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
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.
