It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: BiffTannen
a reply to: MrSpad
Or Mr. Moderator, in this day and age of set-up and disparage, the person of which you point to has been purposefully muddied and their achievements, papers, credit rating and reputation altered/sullied for the sake of undermining credibility. You seem a little too sure of your findings and a little too sure of the usual indicators, forgetting, apparently, that conspiracies, cover-ups, and general manipulation of information can and does happen FAR MORE than people want to believe. Further to that, anything or anyone tied to money is a potential slave to whatever feeds them the money (or whatever can cut the pipeline). In short....corruptible.
I sit on the fence on this one. The very moment somebody makes a broad and apparently intelligent claim (even if it is unusual or off-the-wall)....and they are suddenly slandered or "exposed" from several ends, I become suspicious as to the interests at play.
Lets face it, Mr. Moderator, its not like mainstream science or any faction tied to a pipeline is gonna co-sign any such findings or theories. It's bad for business....and business like money is the god of those with papers, ego, power and agenda. History is emphatic in that regard.
I am on the fence on this one. Factions and mainstream often stink of BS.
originally posted by: Telepathy3
a reply to: stabstab
Mm, well I can't really disagree on Bigfoot being in fact a Neanderthal because every is the same, the body, build, prints, description etc. As Ive said here I like the intervention theory because the way our evolution is claimed to have happened by mainstream science does at all fit any timeframe of how evolution happens and they only rely on a "missing link" that could say their theory of our evolution is right. But there is no missing link, and there would have to be dozens of missing links to show a normal gradual change from us to all the other "pre-humans" they say we came from. But with the intervention theory aside, it's safe to say mainstream science won't acknowledge what the evidence points to because the existence of this being will ruin their paradigm theory of our evolution. However I do believe that some of the Bigfoots found on different sides of the planet lik the yowe, snowman, or whatever other names, that there could be more then just one race of these beings and that one could in fact be Neanderthals while others on different continents could be different types entirely
originally posted by: VictorBloodworth
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum
I'm immediately suspicious of any claims when there is a certain level of drama attached, and by certain level, I mean ANY.
If you have evidence, show it, allow peer review, and if you are suspicious of possible "contamination" due to questionable conduct by the lab, insist on recording the entire process in person so as not to break the chain of evidence.
If the lab refuses to agree to that, find another that will, and be sure to point out publicly that they did refuse.
I don't see why any reputable lab would have a problem with that.
originally posted by: VictorBloodworth
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum
OK, point.
I was not aware of that.
I've seen debunking but it wasn't convincing to me...perhaps you can link me an alternate study?
I say this in all seriousness..
I want proof too.
“I’ve made them in dry sand, on moist sand, on dry silt, and even dry mud. All it takes is some sort of dessicant in the matrix. This can be elevated salinity, or mineralogical composition as is the case when certain clay minerals like illite or kaolinite or smectite are present, or simply degree of dry-ness of the matrix. Very repeatable and very open-and-shut. The Onion Mtn. and other casts listed above show dessication, not dermals…case closed.”
Interestingly, Dr. Wroblewski now suggests that other casts besides CA-19 and CA-20 may have surface textures that exhibit this process:
1) the original Mill Creek casts from Freeman (human fingerprints even Chillcut could i.d.).
2) the Onion Mtn. cast from 1967 (dessication ridges formed by plaster on a dry substrate).
3) the Walla Walla or Table Springs or Wrinkle Foot from Freeman (dessication and/or fluid flow over wet surface).
4) Hyampom from 1963-4 (indeterminate, isolated on portions of toes).
5) Bossburg “Cripple Foot” (seen by no one but Grover Krantz and Ed Palma).
6) Bossburg handprint (faint, transverse striations, but no whorls, loops, or evidence of being dermatoglyphics).
7) Elkins Creek (acknowledged human fingerprints introduced into cast, also possible dessication artifacts).
8) Skookum Elk Cast (hairs from an elk’s metacarpal block).
9) Indiana Cast (recognized fake)
“I’m saying that since I have seen Matt’s (Crowley) work, I have to be much more careful to make sure I am not seeing ridge artefacts. I agree with his work and I admit that yes, it can be done.”
“Freeman told Dahinden he’d found yet another set of Sasquatch tracks. Suspicious of “evidence” so readily at hand Dahinden made plaster casts and photographs of the footprints, and upon examination found they consisted of an uninterrupted sequence of left, right, left, left, a most unlikely gait for a bipedal creature.”
The bottom line of this investigation is a hard one for the advocates to face, yet it is a fact:
Jimmy Chilcutt, a professional forensic examiner, was willing to “stake his reputation” on his interpretation of a cast he has publicly characterized as “the best one, with the clearest dermal ridges”, for which the very provenance and chain of custody is in dispute.