Advertisement

Bigfoot DNA is Bunk

The group that last year claimed to have sequenced the Sasquatch genome has finally published its data in a brand new “journal,” and geneticists are not impressed.
 

By | February 15, 2013

FLICKR, BOB DORANWhen a Texas-based forensic services company last year declared it had sequenced the genome of the elusive Sasquatch, scientists demanded data. This week, the team behind the claims published a paper in a journal that they appear to have setup themselves, and the results are far from convincing.

The paper, which appeared in the newly created DeNovo Journal of Science, describes how Melba Ketchum and colleagues at DNA Diagnostics, Inc. subjected more than 100 samples sent in from various sites around North America to mitochondrial DNA analysis and whole genome sequencing.

The authors wrote, “DNA analysis showed two distinctly different types of results; the mitochondrial DNA was unambiguously human, while the nuclear DNA was shown to harbor novel structure and sequence.” They concluded that “the data conclusively proves that the Sasquatch exist as an extant hominin and are a direct maternal descendent of modern humans.”

However, geneticists who have seen the paper are not impressed. “To state the obvious, no data or analyses are presented that in any way support the claim that their samples come from a new primate or human-primate hybrid," Leonid Kruglyak of Princeton University told the Houston Chronicle. “Instead, analyses either come back as 100 percent human, or fail in ways that suggest technical artifacts.”

The website for the DeNovo Journal of Science was setup on February 4, and there is no indication that Ketchum’s work, the only study it has published, was peer reviewed

Advertisement

Add a Comment

Avatar of: You

You

Processing...
Processing...

Sign In with your LabX Media Group Passport to leave a comment

Not a member? Register Now!

LabX Media Group Passport Logo

Comments

Avatar of: JChaplinski

JChaplinski

Posts: 1

February 17, 2013

I personaly would love if there were a susquatch. However, with so many people, clubs, and other organizations searching for the elusive beast there is just no real hard evidence. There is no fecal evidence, there are no feeding area's or kill sites (of prey). There are also no bedding areas, no skeletal remains. There is no hair, teeth, skin nothing. These sightings occur not only in remote areas, but in readily accessed areas by hunters, hikers or just people out for a walk.  I have spent my entire life going out in the woods. If there is an area where any large animal has been there is more than tracks left behind. There is scat, hairs, feeding area's etc. What does bigfoot think "I better not take a dump here as I will leave evidence for humans to find?" Also, for there to be enough of a population to provide enough generic diversity to substain a healthy population there would most likley be more than some questionable foot prints. There has got to be some evidence left behind. An animal that large, with the high metabolic rate of a mammal, trying to keep warm, would have to leave an awlful lot of scat lying around! I am quite aware of species that have been discovered that were once thought either extinct or folk lure. But until some kind of strong evidence is brought to light, I for one will remain a sad skeptic. AS I SAID BEFORE "I WOULD LOVE FOR THERE TO BE A BIGFOOT"  JChaplinski

May 4, 2013

 

I find it rather difficult to believe that Dan Cossins or any other person who had read the Article article published by the Sasquatch Genome Project, “Novel North American Hominins” could have come to the opinion that “Bigfoot DNA is Bunk”, or that Leonid Kruglyak, of Princeton University, could have made the comments that he did to the the effect that “To state the obvious, no data or analyses are presented that in any way support the claim that their samples come from a new primate or human-primate hybrid," AND “Instead, analyses either come back as 100 percent human, or fail in ways that suggest technical artifacts.”

The Article in question had only been published a day before Dan Cossins wrote this article, “Bigfoot DNA is Bunk”, and there was certainly no time for Leonid Kruglyak to study it.

In response to the numerous comments by skeptics and non-belivers, such as Leonid Kruglyak of Princeton University, I would like to relate some of the following facts for your consideration.

The Sasquatch Genome Project had spent five years in by far the most comprehensive study ever undertaken of the unclassified creature commonly known as Bigfoot or Sasquatch.

111 purported dna samples were selected for the study, using forensic procedures to prevent the possibility of contamination.

20 Partial and 10 complete mtDNA genomes of 16,500 base pairs were sequenced.

The University of Texas DNA Laboratory then received three purported dna samples from Dr. Melba Ketchum, and then successfully sequenced three complete Nuclear Genomes (nuDNA), of 3 billion base pairs each.

The three selected dna samples that were sequenced on the Illumina Next Generation Platform, had been collected by three different researchers, and came from three areas, (Washington State, Minnesota and British Columbia), and were from three purported Sasquatch individuals.

The Three genomes aligned well with each other, and the most importantly, these three genomes also definitely possessed Consistent Homology, which indicates the origin of a common ancestor. (See Wikipedia)

This evidence constitutes much more than adequate proof of a new species to my way of thinking.

One genome is absolute proof; Three genomes that align with each other, and possess Consistent Homology is absolute Gross Overkill! This is incontrovertible, irrefutable evidence.

The Sasquatch Genome Project has been very successful and accordingly, Dr. Melba Ketchum has registered the Taxon for Sasquatch with ZooBank on 18 December 2012 as Homo sapiens cognatus.

The ZooBank Registration Data for the Sasquatch taxon is as follows:

Homo sapiens cognatus Ketchum in Ketchum, Wojtkiewicz, Watts, Spence, Holzenburg, Tolar, Prychitko, Zhang, Bollinger, Shoulders & Smith, 2013

LSIDurn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:40E2FA1F-10A1-4D42-8B02-A007347F1B43

Rank: Subspecies

Parent: Homo Sapiens Linnaeus, 1758

Specific Name: cognatus

Authorship: Ketchum

Publication: Ketchum, Melba, Patrick Wojtkiewicz, Aliece Watts, David Spence, Andreas Holzenburg, Douglas Tolar, Thomas Prychitko, Fan Zhang, Sarah Bollinger, Ray Shoulders & Ryan Smith. 2013

Novel North American Hominins, Next Generation Sequencing of Three Whole Genomes and Associated Studies. Denovo, Accelerating Science 1(1, Supplemental).

Page:

Figure(s):

Type Specimen(s):

Type Locality:

Fossil: No

With regard to that assertion that the paper is not sound, Dr. Ketchum has now received 2 unsolicited communications from Dr. David H. Swenson Ph.D., a biologist who is well qualified to comment on the science found in the paper.

The first communication from Dr. Swenson reads as follows:

From Dr. David H. Swenson Ph.D.:

"Brien Foerster, Jeff Kart, and other interested parties.

I went over the manuscript by Melba Ketchum on Bigfoot genomics.

My desktop had difficulty with a BLAST analysis of the consensus sequences.

It helped me understand more about the project.

This collaborative venture has done a huge project that taxes me to fully grasp.

I see interesting homology with a standard human sequence with 99% match for mitochondria.

From my abbreviated study, the nuclear genome seems to have human and nonhuman sequences.

My opinion of the creature is that it is a hybrid of a human mother and an unknown hominid male, Just as reported.

For all practical purposes, it should be treated as human and protected under law.

Brien, selection of Melba's lab for your studies is a very good call.

Sasquatch is real, as proven by genetic analysis."

Dr. David H. Swenson Ph.D.

The second communication from Dr. Swenson reads as follows:

"I did more BLAST analyses and came up with the same confusion the independent labs had.

The genome has some good human matches and some unknowns."

"The sequences are not contaminated, near as I can tell.

I have not searched for open reading frames, but that is beyond the scope of my tools.

The close matches are gapped with sequences that match nothing.

AMEL and MY genes match humans in some cases, in others, not.

If I am wrong, I would like to be shown with data, not uninformed opinion from "experts".

Dr. David H. Swenson, Ph.D.

 

"END Quotation".

 

It appears that this is the first vindication of the Ketchum Study by a scientific expert. I am rather sure that there will be many more to come, now that hard data is available at the Sasquatch Genome Project at http://sasquatchgenomeproject.org/

Now that the University of Texas DNA Laboratory has sequenced no less than three Nuclear Genomes, it will be impossible for anyone to say that there is no evidence to prove the existence of Sasquatch.

I do not think that anyone will dispute the work done by the DNA Laboratory at the University of Texas at Dallas. It is HARD evidence. It is repeatable, and it will stand the test of time, as other labs replicate the findings. There is a total of Three Terabytes of Data!

My kudos to Dr. Ketchum and her 10 distinguished colleagues, who will be famous for their dedication to this ground breaking project.

Thank you for this opportunity to contribute to this matter.

Bigfoot DNA Believer

May 16, 2013

I find your statement that "the results are far from convincing" with regard to the data produced by the Sasquatch Genone Project.

A Biologist, Dr. David H. Swenson Ph.D., who is well qualified to comment on the science found in the paper, made the following comments:

The first communications from Dr. Swenson to Dr. Ketchcum reads as follows:

"Brien Foerster, Jeff Kart, and other interested parties.

I went over the manuscript by Melba Ketchum on Bigfoot genomics.

My desktop had difficulty with a BLAST analysis of the consensus sequences.

It helped me understand more about the project.

This collaborative venture has done a huge project that taxes me to fully grasp.

I see interesting homology with a standard human sequence with 99% match for mitochondria.

From my abbreviated study, the nuclear genome seems to have human and nonhuman sequences.

My opinion of the creature is that it is a hybrid of a human mother and an unknown hominid male, Just as reported.

For all practical purposes, it should be treated as human and protected under law.

Brien, selection of Melba's lab for your studies is a very good call.

Sasquatch is real, as proven by genetic analysis."

David H. Swenson Ph.D.

The Second communication from Dr. Swenson to Dr. Ketchum reads as follows:

"I did more BLAST analyses and came up with the same confusion the independent labs had.

The genome has some good human matches and some unknowns."

"The sequences are not contaminated, near as I can tell.

I have not searched for open reading frames, but that is beyond the scope of my tools.

The close matches are gapped with sequences that match nothing.

AMEL and MY genes match humans in some cases, in others, not.

If I am wrong, I wouldlike to be shown with data, not uninformed opinion from "experts".

David H. Swenson, Ph.D.

"END Quotation".

It would appear that there is in fact "real hard evidence" adequate to convince  a Ph.D. Biologist make the statement " Sasquatch is real, as proven by genetic analysis"

How do you respond to that statement of Dr. Swenson?   He seems to be convinced, as a function of his analysis of the Data.

Bigfoot DNA Believer

June 23, 2013

 

On February 17, JChaplinski made a comment that includes the following statement regarding his skepticism of the existence of an unclassified hominin extant in North America.

"there is just no real hard evidence. There is no fecal evidence, there are no feeding area's or kill sites (of prey). There are also no bedding areas, no skeletal remains. There is no hair, teeth, skin nothing."

I cannot agree even partially with JChaplinski on this statement.

Each and every one of the 8 assertations made in this statement is totally and completely incorrect.

I do not know how anyone who has less than zero proof of the non-exixtence of a creature can state with any degree of accuracy that no evidence to the contrary exists.

Just to make a point, the Sasquatch Genome Project has recieved from researchers a very signififcant number of hair samples, that have been tested and identified by experts, and subjected to DNA sequencing.  The results were that there is substantial valid scientific evidence that an unclassified creature is in fact extant in North America.  The scientific name or Taxon of that creature, as registered with ZooBank is Homo sapiens cognatus.

Blood, Saliva and Skin (with Hair and Flesh attached) were also subjected to DNA extraction and sequencing, and resulted in the DNA Laboratory at the University of Texas producing Three COMPLETE Nuclear Genomes of this newly discovered hominin.

This DNA Evidence is very important because the three Nucear Genomes aligned well with each other, and were also found to display Consistent Homology, which indicates that they came from a common (single) ancestor.

The fact that this DNA evidence came from Washington State, Minnesota and the Canadian Province of British Columbia, rather convincingly proves that these creatures, Homo sapiens cognatus, commonly known as "Bigfoot or Sasquatch" are extant in a very large part of North America.

Nobody, including those numerous skeptics who have dismissed the remote possibility of such a creature alive in North America, can provide any proof that the DNA research was flawed or contains any errors.

 

Dr. Bryan Sykes from Wolfson College, Oxford, one of the most distinguished experts in DNA research has been quoted as saying:

“recent advances in the techniques of genetic analysis of organic remains provide a mechanism for genus and species identification that is unbiased, unambiguous and impervious to falsification."

The DNA evidence gathered by the Sasquatch Genome Project is just exactly what he is talking about.  It is evidence that is in fact unbiased, unambiguous and impervious to falsification.  It proves the existence of these Hominins.

It is time to stop the endless cries that proclaim that there can be no such creature alive, and accept the valid scientific evidence produced by the University of Texas at Dallas that there is such a creature does in fact exist, and get on with the more important work of researching this hominin, which is the only living relative of Homo sapiens sapiens.

All of our other relatives, such as Homo Neanderhalis are long extinct.

The Sasquatch Genome Project has proven beyond all doubt  that one relative of Homo sapiens sapiens is still alive and well in North America, and that is Homo sapiens cognatus!

This is an amazing and remarkable discovery which I personally believe will be nominated for the Nobel Prize, and  I wouldn't be in the least bit surrprised if it does in fact win that Prize.     It is very richly deserved.

My premature congratulations to Dr. Melba Ketchum and her 10 colleagues at the Sasquatch Genome Project, who worked tirelessly for 5 years, suffering multiple attacks and scorn.

Bigfoot DNA Believer

 

 

July 7, 2013

Your comment in the opening paragraph that "the results are far from convincing." obviously is rather convincing to one eminent biologist, Dr. David H. Swenson, Ph.D, who communicated his review of the Data published in the Article, "Novel North American Hominins" to Dr. Melba Ketchum, who led the Sasquatch Genome Project to the discovery of the Century, that we do in fact have a relative within our Genus Homo, that is extant in North America.  Samples collected in British Columbia, Washington State and Minnesota have proved this fact beyond all possible doubt.  They are now have no less than three complete Nuclear Genomes, and 20 complete Mitochondrial Genomes to prove this existence of an extant hominin.

Dr. Swenson wrote, and I quote:

"Brien Foerster, Jeff Kart, and other interested parties.

I went over the manuscript by Melba Ketchum on Bigfoot genomics.

My desktop had difficulty with a BLAST analysis of the consensus sequences.

It helped me understand more about the project.

This collaborative venture has done a huge project that taxes me to fully grasp.

I see interesting homology with a standard human sequence with 99% match for mitochondria.

 

From my abbreviated study, the nuclear genome seems to have human and nonhuman sequences.

 

My opinion of the creature is that it is a hybrid of a human mother and an unknown hominid male, Just as reported.

 

For all practical purposes, it should be treated as human and protected under law.

Brien, selection of Melba's lab for your studies is a very good call.

 

Sasquatch is real, as proven by genetic analysis."

 

Dr. David H. Swenson Ph.D.  

 

After further study Dr. David H. Swenson communicated with Dr. Ketchum a second time and wrote:

""I did more BLAST analyses and came up with the same confusion the independent labs had.

The genome has some good human matches and some unknowns."

"The sequences are not contaminated, near as I can tell.

I have not searched for open reading frames, but that is beyond the scope of my tools.

The close matches are gapped with sequences that match nothing.

AMEL and MY genes match humans in some cases, in others, not.

If I am wrong, I would like to be shown with data, not uninformed opinion from "experts".

David H. Swenson, Ph.D.

"END Quotation".

I think this pretty well sums up the situation, and refutes the assertion of  Leonid Kruglyak who is quoted as saying “Instead, analyses either come back as 100 percent human, or fail in ways that suggest technical artifacts.”

Further evidence of the existence of Homo sapiens cognatus comes from Dr. Haskel Hart.  I will quote his commuication to Dr. Melba Ketchum.

This is a direct "quote" from Dr. Hascall Hart

"1. The mtDNA of 29 samples is essentially human.

2. The nDNA of three samples (26, 31,and 140) has homology to human nDNA on chromosome 11, but is not entirely human. 

3. The nDNA of three samples(26, 31, and 140) is not related to black bear, raccoon or opossum."

Bigfoot DNA Believer

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Avatar of: Mike_the_chemist

Mike_the_chemist

Posts: 1

February 17, 2014

This article is based on some heresay from Leonid Kruglyak who simply bases his conclusions without demonstrating proof for his assertions.  This statement that the samples came from a human or technical artifacts is out there.  WHAT technical artifacts...some he made up in his mind before hand and doesn't want to share them at this point?  What EPG's did he look at that show 100% human banding.  Obvsiouly in any results there would be controls and samples that were not of interest.  However, that doesn't mean the real sampling is somehow discredited but rather part of the totality of the experiment.  And, didn't this so called "SCIENTIST" magazine not previously publish that the ECG's where opposum?  Which are they?  Opposum or human...it doesn't seem scientifically they can be both?  This online magazine seems about as far from real science as you can get.  There was no degredation in the yield gels and they clear show "non-human" bands. That is REAL science.  This sort of speculation and simply making statements without showing "basis" for you claims is the opposite of science.  Also, Dr. Swenson has duplicated the results.  Let us PROVE it is "bunk" and not just SAY it is bunk because he doesn't follow into phylogeny THEORY and any supposed phylogeny tree or order is nothing more than a theory as well since no one person has lived all of human history.

 

 

Follow The Scientist

icon-facebook icon-linkedin icon-twitter icon-vimeo icon-youtube
Advertisement

Stay Connected with The Scientist

  • icon-facebook The Scientist Magazine
  • icon-facebook The Scientist Careers
  • icon-facebook Neuroscience Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Genetic Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Cell Culture Techniques
  • icon-facebook Microbiology and Immunology
  • icon-facebook Cancer Research and Technology
  • icon-facebook Stem Cell and Regenerative Science
Advertisement
Advertisement
Mettler Toledo
BD Biosciences
BD Biosciences