Bigfoot DNA sequenced?

ianbobo

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Oct 4, 2004
2,209
194
423
South of Boston
#1
I hope this is real

http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/11/bigfoot-dna-sequenced-in-upcoming.html#moretop
DALLAS, Nov. 24--A team of scientists can verify that their 5-year long DNA study, currently under peer-review, confirms the existence of a novel hominin hybrid species, commonly called “Bigfoot” or “Sasquatch,” living in North America. Researchers’ extensive DNA sequencing suggests that the legendary Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago as a hybrid cross of modern Homo sapiens with an unknown primate speci
 

Cunt Smasher

Caligula Jr.
Aug 26, 2005
13,287
3,945
563
#2
She is real, and the study is real, but who knows. What throws me off is they're saying the bigfeetses are a hybrud, meaning some ape thing fucked a human. I hope it's true there's proof, but we've been burned a buncha times.
 

Creasy Bear

gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Donator
Mar 10, 2006
48,744
36,872
628
In a porn tree
#3
The only way to really "confirm" Bigfeets DNA is to compare it to a known Bigfoots... and therein lies the problem.
 

ianbobo

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Oct 4, 2004
2,209
194
423
South of Boston
#4
Rumors this study was released yesterday because Finding Bigfoot will reveal similar results tonight
http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/11/dr-melba-ketchum-versus-matt-moneymaker.html#moretop
What is most interesting about this is the timing. The Saturday after Thanksgiving Melba Ketchum issues a press release, which just so happens to fly in the face of her tight lipped nature over the past two years. Remember Ketchum went so far as to engage in a disinformation campaign in an attempt to undermine the trustworthiness of what was reported by Robert Lindsey. Now all of a sudden Ketchum issues a statement that confirms most, it not all of what Robert Lindsay has reported.

Now Ketchum’s sudden need to inform everyone just so happens to take place the day before an episode of Finding Bigfoot, where Matt Moneymaker and company are provided a large portion of what is believed to be Sasquatch hair. The previews make clear this hair was sent out for DNA testing, with the results scheduled for release on the episode.
 

Creasy Bear

gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Donator
Mar 10, 2006
48,744
36,872
628
In a porn tree
#5
Rumors this study was released yesterday because Finding Bigfoot will reveal similar results tonight
http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/11/dr-melba-ketchum-versus-matt-moneymaker.html#moretop
What is most interesting about this is the timing. The Saturday after Thanksgiving Melba Ketchum issues a press release, which just so happens to fly in the face of her tight lipped nature over the past two years. Remember Ketchum went so far as to engage in a disinformation campaign in an attempt to undermine the trustworthiness of what was reported by Robert Lindsey. Now all of a sudden Ketchum issues a statement that confirms most, it not all of what Robert Lindsay has reported.

Now Ketchum’s sudden need to inform everyone just so happens to take place the day before an episode of Finding Bigfoot, where Matt Moneymaker and company are provided a large portion of what is believed to be Sasquatch hair. The previews make clear this hair was sent out for DNA testing, with the results scheduled for release on the episode.
I figured there'd be a realityish TV tie in there somewhere. Bigfeets and realish TV go together like meth and white trash.
 

gleet

What's black and white and red all over?
Jul 24, 2005
22,543
13,852
608
Idaho
#6
Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens.
Weren't the wimmens bad enough when they were just coal burners? Now we find they are breeding unknown hominims and making Bigfeets. Next year there will be tv shows searching for Bigfeets daddy in trailer parks and carnivals nationwide.

Ketchum calls on public officials and law enforcement to immediately recognize the Sasquatch as an indigenous people:

“Genetically, the Sasquatch are a human hybrid with unambiguously modern human maternal ancestry. Government at all levels must recognize them as an indigenous people and immediately protect their human and Constitutional rights against those who would see in their physical and cultural differences a ‘license’ to hunt, trap, or kill them.”
Oh great.

Comment from the article:

Reply
 

ianbobo

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Oct 4, 2004
2,209
194
423
South of Boston
#8
Weren't the wimmens bad enough when they were just coal burners? Now we find they are breeding unknown hominims and making Bigfeets. Next year there will be tv shows searching for Bigfeets daddy in trailer parks and carnivals nationwide.



Reply
didn't take long to go there
 

ianbobo

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Oct 4, 2004
2,209
194
423
South of Boston
#9
Best part of the site is they allow anonymous posts
 

Atomic Fireball

Well-Known Member
Donator
Jul 26, 2005
6,323
4,267
678
#10
Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago as a hybrid cross of modern Homo sapiens with an unknown primate species

There was a paper published in another journal a few years back that suggested the hybridization occurred much more recently


 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,168
12,930
373
Atlanta, GA
#12
It's a joke blog, guys. Here is one of the entry headlines:

Calling a Sasquatch an animal is NOT an insult


Then there's this:
Erickson-Ketchum Project: R.W. Ridley NABS interview with North American Bigfoot Search, the proof is in the pudding





The photo and video links to earlier entries on the right side of the main page are the best.

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story
October 10, 2011 Yeti Expedition: Body not found, but scientists 95% sure Yetis are real [VIDEO]
'I was kidnapped by a Sasquatch' - Albert Ostman
April 10, 2012 User Disappears After Posting Image of Bigfoot On Reddit.com
 

ianbobo

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Oct 4, 2004
2,209
194
423
South of Boston
#13
It's a joke blog, guys. Here is one of the entry headlines:

Calling a Sasquatch an animal is NOT an insult


Then there's this:
Erickson-Ketchum Project: R.W. Ridley NABS interview with North American Bigfoot Search, the proof is in the pudding





The photo and video links to earlier entries on the right side of the main page are the best.

Bigfoot injured by a forest fire was taken away and hidden by the authorities, not even Robert Lindsay can top this story
October 10, 2011 Yeti Expedition: Body not found, but scientists 95% sure Yetis are real [VIDEO]
'I was kidnapped by a Sasquatch' - Albert Ostman
April 10, 2012 User Disappears After Posting Image of Bigfoot On Reddit.com
They don't take themselves too seriously but they do report some alleged real encounters.
 

ianbobo

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Oct 4, 2004
2,209
194
423
South of Boston
#15
I thought the word Bigfoot in the thread title made it clear this is a joke thread.
I actually believe though I have no evidence. Must go back to being 9 years old watchin "In Search Of...". Should have put a poll up:
Do you believe in BF?
It's a dude in a suit?
Pee in Bobo's butt?

The Patterson film is actualy pretty good evidence. Is some guy in 1968 going to make a suit with boobs flapping around?
 

Lord Zero

Viciously Silly
Aug 25, 2008
54,168
12,930
373
Atlanta, GA
#16
I actually believe though I have no evidence.
That's the exact same thing as religion and believing in UFOs.
Is some guy in 1968 going to make a suit with boobs flapping around?
Yes. Some guy made up the Loch Ness Monster and plenty of other guys have made up crop circles. All for no reason.
 

gleet

What's black and white and red all over?
Jul 24, 2005
22,543
13,852
608
Idaho
#17
I actually believe though I have no evidence. Must go back to being 9 years old watchin "In Search Of...". Should have put a poll up:
Do you believe in BF?
It's a dude in a suit?
Pee in Bobo's butt?

The Patterson film is actualy pretty good evidence. Is some guy in 1968 going to make a suit with boobs flapping around?
I'm out in the middle of nowhere every week. When they released 15 wolves into the whole state, I started finding their tracks soon after in different places. Wolverines are rare, but they are easy to get on game cameras with a deer carcass for bait. I've found bear carcasses and skeletons, elk carcasses killed in avalanches, lion teeth, etc. Shit from all the big animals is all over the place. Millions of nervous hunters, millions of rifles, game cameras everywhere taking daylight, flash, infrared and thermal pictures of every animal alive, and nobody has proof.If it is out there, somebody will shoot it or hit it with a semi or see the ravens feeding on it's carcass.

The guy in the suit admitted everything and said the suit was hot. I saw him in a show when he was old and he walked away from the camera. He was shaped like an upright beaver with long arms and walked exactly like the film.

I would like for them to be real but there isn't any proof. When I am all alone and miles from anywhere, I worry about bigfoot as much as I do wolfman and frankenstein.
 

Creasy Bear

gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Donator
Mar 10, 2006
48,744
36,872
628
In a porn tree
#18
I actually believe though I have no evidence. Must go back to being 9 years old watchin "In Search Of...". Should have put a poll up:
Do you believe in BF?
It's a dude in a suit?
Pee in Bobo's butt?

The Patterson film is actualy pretty good evidence. Is some guy in 1968 going to make a suit with boobs flapping around?
Yes... a guy named Phil Morris.

A guy named Bob Heironimus was in the suit.
 

ianbobo

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Oct 4, 2004
2,209
194
423
South of Boston
#19
Was the Patterson-Gimlin film ever proven to be a hoax?

The short answer: No.

But what about the rumors? What about the rumor that one of the people who helped obtain the footage "confessed" to wearing the costume?

There are, in fact, several different stories involving different people who claimed (or were suspected) to be the man in the costume ...

Logically, if the stories involve different culprits ... then most of those stories must be completely bogus ... because not everybody who made the claim of being the guy in the costume ... was the guy in the costume ...

Some of those bogus stories have been commercially exploited in books and TV documentaries. That his how most people have "heard" that the Patterson footage was "proven to be a hoax".

On this page you will find links to youtubery of the most influential documentaries, and some relevant background informaton most influential rumor of all -- the Hieronimous "confession".

Thankfully, in January 2010 new information was presented on television which graphicly demonstrates that all of those costume stories were falsified.

A new documentary on the National Geographic Channel titled "American Paranormal: Bigfoot" presented some compelling math and anatomy to show it's not a costume at all.

The strategy for analysis of the Patterson creature built upon strategies employed in prior documentaries, namely "Sasquatch: Legend Meets Science" and at least one episode of Monsterquest (History Channel).

That's not a bad thing. The three different examinations all mutually corroborate each other in various ways. The mathematical data of the latest examination gives a more precise measurement of the Patterson creature's height:

Seven (7) foot, six and a half (6 1/2) inches tall

The math is there to be re-examined, anytime.

There wasn't sufficient time in the documentary to examine any of the pervasive hoax rumors still floating around, but that can be done here.
http://www.bfro.net/news/korff_scam.asp
 

ianbobo

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Oct 4, 2004
2,209
194
423
South of Boston
#20
Yes... a guy named Phil Morris.

A guy named Bob Heironimus was in the suit.
"Confessor" Bob Hieronimous.
In January, 2001, he was quoted
as saying "These Bigfoot people are making money off it. Well, I should be gettin' a little cut of that, see. I'm gettin' nuthin'."
There's much more on the link I posted. Pretty good read.
 

ianbobo

Well-Known Member
It's My Birthday!
Oct 4, 2004
2,209
194
423
South of Boston
#21
From the story on the link I posted.

Three Contradictory Versions of the Hieronimous Confession


Version #1, Costume Description

Hieronimus said Roger Patterson killed a red horse and made a costume from its heavy, stinking hide.

Quotes from Bob Hieronimus, in 2001:

"Roger skinned out a dead red horse ... [The costume] stunk ... It weighed maybe twenty, twenty five pounds. It was a little bit heavy ... Horsehide would be heavy."

"It was made of three parts. It had legs. It had a corset or middle piece between the neck and waist. And it had a head."


Hieronimus' first story described his costume as a heavy costume made from the hide of a red horse. He says it stunk like a dead animal.




PGF Frame 352





Version #2, Costume Description

Hieronimus subsequently agrees that the costume was a simple, gorilla costume, manufactured by Morris Costumes in North Carolina in the 1960's.
In this second version of his confession, the fur of the creature was dynel nylon threads stitched to a woven cloth backing -- nothing like the hide of a "dead red horse" that he previously described.

This dramatic modification of his original "confession" was prompted by a publicity-hungry costume maker in North Carolina named Phillip Morris.

Morris also wanted to take some credit for the Patterson footage, somehow, and possibly market a new costume.

Although Morris has no records showing the sale of a costume to Roger Patterson, he is nevertheless certain that he provided the costume used in the famous footage.

Morris claims that a man named Roger Patterson bought a discount gorilla costume. Somehow he remembers that sale, though there is no record of it.

He also claims he "recognized" the gorilla costume when he saw the Patterson footage on TV one day. How coincidental!

The photo on the upper right shows the costume Morris "recognized" from the Patterson footage.



A photo of the gorilla costume Hieronimus said was used.

The man in the photo is costume maker Phillip Morris. In this same photo Morris appears as his "Dr. Evil" TV host character. The TV show was a horror film showcase which aired in the 1950's in the southern United States.

Prior to his recent claims about the Patterson footage, Morris got media attention for his demands for compensation from the producers of the Austin Powers film series. Morris claimed the Mike Meyer's "Dr. Evil" character infringed on Morris' previously unregistered trademark for an obscure line of "Dr. Evil" costume products.

Lawyers for the Austin Powers producers easily demonstrated that the two different "Dr. Evil" characters were developed independently, and would not be confused by the public.



Mike Myers as "Dr. Evil"






Version #3, Costume Description

Sometime after Costume Description #2, Hieronimus and Morris came up with a new costume replica of the Patterson creature, which Morris said he could make more duplicates of for 7-8 thousand dollars.

The latest costume is a custom-made, latex-enhanced non-stretching quirky creation. It's a very far cry from what Hollywood special effects folks say would have been required, and nothing like the simple gorilla costume that Morris originally claimed was sold to Patterson in the 1960s, which Morris claimed he "recognized" on TV when he saw the Patterson footage.

The Version #3 Costume is pictured on the right. It is held up by Morris and Hieronimus.

The images on the right are from the last television story done about Bob Hieronimus, on the local news channel in Yakima.

At the height of the scam, television and newspaper reporters in Yakima ran with the Hieronimus "confession" story without paying much attention to the blatant, graphic inconsistencies.










 

gleet

What's black and white and red all over?
Jul 24, 2005
22,543
13,852
608
Idaho
#22
The widely acclaimed BFRO (Bigfoot Research Org) says Bob is a liar. Shocking.

Here is a post from James Randi's outfit.
kitakaze
26th September 2008, 10:17 AM
As it relates to Bob Heironimus as Patty I am reposting my 28 "I know" post (now 29) with a couple edits thanks to William Parcher:I believe Bob Heironimus was Patty. I don't believe Philip Morris had anything to do with the suit. I don't expect Bob Heironimus to have ever had intimate knowledge of all the circumstances involved before he got into the suit nor do I expect him to have a perfect recollection of the details he did know near 40 years later. I don't expect a person who is engineering a hoax for profit and gain to stop and explain every part of his plan to each person he involves in that plan.

I know Bob Heironimus had connections to Patterson and Gimlin unlike the notion that footers wanted us to believe that he was just some random crazy guy looking for attention decades later. I know Gimlin and Heironimus were and still are good friends. I know Heironimus lives on the same street as Gimlin. I know it makes zero sense to implicate yourself and your friend and neighbour in a hoax when that friend and neighbour could take you to court or at the least walk over to your house and pop you in the nose and take back the lawn mower he lent you for calling him a liar. I know Gimlin won't take Heironimus to court and I know he has declined invitations to do public interviews with Heironimus.

I know Heironimus appears in footage for Patterson's film 'Bigfoot - America's Abominable Snowman' in May 1967 in what appears to be Yakima riding on Chico, leading another horse, and being followed by Jerry Merrit. I know that Gimlin was riding Heironimus' horse at Bluff Creek and didn't say anything until it was discovered and put to him long after he had a chance to say that Heironimus did have some connection to Bluff Creek. I know that Patterson appears on Heironimus' horse beside a wig wearing Bob Gimlin on the cover of Argosy magazine.

I know that Patterson was a talented performer and had connections in Hollywood. I know that Patterson had representation by Hollywood entertainment lawyer Walter Hurst that was paid for by George Radford. I know on May 26th, 1967 Roger Patterson signed a contract with George and Vilma Radford to receive $700.00 for expenses related to his film.

Here is that contract:

http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=13604

I know that during this time Patterson had made trips to Los Angeles and had stayed with musician Gene Vincent and old friend actor Ross Hagen who did vocals for Patterson's Bigfoot calls for his film. I know that Patterson would have us believe that during all these activites of his he was actually insanely lucky enough to film a real Bigfoot while looking for one, a feat not achieved since after 40 years of concerted effort and searching with ever greater and more advanced technologies and man power. I know that Patterson would have us believe that he filmed a female Bigfoot with prominent hairy breasts yet amazingly he had drawn a detailed illustration of just such a creature in a his Bigfoot book published just the year before. I know this picture was inspired by the alleged William Roe encounter of just such a creature, the account of which is accompanied by an illustration by Roe's daughter. I know that the PGF plays very much like a visualization of the William Roe encounter.

I know that we are at a point where denying Heironimus' involvement is so unrealistic that even Bigfoot enthusiasts and PGF students who have spent years defending the film are now putting forth theories that have Patterson putting Heironimus in a suit though not being the subject of the PGF.

Here is pseudo-intellectual Roger Knight advancing just such a scenario:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.p...dpost&p=481813

I know that there are serious discrepancies regarding the timeline of the film being sent for development. I know that Roger explained that when he first encountered the creature his horse reared and fell, pinning him. I know he produced a bent stirrup as proof of this. I know that later we were told that he slipped off the back of his horse extracating his camera one-handed and unharmed. I know that Patterson had a penchant for illusion and deception as evidenced by his insisting Gimlin wear a hokey native wig and introducing him as an Indian tracker. I know that there is no original film for people to examine is available and that copies that are show evidence of tampering in the form of splicing.

I know that people like yourself, Lu, have created a system where a lack of reliable evidence and faulty details are excused if it allows you to perpetuate your belief system. I know that you are a propononent of the reality of the Minnesota Iceman yet now don't have much to say when that classic gaff was just recently revealed to be a hoax by Verne Langdon who was central in the events that lead to it's creation. What would you like on your crow?

I know that it is just a matter of time now and much sooner than many people think before the facts of the Patterson/Gimlin hoax are revealed. I know that people who continue to defend the film's veracity such as yourself and Sweaty do so with an almost unsettling will and investment to believe. I know that in years to come that the PG hoax will be used to educate people in the perpetuation of belief systems.

I know that 2008 is a very embarrassing year to be a Bigfoot enthusiast.
http://forums.randi.org/archive/index.php/t-124863.html
 

Creasy Bear

gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Donator
Mar 10, 2006
48,744
36,872
628
In a porn tree
#23
From the story on the link I posted.

Three Contradictory Versions of the Hieronimous Confession


Version #1, Costume Description
Hieronimus said Roger Patterson killed a red horse and made a costume from its heavy, stinking hide.

Quotes from Bob Hieronimus, in 2001:

"Roger skinned out a dead red horse ... [The costume] stunk ... It weighed maybe twenty, twenty five pounds. It was a little bit heavy ... Horsehide would be heavy."

"It was made of three parts. It had legs. It had a corset or middle piece between the neck and waist. And it had a head."


Hieronimus' first story described his costume as a heavy costume made from the hide of a red horse. He says it stunk like a dead animal.



PGF Frame 352





Version #2, Costume Description
Hieronimus subsequently agrees that the costume was a simple, gorilla costume, manufactured by Morris Costumes in North Carolina in the 1960's.
In this second version of his confession, the fur of the creature was dynel nylon threads stitched to a woven cloth backing -- nothing like the hide of a "dead red horse" that he previously described.

This dramatic modification of his original "confession" was prompted by a publicity-hungry costume maker in North Carolina named Phillip Morris.

Morris also wanted to take some credit for the Patterson footage, somehow, and possibly market a new costume.

Although Morris has no records showing the sale of a costume to Roger Patterson, he is nevertheless certain that he provided the costume used in the famous footage.

Morris claims that a man named Roger Patterson bought a discount gorilla costume. Somehow he remembers that sale, though there is no record of it.

He also claims he "recognized" the gorilla costume when he saw the Patterson footage on TV one day. How coincidental!

The photo on the upper right shows the costume Morris "recognized" from the Patterson footage.



A photo of the gorilla costume Hieronimus said was used.

The man in the photo is costume maker Phillip Morris. In this same photo Morris appears as his "Dr. Evil" TV host character. The TV show was a horror film showcase which aired in the 1950's in the southern United States.

Prior to his recent claims about the Patterson footage, Morris got media attention for his demands for compensation from the producers of the Austin Powers film series. Morris claimed the Mike Meyer's "Dr. Evil" character infringed on Morris' previously unregistered trademark for an obscure line of "Dr. Evil" costume products.

Lawyers for the Austin Powers producers easily demonstrated that the two different "Dr. Evil" characters were developed independently, and would not be confused by the public.


Mike Myers as "Dr. Evil"






Version #3, Costume Description
Sometime after Costume Description #2, Hieronimus and Morris came up with a new costume replica of the Patterson creature, which Morris said he could make more duplicates of for 7-8 thousand dollars.

The latest costume is a custom-made, latex-enhanced non-stretching quirky creation. It's a very far cry from what Hollywood special effects folks say would have been required, and nothing like the simple gorilla costume that Morris originally claimed was sold to Patterson in the 1960s, which Morris claimed he "recognized" on TV when he saw the Patterson footage.

The Version #3 Costume is pictured on the right. It is held up by Morris and Hieronimus.

The images on the right are from the last television story done about Bob Hieronimus, on the local news channel in Yakima.

At the height of the scam, television and newspaper reporters in Yakima ran with the Hieronimus "confession" story without paying much attention to the blatant, graphic inconsistencies.









It's a guy in a suit. Maybe not that guy in a suit... but it's a guy in a suit.

Seriously... grow up.