DNA

DNA

J
J

April 20th, 2009, 6:09 pm #1

Just my opinion on DNA and why I voted "Corpse".

Most folks probably think DNA is the "be all" and "end all" to scientific research. If you have DNA you have proof of the animal. Right?

The truth is DNA would only be the beginning at best and ignored at worse.
DNA will only tell you that something is there. It can only tell you if it is male or female, a primate or human, and maybe where on the tree of life it comes from.

DNA will only present more questions with no answers. Assuming you can get enough of it for a viable DNA analysis.

Scientist don't care much about the DNA, unless they have something to compare it to.

Think about this, you are a biologist. You would like to study the reproductive system of a sasquatch. How does DNA help you? It doesn't, you need a body to study. It is the same with all other scientific efforts.

In order to classify an animal they need to know the skeletal structure, organ placement, tissue types and blood types. None of which can be determined from DNA.

Scientist will want to study it's eyes, nose, hair, blood, skin, anatomy and all fluids in it's system. Specialist will want each organ and learn from it. Only after that can the animal be properly defined.

And if a Sasquatch is human, they will want to determine the differences and similarities. None of that can come from DNA.

Once a corpse is acquired they will get DNA for comparison and maybe in time they will run it's genome. But only after they understand what it is and isn't via standard anatomical research.

Lets suppose you somehow acquire a pint of Sasquatch blood. You turn it in for DNA analysis. They will type the blood and run the DNA. If it comes back Primate or similar to ape then that is the end of the story, they will say you brought them Ape blood.

If it comes back human then that too is the end of the story, you brought them human blood.

If it comes back like something in between then they will be curious but there is little they can do other than scratch their heads and wonder what mutations occurred to taint the blood in such a way that it appears to be different. Now they need a body to compare it too. So you are back to square one, having to provide a body.

So, for me just get a corpse and be done with it. You will learn more about Sasquatch in the first 5 minutes with a corpse than in 60 years of looking for them. All questions are answered then and there.

I am not going to address the moral issues of killing one, I am only concerned with the practical issue of solving the mystery. Perhaps morally it is wrong, but practically it is the only way.

One could try and capture one, which I feel would be costly and require far too much effort with little chance of success.

You can spend hundreds of thousands on trying to capture one or $10.95 for a box of shells. The latter being not only the most cost efficient, but will provide clear results and a specimen to study for all time.

The bottom line is you need a corpse. Even if you brought in photographic, DNA and blood samples you still need one to compare it to. So I say just cut to the chase and get one.
IMHO,
J.
Quote
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

April 20th, 2009, 7:07 pm #2

You have to have an animal to match...if not...meaningless...
Quote
Like
Share

Pywacket
Pywacket

April 20th, 2009, 8:37 pm #3

Just my opinion on DNA and why I voted "Corpse".

Most folks probably think DNA is the "be all" and "end all" to scientific research. If you have DNA you have proof of the animal. Right?

The truth is DNA would only be the beginning at best and ignored at worse.
DNA will only tell you that something is there. It can only tell you if it is male or female, a primate or human, and maybe where on the tree of life it comes from.

DNA will only present more questions with no answers. Assuming you can get enough of it for a viable DNA analysis.

Scientist don't care much about the DNA, unless they have something to compare it to.

Think about this, you are a biologist. You would like to study the reproductive system of a sasquatch. How does DNA help you? It doesn't, you need a body to study. It is the same with all other scientific efforts.

In order to classify an animal they need to know the skeletal structure, organ placement, tissue types and blood types. None of which can be determined from DNA.

Scientist will want to study it's eyes, nose, hair, blood, skin, anatomy and all fluids in it's system. Specialist will want each organ and learn from it. Only after that can the animal be properly defined.

And if a Sasquatch is human, they will want to determine the differences and similarities. None of that can come from DNA.

Once a corpse is acquired they will get DNA for comparison and maybe in time they will run it's genome. But only after they understand what it is and isn't via standard anatomical research.

Lets suppose you somehow acquire a pint of Sasquatch blood. You turn it in for DNA analysis. They will type the blood and run the DNA. If it comes back Primate or similar to ape then that is the end of the story, they will say you brought them Ape blood.

If it comes back human then that too is the end of the story, you brought them human blood.

If it comes back like something in between then they will be curious but there is little they can do other than scratch their heads and wonder what mutations occurred to taint the blood in such a way that it appears to be different. Now they need a body to compare it too. So you are back to square one, having to provide a body.

So, for me just get a corpse and be done with it. You will learn more about Sasquatch in the first 5 minutes with a corpse than in 60 years of looking for them. All questions are answered then and there.

I am not going to address the moral issues of killing one, I am only concerned with the practical issue of solving the mystery. Perhaps morally it is wrong, but practically it is the only way.

One could try and capture one, which I feel would be costly and require far too much effort with little chance of success.

You can spend hundreds of thousands on trying to capture one or $10.95 for a box of shells. The latter being not only the most cost efficient, but will provide clear results and a specimen to study for all time.

The bottom line is you need a corpse. Even if you brought in photographic, DNA and blood samples you still need one to compare it to. So I say just cut to the chase and get one.
IMHO,
J.
J said... "Scientist will want to study it's eyes, nose, hair, blood, skin, anatomy and all fluids in it's system. Specialist will want each organ and learn from it. Only after that can the animal be properly defined."

We'll try to do our best to leave enough to study after we blast it's axx. lol
Quote
Share

Squatchman
Squatchman

April 21st, 2009, 2:09 am #4

Just my opinion on DNA and why I voted "Corpse".

Most folks probably think DNA is the "be all" and "end all" to scientific research. If you have DNA you have proof of the animal. Right?

The truth is DNA would only be the beginning at best and ignored at worse.
DNA will only tell you that something is there. It can only tell you if it is male or female, a primate or human, and maybe where on the tree of life it comes from.

DNA will only present more questions with no answers. Assuming you can get enough of it for a viable DNA analysis.

Scientist don't care much about the DNA, unless they have something to compare it to.

Think about this, you are a biologist. You would like to study the reproductive system of a sasquatch. How does DNA help you? It doesn't, you need a body to study. It is the same with all other scientific efforts.

In order to classify an animal they need to know the skeletal structure, organ placement, tissue types and blood types. None of which can be determined from DNA.

Scientist will want to study it's eyes, nose, hair, blood, skin, anatomy and all fluids in it's system. Specialist will want each organ and learn from it. Only after that can the animal be properly defined.

And if a Sasquatch is human, they will want to determine the differences and similarities. None of that can come from DNA.

Once a corpse is acquired they will get DNA for comparison and maybe in time they will run it's genome. But only after they understand what it is and isn't via standard anatomical research.

Lets suppose you somehow acquire a pint of Sasquatch blood. You turn it in for DNA analysis. They will type the blood and run the DNA. If it comes back Primate or similar to ape then that is the end of the story, they will say you brought them Ape blood.

If it comes back human then that too is the end of the story, you brought them human blood.

If it comes back like something in between then they will be curious but there is little they can do other than scratch their heads and wonder what mutations occurred to taint the blood in such a way that it appears to be different. Now they need a body to compare it too. So you are back to square one, having to provide a body.

So, for me just get a corpse and be done with it. You will learn more about Sasquatch in the first 5 minutes with a corpse than in 60 years of looking for them. All questions are answered then and there.

I am not going to address the moral issues of killing one, I am only concerned with the practical issue of solving the mystery. Perhaps morally it is wrong, but practically it is the only way.

One could try and capture one, which I feel would be costly and require far too much effort with little chance of success.

You can spend hundreds of thousands on trying to capture one or $10.95 for a box of shells. The latter being not only the most cost efficient, but will provide clear results and a specimen to study for all time.

The bottom line is you need a corpse. Even if you brought in photographic, DNA and blood samples you still need one to compare it to. So I say just cut to the chase and get one.
IMHO,
J.
Where and who do you take the body to when ya have one? Hell ,I want cash for mine.
Quote
Share

J
J

April 22nd, 2009, 5:57 am #5

J said... "Scientist will want to study it's eyes, nose, hair, blood, skin, anatomy and all fluids in it's system. Specialist will want each organ and learn from it. Only after that can the animal be properly defined."

We'll try to do our best to leave enough to study after we blast it's axx. lol
nt COOL!
Quote
Share