Bigfoot’s DNA

Written by

Researchers claim to have the beasts DNA.



  • samdchuck

    “At this point it’s probably important to note that the study has not yet been peer reviewed and Ketchum has thus far refused to release her data, explain her methodology or say where she got the “Sasquatch DNA samples” in the first place. Also, according to Houston Chronicle science writer Eric Borger, Ketchum has credibility issues of her own: her company, DNA Diagnostics, has received more than two dozen customer complaints and gets an F from the Better Business Bureau. Oh, and those mysterious third-species males who were supposedly picking up human women on some kind of proto-Craigslist? According to a blogger and Bigfoot enthusiast named Robert Lindsay, earlier drafts of Ketchum’s study claimed they were angels.” — http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/11/29/bigfoot-is-part-human-according-to-dubious-sounding-bigfoot-dna-tests/

  • http://twitter.com/theNthAndrew theNthAndrew

    The best way to get your shoddy science published is to publish it in your own journal! Wish I had thought of that… (http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/bigfoot-genome-paper-conclusively-proves-that-sasquatch-is-real/)

  • studuncan

    On Wednesday, their research appeared in the DeNovo Journal of Science, which seemed to confirm Ketchum’s research about the reality of Bigfoot.

    But according to GoDaddy.com, DeNovo was first registered as a domain on Feb. 4, 2013 — anonymously and for only one year.

    The current edition of DeNovo is listed as Volume 1, Issue 1, and its only content, thus far, is the Bigfoot research.

    • studuncan

      Also, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a website with more stock photos used without irony.

      • Jim H

        And it slowed Safari to a crawl, cpu usage jumped to 97 at times. But still worth it for a good laugh. Just use Firefox instead!

        • Bob

          Didn’t do anything to mine, and my Mac is ancient.

          I’d sooner smash my self in the face with a bowling pin than use that ill-designed monstrosity.

  • rmward

    I believe “researchers” should be in “air quotes”.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003287634321 Charles Bootjer

      Do you really have any definitive reason to suggest that the individuals who participated in this DNA research program should not be referred to as researchers? I doubt that you have any proof that they do not deserve to be considered researchers when in fact they (at least 11 people) were involved in a five year DNA research project. You should at least read their biographies in the article “Novel North American Hominins” and then tell me that they are not bona fide “researchers”.

  • Jim H

    This really cracked me up:

    “Speaking about what the next step should be following the findings, Dr Ketchum said she would like to see the creatures have “the same protections as any other human.”

    Ha ha ha… so funny. A foregone conclusion no doubt1 Now how about them Sasquatch protection laws! Derp de derp derp. : D

  • Canucker

    Since the genome apparently contains stretches of panda, human, chimpanzee and horse DNA sequences, this garbage has less credibility than The Donald’s relationship to intelligent primates.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003287634321 Charles Bootjer

      There was not just “the genome” produced, and I doubt that it is fair to refer to the three nuclear genomes as “Garbage”

      Do you have the training and credentials to make such an assertion? I rather doubt that. If so, let us know.

      The Three Genomes that were sequenced by the DNA Laboratory of the University of Texas at Dallas for the Sasquatch Genome Project did in fact contain Human DNA sequences, and sequences from an unknown hominn, but none from Neanderthals or Apes, according to the article “Novel North American Hominins” published by Denova. To the best of my knowledge, there were no Panda, Chimpanzee, or Horse sequences noted in the analysis of the Blasts that were made on Genbank, when they were searching for further evidence.

      If you have any “proof” to that effect that any such claims as you stated ever took place, you should make the source of that information available for analysis, and not just make what is intended to be derogatory comments without proof.

      • Canucker

        Charles, I have a PhD in biochemistry and 25 years of experience in molecular biology with more than 100 papers in peer-reviewed journals. This was a whitewash of a study which in no shape or form represents a new species. It has been rightly ridiculed by the mainstream scientific community for a host of reasons. If you cannot see it is purely a PR gimmick, then so be it.

  • http://twitter.com/Moeskido Moeskido

    Jim, has anyone taken tissue samples from you lately?