Big Foot DNA

Discussion in 'Biology & Genetics' started by river, Dec 27, 2012.

  1. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    It seems that human mitochondria has been found in the samples , of which are over a hundred of
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    By the way there are no websites , the forensic scientist is waiting upon peer review of the paper presented

    The study was carried out by many labs who had no idea of what they were analyzing to verify their own lab results

    Which were not contaminated by them or any thing else , since they have records of their own DNA to establish the purity of the samples

    But any thoughts anyway ?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,302
    The truth is much more than can be handled.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Walter L. Wagner Cosmic Truth Seeker Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,520
    Just FYI, I started a thread on the same topic a few weeks ago, and it was moved to the "UFOS and Monsters" section. Still waiting for further analysis and the published results.
     
  8. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    Are you saying there's a hominid living undetected in the USA? I just don't see that being true.
     
  9. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Messages:
    5,874
    Who is the "forensic scientist"? What publication(s) is(are) being submitted to?

    I'm not convinced even this much is true to be perfectly honest (that a "forensic scientist" has submitted a paper on bigfoot DNA to the peer-review process). But if it is, the results will be interesting.
     
  10. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    Join coast to coast , and listen to the interview , you can join for 1 months , about 6.95

    It comes down to , whats more important , finding the truth , for a meager sum , or spouting off about which you don't know

    Your choice
     
  11. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Messages:
    5,874
    "Join Coast to Coast?" that's your reply to my very reasonable questions?

    Don't be daft. First, Coast to Coast is a nutter show to begin with... so no reason to even consider joining. Second, I asked a very valid set of questions which you are clearly refusing to answer. Either that or there simply are no answers. There is no "forensic scientist" at all is there? Just some guy who probably claims to be a forensic scientist.

    Your evasion is intellectual dishonesty.

    If there answers to who and what publications are available, there is no reason not to give them. Except to be dishonest.
     
  12. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    So then your not willing to spend $6.95 for one month to be informed about the subject

    Either you are a cheap person , or afraid of the truth
     
  13. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    In my case, I wouldn't spend 10 cents on it. That's at least 25 cents more than it's worth. <shrug>
     
  14. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    Afraid of the truth as you always are
     
  15. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    That's always the best you can ever do, isn't it? Claim other people are afraid of your nonsense. While the REAL fact is that it's *you* who are afraid of the actual truth.

    As I said once before, when someone does nothing but visit crank and woo-woo sites (as you do), it rots their brain.
     
  16. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    You are afraid of the truth
     
  17. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    I've explained before - and in detail - that I most certainly am not. You are simply one of the few *highly* under-educated people here who do not know enough the be able to sort fiction from fact. And you fall for every single bit of stupidity you come across due to the fact that you WANT to believe these fantasies.

    I prefer to live unafraid in the REAL world - not plagued with nonsense as you are. <shrug>
     
  18. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    You are afraid of the truth

    The proof is your lack of any inquisitiveness , of which all intelligent people have
     
  19. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Messages:
    5,874
    No.. the truth is out. You're a liar. If there were real data to discuss, you'd have done so by now.

    I'm not being unreasonable. I'm simply asking for the name of the "forensic scientist" and the publication that is refereeing the paper. Instead of providing this very simple information, you do as mystery-mongers and significance-junkies do and attempt to redirect, deflect, move a goal post, and shift burden of proof.

    Well done. The truth is out: you're a liar.
     
  20. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    The paper is under peer review and I have said before there is no web site to go to

    If you really have any sense of inquisitiveness about the subject then join coast to coast and look into the archives , and listen to the interview

    Whats the harm
     
  21. SkinWalker Archaeology / Anthropology Moderator

    Messages:
    5,874
    I didn't ask you for a website. In fact, I don't want a website. I'm asking for:

    1) the name of the "forensic scientist"
    2) the name of the publication that is refereeing the paper

    If this person exists, then it should be easy to provide.
     
  22. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206
    Dr. Melba S. Ketchum


    The paper name was not mentioned
     
  23. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,206

Share This Page