Monday, July 11, 2011
Re: News From The Erickson Project
The Bigfoot drawing as shown is via The Erickson Project, and posted under fair use to highlight the developments coming out of that group’s new enhancements and alleged discoveries. The image is a mixed media drawing done by their project associate dArlet Devisser. It as an illustration. It is not a true representation of the facial footage. The sketch was employed as a design element within the text of The Erickson Project’s webpage.
This is my first exposure to this information so I DO hope I am misunderstanding what is going on. Otherwise it sounds like there are some major misrepresentations. Here is the link that was brought to my attention:
Which has this statement as its second paragraph
"Surely the most breathtaking news so far involves the sequencing of Bigfoot DNA. We already reported previously on the sequencing Bigfoot mitochondrial DNA, which is coming out 100% human. That means that the Bigfoot female line goes back to human females."
Here is the "Already Reported Previously" link:
But the actual news is that if the female genetics they are reporting are 100% human, then the sample is 100% human. There are two key samples used in the analysis and they must therefore both come from human female corpses.
The Third paragraph continues with the disclosure:
"However, we can now report on the sequencing of the nuclear DNA from the male side. The report is that it is absolutely non-human! It is very far away from humans. In the chart below, various hominins are measured according to their distance away from humans in terms of polymorphisms (P* distance)." And then gives a chart indicating comparative polymorphisms from modern humans in Neanderthals, Denisova, the Bigfoot composite sample, and chimpanzees.
Now the doubletalk here is that the DNA for the fossil hominids is once again mitochondrial DNA preserving the female line of descent and not nuclear DNA at all! Furthermore only half the nuclear DNA comes from the male line.
And then fuirther down the page is a lot of self-contradictory rigamarole about how the samples were allegedly obtained.
Now as I said I'd love to be proven wrong on this. But I have just heard a series of badly incriminating admissions that these people don't know what they are doing. It IS true I am hearing all this as indirect ("Leaked") rumours and not as official documentation. But what I have just seen gives me NO confidence in any conclusions the group might come to, I'm sorry.
Best Wishes, Dale D.
I subsequently got this reply from Tyler Stone:
I think this article might be worth looking at:
[Which is a long tale of woe consisting of reports of unsatisfied customers submitted to the Better Business Bureau. In the review of this DNA firm which promises a "Revolutionary new advance in DNA Testing" (ie, they presumambly use an experimental approach to analysis not approved by the DNA analysis industry at large) , the business is rated an "F" for its overall performance]
The business running the tests, DNA Diagnostics, basically seems to be doing this:
1. Receive samples and payment via check
2. Cash check
3. Fail to run test, lie about it to customer/legal officials OR perform test and send incorrect results to customer.
So basically, with as horrible as the company sounds, I wouldn't trust anything coming from them. I'd say this story is all BS.
It's also worth noting that Dr. Ketchum did the analysis for a sample of "yeti hair" found on an episode of destination truth. It came back as being from an unknown non-human primate, yet I've heard elsewhere that the lab doesn't even HAVE non-human primate samples for comparison!
Now if the samples were to be tested at a different lab and they got the same results, I'd be willing to accept this. But I doubt that will happen. Honestly, I'd say any "real" results are from contamination by Dr. Ketchum. I bet her DNA would match the "Sasquatch" DNA if it was tested.
In short, the "findings" are garbage and the whole story is a load of BS. End of discussion.
--Sorry, I should wait for some sort of formal announcement of the final Bigfoot DNA test results from the company first: but right now I'd say that the stuff just keeps getting deeper and, frankly, I haven't got a shovel big enough to keep up with it.
Best Wishes, Dale D.
Please note that I personally do not have anything to say about DNA Diagnostics or the way they run their business: the report through Cryptomundo is by way of the Better Business Bureau. I am not publically defaming the business for that reason. What I AM saying is that based on these preliminary statements, they haven't a clue about mitochondrial and Nuclear DNA, or the male and female genetic contributions, and that therefore their results are useless