive. Erm what? Yea... unless a couple of noisy cowboys rock up.. in that case they just stroll accross an open sand bar for an extended period of time.
You can not use this as an excuse I am afraid because you always claim thousands of sightings. This would certainly not be expected if they are calculating evasive. You cant have it both ways I am afraid.
Typical footers don't think. They just pile up a whole load of stuff they feel can be attributed to their myth with no regard to whether any of it fits together or is viable.
If bigfoot was real it should not be difficult to obtain the evidence.
If I was to make up an imaginery creature and people were to ask why I have no evidence I would say the following:
DeleteThey are intelligent.
They bury their dead.
They can detect and avoid cameras.
They are nocturnal.
Bones are rare for all species, this is no different.
Oh wait a minute isnt this what footers say?
Smoked.
Humans are intelligent (well meant to be). Some murderers bury the people they have murdered yet we are able to find them most of the time. Marines are trained to avoid surveillance far greater than the average every day cameras yet the every day cameras can still pick them up from time to time in good quality i might add not blurry. Criminals are also nocturnal yet we have technology capable of picking then up at night. Bones are rare for all species? Wait have we not found bones from 99.9% of all known species extinct and current?
DeleteBurial mounds suggest a much more intelligent culture and evasion capabilities and would also explain why there are hundreds of accounts of disturbing such in libraries up and down your country and would articulate further why we don't come across the remains of these creatures, especially when 70% of the country is covered in wilderness, to which it turn suggests how hard it would be to locate such burial areas, especially once the old native regions of New England for example were churned up and taken over during the industrial revolution and then covered up as quickly as possible to suit the economic boom.
DeleteDon't take my word for it.... Who the heck am I?! Listen to experts...
Peace.
Their is no such thing as a bigfoot expert every thing is opinion until there is a actual species observed and documented.
DeleteI completely agree with you there. However that does not mean it's ok to ignore things either.
DeletePeace.
Joe,you're a BFI,BIG FUCKING IDIOT.
DeleteAnd you're a big douchebag falling for the smear.
DeleteOkay, it is one thing to be a skeptic.. That is all fine and dandy and you have right to your opinion. But to sit there and say "Footers pull this out of their ass." while pulling your own points out of your ass is another.
Delete"AnonymousThursday, October 24, 2013 at 6:06:00 AM PDT
"Humans are intelligent (well meant to be). Some murderers bury the people they have murdered yet we are able to find them most of the time."
uhhh no we don't... And when we do it is because we know a general area on where to look, or the offender made a plea-bargain for a lesser sentence (Life instead of death.)
"Marines are trained to avoid surveillance far greater than the average every day cameras yet the every day cameras can still pick them up from time to time in good quality i might add not blurry."
Where do you come up with this crap? lol Do you mean the recon guys in full gully-suit on the cover of Life, Time and Guns & Ammo? The guys who are posing for the photo? lol
"Criminals are also nocturnal yet we have technology capable of picking then up at night."
Damn.. there is so much wrong with that sentence alone, where do I start? Nocturnal means they are adapted to hunt at night. Not that they are up late. And what is this technology you speak of? Burgler alarms, store surveillance cameras? For one, where exactly is your point on this? You think the forest is full of motion detectors and CCTV? lol Aside from that, if there was even an 8th of truth to what you were trying to say, we would not have 1/2 the crime rate.
"Bones are rare for all species? Wait have we not found bones from 99.9% of all known species extinct and current? "
ROFLMAO.....NO.... Not even close. Even if sasquatch don't bury their dead (And I think they do.) Forest, Jungle and swamp environments quickly dispose of a carcass and fossilization is not possible. Aside from high acidity in the soil and bone eating animals such as possums, raccoons and skunks, you are also dealing with fungi and larger amounts of bacteria. You will stumble across an occasional ungulate's carcass because there are so many. But you may never see a dead bear, bobcat, cougar, or wolf.. Most carnivores go off and hide when they are sick or dying..With that said, how many dead humans have you come across?
Lol that's awesome tzeith not to mention murderers are lazy any only dig a foot or two at most
DeleteIf they had work ethic and did 6 ft we wouldn't find their victims
DeleteJoe F = fuctard
DeleteHey joe it's Canadian guy did u ever get a chance to look at northwestern Ontario if u didn't take a look over the years in the small area that we live which is surrounded by boreal forest in every direction I'm very supprised there is not more focus in this area I really belive this is the biggest holding area for these animals for the fact that nobody talks about them here and when they do it's like mentioning just another animal it's just not a big deal might sound like a big fairy tail but it's just the way it's been forever and also not that it makes a difference we have native rezorvations here and surrounding us for hundreds of miles and they also now all about the bfs
ReplyDeleteHey bro!
DeleteIs this the gentleman as TTL?
Peace.
I think you are on to a winner!!
DeleteIf I could speak to you off this blog then I might be able to be of more help to you.
Peace.
Fooled ^
DeleteDenied. ^
Deleteand there goes Joe trying to get personal info again. his track record acting off this board is less than reputable.
DeleteJoe F = fuctard
DeleteAlso joe I was reading how there was 1000 or 3000 sightings in the past how ever many years on the bfro and honestly I'd say there's 500 to 1000 sightings in this fairly large but small area compared to USA every year don't care if now body belived it but it's the truth and that number could be a lot larger, thought I'd tell u take it for what it is! Have a good day guys and girls!
ReplyDeleteNo girls here.Just trannies.
DeleteAnon 7:18,meet me at 06:00pm at the pink flamingo,i'll make a man of you,well i'll have my work cut out but i'll give it a go xx
Delete^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
SPANKED
Sorry Eva.I have a gash just like you.But you don't want a man with a gash,do you?oo
DeleteWell Lisa,some of the men i've been with are married so i wouldn't bet on it,and they can't tell the difference anyway,keep an eye on your fella xx
DeleteUS REAL LADIES " have HOT PINK SNAPPERS ...not smelly old GASHES!!! as always mellisssssa HHHHH.
DeleteAll of this Ketchum and Sykes shit will be irrelevant once a REAL body is shown to the world in December.
ReplyDeleteBy whom?
DeletePeace.
And why Dec? Why wait? Why all the waiting? Because Dyer is scum.
DeleteHow come Melba looks sorta hot in her small facebook picture?
ReplyDeleteJoe Fitz it's Canada guy here were almost for Shure thinking that to take one of these animals down is very very possible but the thing is you'd have to take the others down as well that are part of the group which makes things difficult and very inhumain, terrible thing to do and u would also need a select group of guys to pull it off! Now I really think the only solution which still sounds terrible is to wound one bad enough for good samples and film it at the same time? What your thoughts joe F hypothetically speaking???????
ReplyDeleteListen bro... Personally, I wouldn't go down this route of shooting one at all for the reasons you've mentioned, and I'm very pleased that you have come to that understanding do far, not that I'm trying to condescend you in any way what so ever... You sound like tough outdoorsmen. You'd have to be for the region you are researching in.
DeleteI think that if you could got consistent, very consistent pieces of footage then that would be all you need. There are types of motion that these creatures use that would be unquestionable. For example motion changes (from bipedal to quadrupedal), tree climbing, etc.
A close up video of the face would be incredible... That's largely the first thing enthusiasts ask; "what did the face look like?"
As soon as you take that shot, you compromise the area, the hard work you've done to locate them and potentially risk you lives; every single one of you.
Keep in touch.
Peace.
Canada guy , you nailed right there joe that first shot its a lot more than just a shot everything could change in minutes depending how they decide to respond?
DeleteFooled ^
DeleteCANADA GUY ! if you can shoot them ,then you can definitely film one ,, if you shoot one you and your buddys will be killed..
DeleteBe a man and kill them all.
DeleteJoe F = fuctard
DeleteThought the same as u at one point just shoot but it's not that simple sorry!
ReplyDelete