Anybody who claims to have a sample of a Bigfoot DNA without proper tests should be ignored 100% of the time and should be deemed a attention seeker. I would believe a person who spent money to have his sample tested and had results of a human like animal.
Why would someone claim to have Bigfoot DNA without first testing it ?
My conclusion is the person would be a nitwit or a attention seeker probably both.
Post by Cryptosaurian on Mar 8, 2016 19:29:57 GMT -5
Regardless, saying you found the DNA of a sasquatch without any backup context (i.e., a body) is too premature......I've watched this on Monsterquest numerous times and all I can say is that they've found DNA of an unknown primate THAT'S POSSIBLY A SASQUATCH.....but could also be another unknown species we don't know about. Until backup context is provided, anyone who says 'we have definitive sasquatch dna' would have to be taken into skeptical, cautious and careful investigative account.
"Whether or not the creature(s) exist, the stories certainly do."- Chad Arment
Cryptosaurian is a BCSCC Okanagan Field Researcher/Investigator & an aspiring author. He is currently on the the track of Ogopogo, "The Great Lake Mystery." He is now also investigating thunderbird sightings and enigmatic 'saurian' reports.
You know the only difference between a 'cow' and a 'pea' genetically? 2 genes! Good luck on a 'sasquatch in a haystack' approach to solving this question of Bigfoot! Forget DNA! we are years away from mastering it. We are like children in a hobby store 'years' out of our league!
"We should not allow possibilities to become assumptions!": John Green