sebastian
Really into this!
Detective Gadget & Moderator
Posts: 512
|
DNA
Feb 19, 2012 23:54:29 GMT -5
Post by sebastian on Feb 19, 2012 23:54:29 GMT -5
Certain project claims to have the result of some DNA analysis soon. Do you think they have a chance? For me, it is a No; my reason is that the origin of the samples is questionable. Using DNA to define a species is also not as clear cut; DNA cannot provide information on the classic biological species concept ( reproductive isolation).
|
|
billr
Really into this!
Posts: 856
|
DNA
Feb 20, 2012 0:00:42 GMT -5
Post by billr on Feb 20, 2012 0:00:42 GMT -5
You need proof of source, ie you need to know where your original source came from
|
|
Richard
Really into this!
Thinking I should be out in the bush ...
Posts: 562
|
DNA
Feb 20, 2012 12:03:55 GMT -5
Post by Richard on Feb 20, 2012 12:03:55 GMT -5
Not only is proof of source required - but DNA testing isn't quite all it is cracked up to be. For known DNA sequences it is a great tool to differentiate sequence A from B. However when looking at a previously unmapped genome, the trick is knowing which of the thousands of markers out of the 3 billion base pairs that exist within human DNA to investigate. So - just saying that 3,000 markers are the same does NOT mean that the we are looking at the same total genome - that is a drop in the bucket of the overall genome. However TV-scientists would lead you to believe otherwise. So DNA really isn't the solution to our problem - rather we need to get a creature or its remains for investigation. After all if I have to see Todd Disotell again I think I'll cry .. mainly since even with just a mohawk he has more hair than I Richard
|
|
sebastian
Really into this!
Detective Gadget & Moderator
Posts: 512
|
DNA
Feb 23, 2012 20:27:00 GMT -5
Post by sebastian on Feb 23, 2012 20:27:00 GMT -5
I heard Melba Ketchum got some Maple Ridge hair samples.......
|
|
hotdog
No life here!
Posts: 49
|
DNA
Feb 24, 2012 18:21:26 GMT -5
Post by hotdog on Feb 24, 2012 18:21:26 GMT -5
Where did you hear that?
|
|
sebastian
Really into this!
Detective Gadget & Moderator
Posts: 512
|
DNA
Feb 24, 2012 19:36:44 GMT -5
Post by sebastian on Feb 24, 2012 19:36:44 GMT -5
Hotdog, I will PM you on this one.
|
|
duallie
Has opinions now!
Posts: 191
|
Post by duallie on Feb 24, 2012 23:23:27 GMT -5
what i hate is when tests come back inconclusive, and then some consider that as proof that it must be bf.
where did the maple ridge hair samples come from? what reason is there for the woman to assume they are sasquatch and not just some hair she found in the woods?
|
|
|
DNA
Feb 24, 2012 23:37:35 GMT -5
Post by lorelei on Feb 24, 2012 23:37:35 GMT -5
I heard the Maple Ridge sample came up as male human pubic hair. Just kidding!
|
|
duallie
Has opinions now!
Posts: 191
|
DNA
Feb 25, 2012 0:13:50 GMT -5
Post by duallie on Feb 25, 2012 0:13:50 GMT -5
I heard the Maple Ridge sample came up as male human pubic hair. Just kidding! you'll probably be not far off. odds are probably higher it's a male/female mix.
|
|
sebastian
Really into this!
Detective Gadget & Moderator
Posts: 512
|
DNA
Feb 25, 2012 23:58:05 GMT -5
Post by sebastian on Feb 25, 2012 23:58:05 GMT -5
I read somewhere on Facebook that the result came back as modern human.
|
|
duallie
Has opinions now!
Posts: 191
|
DNA
Feb 26, 2012 23:01:11 GMT -5
Post by duallie on Feb 26, 2012 23:01:11 GMT -5
I heard the Maple Ridge sample came up as male human pubic hair. Just kidding! well look at that. you were right on......kinda.
|
|
duallie
Has opinions now!
Posts: 191
|
DNA
Feb 26, 2012 23:11:48 GMT -5
Post by duallie on Feb 26, 2012 23:11:48 GMT -5
I read somewhere on Facebook that the result came back as modern human. so, how is it that this was even linked as possible bf hair to begin with? some people just think that any noise or anything that they see, an indentation in the soil, a broken branch, or a wood-knock can be nothing else but bf sign. people should first and foremost try to rule out other possible causes of any sign before assuming it as bf. and if every other possible cause can be ruled out, then maybe start to see if it can be sttributed to a bf possibility. too many instantly believe that bf makes every sound in the woods.
|
|
|
DNA
Feb 27, 2012 14:55:59 GMT -5
Post by kokanee on Feb 27, 2012 14:55:59 GMT -5
|
|
duallie
Has opinions now!
Posts: 191
|
DNA
Feb 27, 2012 17:08:37 GMT -5
Post by duallie on Feb 27, 2012 17:08:37 GMT -5
what is there to believe? what is he even saying? he claims it tested 100%..........100%what? nothing can test 100% positive of being bf. there is no bf body to compare anything to. this is what i was meaning about people claiming things are bf. bf first needs to be proven to exist before everything can be claimed to be linked to it.
|
|
|
Post by westerncanadian on Feb 28, 2012 18:50:19 GMT -5
If it's from Brisson it is rubbish. We have caught him hoaxing twice. Once with rock throwing and the other time with the Golden Ears photos.
|
|