View Single Post
Old 31st January 2007, 07:57 PM   #1112
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 209
Originally Posted by kitakaze View Post
Hello Melissa,

Wow! I had no idea that you had previously posted here. I see you came here at a time when I was MIA travelling for a while. Welcome (and welcome back) to the JREF. I'm pleased that your here to personally comment on much of the things we've been discussing. I'm looking forward to becoming more familiar with your efforts regarding dermatoglyphics claims.

I'll be blunt, I'm of the opinion that of everything we've seen so far, of the small number of casts that are claimed to be displaying dermatoglyphics, that none of these features were the result of a sasquatch imprint. I say this not as a dismissal based on the lack of evidence supporting sasquatch in general but rather on the quality of the dermal claims themselves. I hope this won't lead you to disregard any questions or comments I may have as being biased. Of the small number of proponents that post here I have a particular kind of appreciation for Huntster and LAL's contributions if obviously not always in agreement with them. A couple of others, not so much as I'm sure you can see. It was from LAL that I first learned of your efforts to address Matt Crowley's findings.

Before we get too far into a detailed debate concerning soil types and 'this expert told me this and that expert told you that' subject I wonder if you might have any input on a point that I've been raising lately regarding dermal claims that has yet to be answered. You see, my signature (not the Donnie Darko one) is an abbreviated form of this point or question to be more specific. I'll give you the unabbreviated version:

Regarding claims of casts of alleged sasquatch prints displaying what are interpretted as being the dermatoglyphics of that creature can anyone anywhere demonstrate two casts of separate prints of a successive trackway displaying matching (not similar) dermal patterns?

This seems to be one of the simplest and most basic questions regarding these claims yet one that has thus far been unanswered. I look forward to any input you have to offer on this.

Thank you for the warm welcome I must admit for a room full of skeptics many have been very gracious and kind.

As to your question about my thoughts on the lack of multiple tracks that display dermals in a track way - Your guess is as good as mine.. Had the Onion Mountain Tracks been preserved better, this may be a totally different conversation.

To be completely honest - My work has never been about proving Tube wrong, he and others would like to make it into a contest between him and myself and I do get drawn into the pissing contest, but my work is about so much more than what Tube can or can not create. Fact is Tube - your not being honest and you know it. On the BFF - many people one afternoon called Seattle Supply Co - and they were all told (and the workers angered) they do NOT have Volcanic ash - let alone VIRGIN volcanic ash..They do get it in from time to time, but they do not keep it in stock, and when they were basically harassed by phone - the official response from that store was, they had not had Volcanic ash in a while and didn't know if or when they would get it again. What they display on their website is PUMICE - which we both know is a much different substance than Virgin Volcanic Ash. If you want the information Tube - go find it, its out there, thats pretty much the same advice you gave me.. Do it yourself. Which is excellent advice.

I can only report what I have discovered through my own testing. Tube's work with the Onion Mountain Soil validates my work - as he also has not recreated these "artifacts". I'm not sure why he is so angry with me. Oh well.

kitakaze: To be perfectly honest - I must say I am not sure any dermal captured in a track is that of a Sasquatch.. We would have to find one to ever have a definitive answer...

I find that usually when your being attacked, your doing something right. I must be doing a great job lmao. I'm not here to argue or fight with anyone, but I wont sit back and allow anyone to misquote or mis-state the facts surrounding my work, as anyone would do. I have in fact completed tests that were to the specifications tube stated - and I could not duplicate his work, there must be a reason and for him to take that as a reflection upon him or his own work - well I think its time to lower the ego. This isn't about anything for me but getting to the bottom of a mystery.
Melissa is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top