In May 2006 Maria Goodavage assembled a propaganda article in USA Today entitled, "Bigfoot Merely Amuses Most Scientists." In it she quoted John Crane, a zoologist at Washington State University, as saying, "There is no such thing as Bigfoot. No data other than material that's clearly been fabricated has ever been presented."
As part of my review of material that's clearly been fabricated... I purchased the Ketchum Bigfoot De Novo study years ago and have read it several times through. As a person who has been involved in and commissioned several DNA studies - as always, I could not find the part which Crane identified as 'fabricated' (nor could I substantiate his claim that he had reviewed every single bit of BF evidence out there). Skeptics tend to run off when their apothegms are tested below skin deep. They package their conclusions for public consumption, and those claims they make are never tested for merit. This is called an Imposterlösung Mechanism - or The Cheater's Hypothesis - packaging purported CLAIMS of science which are never challenged in the least, and are crafted so as to sound reasonable to a lay public and media, but are total baloney.
The labs which were used in the assembly of the Ketchum consensus DNA results are below. They would absolutely HAVE to be involved in the fabrication - as we do not have the capability to fabricate whole DNA. It would cost me close to $50 million to bribe all the officials at the following labs in order to get them to fabricate results and keep quiet about it for a decade now. Then it would still get out anyway.
University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas TX
University of Southern California, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles CA
Texas A&M University, Dept. of Biology Biochemistry & Biophysics, College Station TX
Texas A&M University, Veterinary Medical Diagnostics Lab, College Station TX
FTDNA Genomics Research Center, Houston TX
SeqWright, Inc., Houston TX
Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences, Dallas TX
Regarding the makeup of the samples analyzed (103 of them) - the mitochondrial DNA (female lineage) sequencing placed the creature as human, and Sample 40 in particular (below) aged the version of the mtDNA to 15,400 years ago. An accusation of fraud MUST BE PROVEN - it cannot just be tossed out and left baking in the sun, presumed as true. This presents some questions which Dr. Crane, who is a zoologist and not a Biophysicist, needs to explain.
1. How does one fabricate novel DNA sequence blocks (no GenBank ID) in a 3' to 5' sugar spline wrapped around histones? Which then PCR replicate for a professional lab third party... How does one do that? If they can do that - they should be awarded the Nobel Prize in Biophysics, Biochemistry and Biogenetics.
2. How does one fabricate a sample, which at least 3 independent and blind study labs extract and agree upon, to analyze an entire mitochondrial DNA genome (16.569 contiguous base pairs)? An amazing feat of deception...
3. How does one fabricate a human DNA which is 15,400 years old? It no longer exists, so where could one possibly get it? One cannot CRISPR assemble whole mtDNA genomes. Did they find some unfrozen caveman and take a sample of his skin?
4. How do 7 labs all come up with the same answers, to a fabricated DNA sample? How does one possibly accomplish this?
If fraud were enacted here, we are talking about a skill in forgery which is god-like in its capability. Crane should have been pounding on their door, asking for lessons in such an art in gene assembly, hundreds of years in advance of any of our current CRISPR capabilities as mankind.
View attachment 1227