Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sasquatch DNA Study Reveals Human Hybrid

80 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

but they didn't take a skull which would easily prove without a doubt that they existed?

that story is 10 feet of bullshiat.

Maybe so. Only going on what I've heard the past few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Re the tissue sample. A hunter in ca shot a female and juvenile. When he approached and saw how human they were he freaked, buried the bodies and fled thinking he may face murder charges. He returned after discussing the events with those who are big names in the field of study and cut a sample. That sample was then sent to Ketchum.

sorry....gotta call bullshit on this story.

Why has no one gone back to the site and dug up the remains? Sounds like the story of a bunch of drunk rednecks in the woods to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Sounds like a tall tale to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

well if it came over in 13000BC it'd be contemporary with early clovis cultures, which would mean it'd have to have migrated over beringia during the upper pleistocene/early holocene. if that's the case there should be DNA evidence in northern china and far eastern russia as well.

platyrrhines are the only primate species native to this hemisphere (and none of them are technically natives, having migrated about 40mil years ago.) and none of them come remotely close to a great ape or some similar species that would account for the increase in size over the human with which it mated. there is zero fossil evidence to suggest any such species has ever existed on this side of the world. the only explanation is a band of clovis migrated into the great plains (arguably impossible because of the timing of the interglaciery recession) and then scooted south thousands and thousands of miles over an extremely short period of time (migratory patterns suggest this is kinda idiotic to propose) to go fug a howler monkey. but then where do you get some giant species from?

the only hominids contemporary with modern humans were the neandertals, which would be the only feasible explanation. some suggest the magdalenians of northern europe were actually the first to populate the americas due to dates on sites around labrador and conflicting dates in projectile point diffusion, so you could post that neandertals came too (or came earlier.) but even then it wouldn't explain anything because 1) neandertals were actually on average shorter than homo sapiens) and 2) it's undermined by the fact that neandertals died out in europe by 40,000 years ago, which forces the person insisting on the argument to set up a scenario whereby neandertals somehow made it to the americas 25,000 years before the clovis.

where's the evidence? paleontologists and archaeologist look for multiple correlating lines of evidence before attempting to make anything resembling a solid claim. a couple strands of DNA doesn't do a damn thing unless it's accompanied by multiple other sources in different fields. it's no different than gavin menzies selling books on the baseless notion that the chinese discovered america because it grabs the attention of people unable to determine the difference between evidence and conjecture disguised as evidence.

i bet some of you still think the cardif giant was real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

This project has been going on for quite some time. Many folks have sent in samples and evidence, signed the NDA, and have been waiting.

give me a couple of minutes and I will have a sample to send in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

but they didn't take a skull which would easily prove without a doubt that they existed?

that story is 10 feet of bullshiat.

the bigfoots do the same thing as the aliens...........

they keep running into the dumbest humans on the planet.

go figure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

can someone who insists on believing in sasquatch please address the many and exhaustive points i brought up above because it took me a long time to write all that out and i've kind of been hoping for a fun argument

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I thought I saw a sasquatch once. Turned out to be King Taharqa's big fat stinkin' mammy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I thought I saw a sasquatch once. Turned out to be King Taharqa's big fat stinkin' mammy.

Ohh for fucks sake.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Anyone who wants to flat out deny that these exist go look at how long it took to confirm pandas as being real.

Also, fossils do not form under all conditions. In fact it takes some pretty specific and fortunate series of events to create them. It is completely possible that the fossil evidence will never exist because the fossils will not form in the inhabited area.

That said if these exist and haven't been confirmed by now I would be extremely surprised if they ever are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Anyone who wants to flat out deny that these exist go look at how long it took to confirm pandas as being real.

scientists have confirmed their existence since 1869. that's over 140 years of technology, human encroachment into previous untouched areas, and understanding of biology and physiology. it's an interesting epistemological point but simply cannot be applied analogously point blank in this day and age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I thought I saw a sasquatch once. Turned out to be King Taharqa's big fat stinkin' mammy.

DAMN!!!!!

Now that was uncalled for......funny as hell....but uncalled for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites