FREEDOM FORUM: Discussion

Make a Comment

Comments in Response


Comment by Powell Gammill
Entered on:

1.  It's a press release.

2.  It will be interesting to see it hold up under peer review.

3.  The 3 genomic DNA sequences I will grant you are intreging claims, especially since presumably they are not in the primate DNA database and yet are closely related to the human genome.

4.  15,000 years is too short for fossilization.  As with Big Foot, it is amazing that zero fossil evidence exists for Big Foot.  And you act surprised at a primate existing large enough to mate with in North America 15,000 years ago that has left no evidence or hint of its presence.

5. "distinctly non-human, non-archaic hominin, and non-ape sequences."  That is unlikely and more likely DNA contamination.

6.  Bad science meets Ocham's razor and the smell test IMNSHO.

But heck, I have to let you have one every once in a while.  You might be right



Comment by Powell Gammill
Entered on:

http://www.livescience.com/25047-bigfoot-dna-human-ancestor.html

Make a Comment