In November of 2012 a report was released by DNA Diagnostics, well, a press release really. The following claim was made:
Our study has sequenced 20 whole mitochondrial genomes and utilized next generation sequencing to obtain 3 whole nuclear genomes from purported Sasquatch samples. The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to Homo sapiens and other primate species. Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens.
A few things smell funny about that claim from Dr. Melba Ketchum (pictured above). The first thing that wafts of a wet Sasquatch is that in her official statement about Bigfoot DNA sequencing she uses the exact phrase “…testing the DNA of purported Sasquatch hair samples…”
The study is flawed to begin with since the scientist — and I use the term loosely — refers to the material examined as purportedly belonging to the subject in question. You don’t run a DNA test of purported evidence for a creature we only have anecdotal and questionable evidence for in the first place, and then claim you’ve made some amazing scientific discovery. It’s bogus.
Could Bigfoot exist? Sure, why not. But we don’t do DNA testing on something to determine it’s origin, unless we know we have something. Get it?
The other issue is the credibility of this “scientific journal” Ketchum’s report was finally published on. I say “on” because it’s an online-only journal, and I quote “scientific journal” because the site in question came into existence very shortly after Ketchum’s study was turned down by mainstream science journals. How convenient.
Ketchum, unable to actually prove where the DNA came from — which negates the study from the start anyway — apparently referred to the DNA as “angel DNA.” Why? Does she actually think there are angels who’s DNA we can obtain and test? Does she think Bigfoot are angels, or somehow not of this world?
Scientific study is about developing plausible theories based on observation, then testing those theories with rigorous experiments to disprove the theory. That’s how science works. That’s why science works. But you need legitimate evidence to examine in the first place, not purported evidence.
In the case of Sasquatch mainstream science has generally been off the case because even a passing examination of the idea that these creatures exist clearly indicates that they probably do not. I’m sure there are many scientists who would love to look closer at the subject of Bigfoot if more compelling evidence were provided. That fact is, anything provided is the same old blurry crap. The field of Squatchdom is rife with hoaxes, people who want their 15 mintutes of fame, and people who just want to believe in something.