Sasquatch Coffee

Sasquatch Genome Project Q & A

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on February 28th, 2013

Cryptomundian edsbigfoot brings us the following:

Loooong Q & A list about Sasquatch here on a page by Dr. Ketchum called the “Sasquatch Genome Project”….my goodness. :)edsbigfoot

This Q & A addresses many of the initial questions expected as a result of the publication of the SGP’s research proving the existence of the beings commonly known in the U.S. as Bigfoot or Sasquatch.

It must be noted that the Bigfoot research community, while including many dedicated, well-meaning and enthusiastic people, has generally not learned from accumulated knowledge gained through sighting reports, eye witness testimony, Native American accounts, or the experiences of habituators and long-term witnesses. Instead, Bigfoot research has been held back by a culture of competition and contentiousness, and a pattern of cyclical debate that disregards the field’s own data and observances. It is the opinion of the SGP that this behavior, and the lack of adequate professional involvement, has prevented progress in the field, which is why the idea that Sasquatch were apes has been so pervasive.

While not intended to be a complete guide, the following questions and answers are based on common data and observances of the Bigfoot research community, the testimony of long-term witnesses and habituators, the knowledge of Native Americans, the received literature, and results of the Sasquatch Genome Project. E-mailed questions are welcome and may be answered here in the future.

A. Who and what are Sasquatch?
1. What are Sasquatch?

The Sasquatch are an indigenous, aboriginal people. Their maternal lineage is human and their paternal lineage is an unknown hominin. Their genetics reveal no relation to homo Neanderthalensis (Neanderthal) or homo sapiens Altai (Denisova). Despite their often reported ape-like features, they have no genetic connection to apes. This means they are not related to the Pleistocene pongid, gigantopithecus blacki, believed by many in the Bigfoot research community to be a likely ancestor. More research is needed to further understand Sasquatch genetics.

The paternal lineage found in the nuclear DNA of Sasquatch suggests a distantly related hominin that evolved separately from humans, apes and other primates but evolved to the point where it could interbred with humans.

2. Why don’t we know more about the paternal lineage of the Sasquatch? Could the paternal species be homo heidelbergensis? What about other recently discovered human ancestors?

Sasquatch is a recently developed species. Haplotype analysis within the mitochondrial (maternal) DNA indicates that the species is only about 15,000 years old. Only a very small percentage of human remains in their nuclear (paternal) DNA, which is primarily of the unknown hominin.

The fossil record is incomplete. Fossilization happens only under special circumstances and fossils are challenging to locate. We simply have not yet encountered remains of the paternal species from which DNA can be extracted.

Homo heidelbergensis is a more recent suggestion for a Sasquatch ancestor, but this human species died out at 400,000 years ago, long before Sasquatch came into existence.

The human family tree has become more complicated with recent discoveries of other human ancestors, including the flat-faced fossil and the unknown hominin revealed through African DNA. More research is needed to learn more about the origins of Sasquatch.

3. How old is the Sasquatch species?

Genomic research indicates that the species is about 15,000 years old.

Here is the link to the Q & A, where you can read the remainder of the document.

About Craig Woolheater
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005. I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films: OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.


6 Responses to “Sasquatch Genome Project Q & A”

  1. edsbigfoot responds:

    Well, darn, it looks like the link is no good for now and the domain needs to be renewed. If the cryptomundo moderator has the entire list and would like to post it that’s fine, but it’s long:) Sorry about that all, I read thru it, thought it was interesting, copied the link and sent it in….and then, *poof*…gone for now, hopefully they’ll renew it. :)

  2. MR JOSHUA responds:

    You don’t need long papers and links to sum this up. You just need 15 words. My name is Melba Ketchum and I am a fraud looking for a quick buck.

  3. DWA responds:

    It must be noted that the Bigfoot research community, while including many dedicated, well-meaning and enthusiastic people, has generally not learned from accumulated knowledge gained through sighting reports, eye witness testimony, Native American accounts, or the experiences of habituators and long-term witnesses. Instead, Bigfoot research has been held back by a culture of competition and contentiousness, and a pattern of cyclical debate that disregards the field’s own data and observances. It is the opinion of the SGP that this behavior, and the lack of adequate professional involvement, has prevented progress in the field, which is why the idea that Sasquatch were apes has been so pervasive.

    I’ll buy all of this but the last sentence, which is wrong.

    One would have to, through concerted effort, “disregard the field’s own data and observances [sic]” to believe that the ape conclusion is contrary to the bulk of the evidence.

    But the inability of the field to build on its lessons learned? Oboyoboy. For sure, that.

    And this is what happens when the scientific mainstream abandons a field to amateurs. We are, what, surprised?

  4. LordBalto responds:

    Mr Joshua said while tossing back another beer:

    “You don’t need long papers and links to sum this up. You just need 15 words. My name is Melba Ketchum and I am a fraud looking for a quick buck.”

    Well I’ll be damned. A real psychic who knows what the contents of a scientific paper are without even reading it. I am so sick and tired of fake skeptics like you that I could puke. Read the damned article before you start flapping your jaw, buster.

  5. LordBalto responds:

    For those of you who cannot afford the $30.00 to actually read the article, the basic results were as follows:

    Mitochondrial DNA (exclusively from the female line): 16 haplotypes from 30 genomes, all human, most European and Middle Eastern with some examples of African and Native American genomes. This work was done by Family Tree DNA, with whom I have had personal dealings (Family Tree DNA is a legitimate lab), and two other independent laboratories. Analyses of Russian and Siberian samples performed outside of this study have confirmed the existence of human mitochondrial DNA in all of the samples.

    All 24 samples upon which whole genome analysis was conducted failed to meet the 95% threshhold for SNP (single-nucleotide polymorphism) in human DNA. In plain English, 5% of DNA pairs were not those found in human beings. I should point out here that chimpanzees are 96-98% identical to humans, so we are clearly looking at a nonhuman species here.

    In two particular samples, 26 and 140, using “inclusive primate organism taxids,” the two samples, which were determined to be from the same species, showed a closer similarity to the otolemur ancestors of man than they did to gorillas or chimpanzees. The implication of this, in my own personal opinion, is that the sasquatch is ancestral to humans rather than any of the great apes.

    Of particular interest, four of the samples showed the presence of the allele for red hair in humans, some sasquatch having been reported to have had reddish hair.

    I would recommend that anyone who wishes to discuss this topic actually buy the article at denovojournal.com. Otherwise the discussion will simply degenerate into another mud pie fight between the believers and the skeptics.

  6. Dent Snider responds:

    I feel that Melba Ketchum is one of the “very” few scientists that I have read or heard, talking of “Sasquatch” that is telling the truth. The naysayers and “critics” are the ones who have some “vested”/monetary, interest in keeping Big Foot in the category of a “GREAT APE” of some kind because that way these “people” (the Sasquatch) have no rights and can be exploited in any and all ways imaginable. Every “critic” if looked at closely will have this in common. They care nothing for the truth, for these people, or anyone other than themselves. They know that Melba’s study is credible and true and are afraid their income stream will be adversely affected by her findings. She is a heroic scientist. They are self serving cowards.



Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|


Cryptomundo Merch On Sale Now!

CryptoMerch

Connect with Cryptomundo

Cryptomundo FaceBook Cryptomundo Twitter Cryptomundo Instagram Cryptomundo Pinterest

Advertisers

DFW Nites


Creatureplica Monstro Bizarro Everything Bigfoot



Advertisement




|Top | FarBar|



Attention: This is the end of the usable page!
The images below are preloaded standbys only.
This is helpful to those with slower Internet connections.