Possibly the Most Important Find in Recent HistoryThe most important and valuable part of the Searching for Bigfoot Team is the network of associates, supporters, and friends that we have established on our expeditions across this great country of ours. Most of the leads that we have followed and the breakthroughs we have made are a direct result of inputs from people just like you. The latest breakthrough came to us in just this way. An email from an associate member came to us asking; “…do they bury their dead...” Of course, we could only give an answer based on our strongest conjecture. We feel that when they sense that they may be gravely ill, injured, or weak, that they seek out a quite and safe place where they could not be easily found by predators or scavengers. After they die, “mother nature” takes over and the remains quickly return to nature as is the normal way for most animals. However, there was more to this email. Attached was a picture of a skeleton found while searching for arrow heads deep in the woods on an individual’s private property. That individual made it clear that they did not want their name used or the location of their property released. They had heard about the Searching for Bigfoot Team, lead by Tom Biscardi, and were confident that they could trust us. They believed in our project and wanted to help, so they contacted us through an associate member who lived near by. We made the trip out to this property and here are the results of what we saw;
The skeleton above measured approximately 109 inches from head to toe! -- Notice the 1 foot marker next to the leg bone!
The remains we measured were 9’3” long! Of course, with the movement of the earth over time and being able to only use crude measurement techniques we cannot attest to the true accuracy of these measurements. We will have to wait for the professionals to do their measurements. However, even if we are off by two feet, this would still be over 7 feet tall! Also, judging by the artifacts found in the layers above this find, the bones should date back about 2000-3000 years. Again, we need to wait for the results from the experts. We had contacted an anthropologist to come along with us on our first visit, but that person decided to decline our invitation, just hours prior to leaving. She stated that due to the controversial nature of the discovery and the urging of her family, she could not get involved, so we were on our own. The Searching for Bigfoot Team was careful to disturb the site as little as possible before covering it back up. We collected only a few bones, such as a jaw bone and teeth to bring back for analysis. If our conclusions are correct, this may the first ever find of conclusive proof that these creatures had existed on this continent along side man in centuries past. This would concur with the oral history of most aboriginal peoples across this country.
Parts of the skull and jaw bone and Some of our attempts to measure the skeleton
The jaw bone and teeth we took back for analysis. The enamel of teeth has the best chance of containing viable DNA! The initial results from the archeology students who originally uncovered this find are as follows:
ANALYSIS OF RECOVERED DNA:
"In total we generated 328bp of mitochondrial sequence. The next step was to ask whether this actually was ancient DNA, and if it was, how does it compares to modern human DNA and previously isolated Homo Erectus DNA. This case was especially important, as we had generated relatively long PCR products from an ancient non-permafrost sample. Radio carbon dating of the sample dated it to 29,000YBP (roughly 30,000 BC) (K. Liden); therefore, products greater than 100-150bp were not expected. COMPARISON TO MODERN HUMANS The first part of the analysis was to compare our aDNA to the Cambridge Reference Sequence (CRS) (4). The two sequences were aligned and any base substitutions, insertions or deletions were recorded. Figure 2 shows one of the cloned PCR products in comparison to a modern human mtDNA identical to the CRS's hypervariable region I showing one insertion and one substitution: in total there were 22 substitutions and one insertion. When comparing any two modern Europeans, the average number of base substitutions over the equivalent region of mitochondrial sequence 5.28 +/- 2.24; therefore, the level of variation between obtained from the Homo Erectus and the CRS was extremely high. This high level of differentiation was seen in a larger scale comparison to 300 modern European sequences with an average number of substitutions of 23.09 +/- 3.27. Similar results were obtained when the sequence was compared to modern Asians and sub-Saharan Africans: 23.27 +/- 4.06 and 23.09 +/- 2.86, respectively. Based on these results, it appeared that the DNA extracted from the rib was not closely related to any modern mtDNA. CONCLUSION Analysis of the aDNA sequences showed two things. First, the DNA recovered from the “Skeletal finding” Site was very similar to the Sanders Site and has subsequently been shown to be similar to the Topper Site samples. Therefore, it can be concluded with a high degree of confidence that Homo Erectus DNA has been recovered and that this in not some kind of peculiar contamination. Second, the Homo Erectus DNA is significantly different from modern human mtDNA, forming a distinct group. These results indicate that Homo erectus contained a distinct type of mtDNA. While it is not possible to know whether Homo Erectus and modern humans did interbreed, based on the Homo Erectus and modern humans analyzed to date, it is possible to conclude that Homo Erectus did not pass any of their mtDNA on into the modern European mtDNA pool. Further analysis of Homo Erectus DNA will provide information on the molecular diversity of Homo Erectus."
(1) The name of the site was changed to protect it.As if all of this data was not enough, we also received a report back from a local university concerning the DNA sampling done on the bones found during our previous visit to this general area (Titled: Possibly the Most Important Find in History found on this web site) . The report we received back showed a measurement of genomes, (a packet of DNA material forming basic genes for specific organs found in humans). The data showed our sample compared to a human base line sample. This preliminary information indicated that our find, although outwardly appearing to be human remains, was in fact NOT HUMAN! Keep in mind that this is only preliminary information and that it will take a lot more testing before we can say conclusively what our find may be. It does, however, get our attention peaked and gives us hope that we are just one step closer to solving the mystery surrounding our friend “Bigfoot”! It keeps us pushing the envelope and ignoring the discomforts and dangers of the field while we search.
The graph on top is a sample from our find, the one on the bottom is a base from a human genome file. Notice the blue line!
We did not open this site nor did we disturb it. We only observed it after the "archeologists" were done with it. We recovered only one artifact that we brought back and it has been turned over to a Professor at Stanford University and we are awaiting the results. We will bring the results to you as we receive them. As always, we bring you what we find, as we find it. You will need to make up your own mind as the information becomes available! These types of finds continue to push us on to keep on Searching for Bigfoot!
When we inquired about more information on this site, we were told by the people who sent us this original information that their supervisor told them that "...they were not to answer any more questions about this site... there would be no more communication about this site... as a matter of fact this site never exisited...!" Does this sound like a cover up to you? It sounded strange to me... here is a link to a comment by Noted Native American author and professor of law emeritus, Vine Deloria: (See what you think!!!!) http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/720497/posts
To see this site just as we first saw it, AT THE MOMENT OF DISCOVERY for our team.. see the movie...
** BIGFOOT LIVES **
My comment added when this was posted on Facebook was:
The DNA cited as Homo erectus in this article is not in fact generally accepted to actually be Homo erectus. The official stance is that actual Homo erectus DNA has yet to be identified anywhere in the world. The sites which are mentioned are pre-Clovis settlements, but this does not automatically imply that they were pre-sapiens. However the morphology of the jaws and teeth do look very similar to some supposed Homo heidelburgensis materials, including at Gadar in Greenland, and heidelburgensis is often mistakenly labeled as erectus.
Postscript: A further caution is that the name of Tom Biscardi appears as part of the team and he is a known hoaxer. As of right now there is no way to know exactly how extensive his involvement in this case might be, but it is definitely a good reason to view the entire matter with suspicion