Category Archives: Genetics
Barack Thatcher: Sidetracking just a little bit. Could it not be argued in some ways “race mixing” is healthy because it reduces the odds of getting recessive genes? I.E. you’re more distantly related to people of other races?
Barack: hybrid vigor is well known. All of the best animal and plant breeds are produced by a process of ever more scientific “race-mixing.” And it’s gotten damned fancy these days. Look at all those cannabis strains.
Even in the wild, a species, subspecies or even regional population that has low genetic diversity (the pure races these morons cheer on) is considered to be at risk of extinction. In population biology, the more diverse the genome of the organism, the more healthy it’s population is deemed to be, as it can weather changes better.
Ultra Cool writes:
The Ainu are related to the Japanese, I assume that makes Veddas Mongoloid by genes, Australoid by skull and Caucasoid by looks, correct?
Not really. I mean Veddoid genes either look NE Asian or Malaysian in the case of the Senoi in Thailand or South Indian in the case of South Indian tribals.
So Veddoid genes have no particular quality. They simply assimilate to the genetics of whatever larger group they are around.
Negritos are similar. The pure genetic Negritos are in the Andaman Islands, and indeed their genes are very distinct. However, the rest of the Negritos simply have genes that look like whoever they are around. Thai Negritos have genes that look Thai. Filipino Negritos have genes that look Filipino. Indonesian Negritos have genes that look Indonesian. New Guinean Negritos have genes that look Papuan. Australian Negritos have genes that look Aborigine, and so on. This is because everywhere they went, the Negritos, a small group, bred in the much larger group until their genes began to resemble the larger group.
Yes, Veddoids do tend to have similar looking Australoid skulls everywhere they exist.
And yes, they do tend to have a “Caucasoid” phenotype everywhere they exist simply because this is somehow what they evolved in India, which then carried on to other places they went to. This Caucasoid phenotype is a result of convergent evolution and in way whatsoever proves that any of these peoples are actually Caucasoid.
I feel that the range of possible human phenotypes is small, so “Asian”, “Caucasian”, or “Negroid/African” are three of the most common phenotypes resulting in humans. These phenotypes can probably evolve just about anywhere because the range of possible end-types for phenotypes may be small. If it’s small, sooner or later, you will have people who look “Negroid” or “Caucasoid” simply due to the law of averages. There are a lot of “Negroid” looking people in Melanesia, among Negritos, among Papuans, and even among some Central Americans such as we see in the Olmec statues. “Negroid” just appears to be a sort of phenotype that may evolve in very hot or tropical weather, possibly because a lot of Negroid attritubes are adaptive in the tropics.
Veddoids may have evolved in India over 18,000 YBP, so they are a very archaic race.
After that, they appear to have gone from India to Thailand, possibly by sea. Skulls from Thailand 18,000 YBP look very much like Jomonese skulls from Japan and Ainu skulls today.
Before 18,000 YBP: Veddoids evolve in India.
18,000 YBP: Veddoids go to Thailand. Their descendants become the Senoi.
13,000 YBP: Veddoids show up in far southern Japan (possibly Okinawa) as the Jomonese, the ancestors of the Ainu and the first people to settle Japan that we know of. They arrive here from Thailand. They appear to have gone from Thailand to Japan by boat. No one knows when they left Thailand or how look it took them to get to Japan, but sometime in that 5,000 year period from 18,000 YBP to 13,000 YBP, they move in between Thailand and Japan by boat. Old anthropological theory said that a long time ago, one of the early peoples of the Philippines resembled what to me look like the Ainu, so they may have stopped in the Philippines at some point between 18,000 YBP and 13,000 YBP en route from Thailand to Japan by sea.
Warning: Long, Runs to 76 pages on the Net.
Yay! Another long awaited Bigfoot news! How bout that?
Melba Ketchum DNA study replicated three teams by three different scientific teams! Of course in science, replication is everything. If you cannot replicate your findings, they are near-worthless, as all scientific findings must be replicated, usually not just once but a number of times.
Melba’s study initially was greeted with round of derision worse than you hear at a violent soccer match. Nearly the entire community trashed her without even reading her findings. A glum press conference was held in Texas starring several Bigfoot luminaries who all acted like they would rather be someplace else. See below about how there was not even any attempt to replicate the study by anyone in science. They simply said that the whole idea that Sasquatches exist is insane and they refused to read any further than that. Gotta love those capital-S Scientists!
Then for a long time nothing happened. But just recently I heard that the Ketchum study has been replicated not once, not twice, but actually three separate times!
First replication of Ketchum’s findings. The first replication was by a man named Dr. David Swenson. He is a top genetics researcher who has published over 130 genetics papers in scientific journals. He was interested in the findings, but as he said in an interview, he had always thought that that Sasquatch was just a legend or a made-up story. He never believed it.
But he decided to look into Melba’s findings. He blasted them and took some time reading over what he saw. At first he just looked at one chromosome, and in the video interview he did, he only talks about looking at that one chromosome.
The skeptards have dismissed his findings because “he only looked at one chromosome.” But his findings were remarkable. He stated that in that one chromosome, he was able to validate Melba’s findings. He found that indeed this was the DNA of a hybrid that was half human on the female side and half some relict or older hominid on the male side. He was absolutely stunned and could not believe his findings. He discussed them in an interview with Joe Rogan. Rogan asked him if this meant that he believed that Sasquatches exist, and he hedged his answer, scientist that he is. He said:
“Well, I would not go this far. Let’s put it this way. One thing I know for sure is there is an unknown animal in the Pacific Northwest. Let’s just leave it like that.”
Some of the usual skeptards, mostly from one of the worst bunch of Bigfooters out there, the pond scum coagulating around this abomination of a Facebook group otherwise known as Skeptard Central, said I based my whole post on “second hand word of mouth.” Well of course. That’s how everything is in this field. People say things, I write them down and report them. What’s so wrong about that? That’s how this game works. We don’t have much of anything better than “second hand word of mouth” anyway. We haven’t proven jack about these things. We don’t even know they exist. All we have are “second hand word of mouth” sighting reports.
There. There’s the video above of Swenson discussing his replication of Ketchum’s findings. Now it’s not “second hand word of mouth” anymore, right? You satisfied?
Another skeptard argument, this one much more malicious (But what do you expect from skeptards?) was that Swensen is not credible because “he and Melba go way back.” So this distinguished genetic scientist is not credible because he is an old friend of Melba’s? This man is on the verge of committing scientific fraud in order to help an old friend! Wow, breathtaking accusation.
However, now I have learned that this is not true, and he has not known Melba for a long time. He only got interested in her after he heard about her study. And at that time, he didn’t even believe in Sasquatch! Then he did replication work and was stunned to discover that she was absolutely right! So if agreeing with Melba means “he and Melba go way back,” well then, I must say is that that is a pretty horrible argument, but it’s typical of the skeptards.
Another argument, not really by skeptards but nonetheless a skeptic rejoinder, is the one noted above that Swensen only looked at one chromosome, so the results are not valid. There is a bit of a point here, but how do you look at a single chromosome of any mammal and somehow conclude that it is a hybrid between a human female and a relict hominid male? I don’t get it.
On the other hand, I have now been able to kill that argument too. A source very close to Ketchum has told me that Swensen actually looked at the entire genome and then concluded the same thing, that it was a hybrid between a human female and an unknown relict hominid male.
So it looks like both skeptic arguments have been shot down on that one. Don’t worry, they will come back with new ones.
Second replication of Ketchum’s findings. The second replication occurred when a lab team associated with an unknown university tried to replicate Ketchum’s findings. Apparently they thought the results were some sort of a joke, and they set out to prove that. They did use some of Ketchum’s actual samples. She still has quite a bit of samples left over from the old study. They had full institutional support until they concluded the study. They tested both NuDNA and MtDNA, and they replicated Ketchum’s findings in toto.
However the institution was only giving them support on the supposition that they would show that Ketchum’s findings were false. As soon as they replicated her findings, institutional support was pulled. The team said they were not going to publish their findings, as a replication of Ketchum’s findings would be a “career-killer” as they put it. However, they did inform Ketchum of the results. They also do not wish to be named for the same reason given for not publishing their findings.
From Ketchum’s Facebook page:
HUGE NEWS: Our research has now been independently verified genome wise. I don’t know when or how they’ll come out with it and I’m not at liberty to say who yet, but it’s finished and matches what we got down to the smallest details. Thank you, God!
Another post about the independent study from her FB page:
Thanks everyone for the kind words and prayers. It’s been a tough road but at some point the bad will be over since this independent study by acclaimed scientists will come out. Yippee.
Of course, skeptics will have a field day with this one, claiming that Ketchum is lying. But if she is lying about the results of another study, is that not scientific fraud? I believe it is. Scientific fraud is a very serious charge. It’s effectively a career-ender in science. Most people proven to have committed scientific fraud will never publish again. So I would just like to point out that when skeptics accuse Ketchum of making up these results, they are accusing her of scientific fraud, a very serious charge. Glad we cleared that up.
Update: The skeptards are already running crazy with this one, saying she has no evidence other than Ketchum’s own word. That is correct, but the whole reason that the team didn’t want to publish was because replicating Ketchum would mean the end of their careers. In fact, the support from the university was apparently contingent on proving Ketchum wrong. As soon as she was replicated, the university’s support ended.
But why did the team feel that way? Because of the despicable attitude created by the skeptards in the very first place, which now permeates “science” from top to bottom. But let us grant them that one. They are correct. All we have is Ketchum’s word on this one. But if this thing really has been replicated three different times now, this won’t be the last time. Replications will continue in the future and at some point, somebody is going to publish.
I specifically asked Richard Stubstad whether it was possible that Ketchum was fabricating the results, making stuff up or committing scientific fraud. He told me, “That is not possible.” Richard was a statistician, and he often reported his views in terms of statistical possibilities. So when he says that she could not have committed scientific fraud, he is saying that the odds of her doing that are so low as to be effectively nil. He told me that she was a good, sincere and morally proper scientist, and she just didn’t have it in her to commit scientific fraud. Keep in mind that Stubstad and Ketchum did not like each other at all. And even this man who did not like her said she was not capable of faking results.
Here is Ketchum reporting on the second replication of her study. There. Now it’s not “second hand word of mouth.” Satisfied?
Third replication of Ketchum’s results. I have just received word that a third lab has replicated Ketchum’s results at least in part. This lab came to Ketchum intrigued by her findings and said they wanted to try to replicate. Ketchum gave them some of her samples, and they went off to the lab. Unfortunately, they only tested MtDNA. But they did replicate her study in a sense.
First they used a hair specialist who found that the hair was not human and not that of any known animal. Then the MtDNA tested human, which is exactly correct. So you have proven nonhuman hair testing as human, and in a sense Ketchum is replicated again. It would have been nice if they would have done NuDNA, but they did not. I am not sure if this team is going to publish or not. I will have to ask my source about that.
The skeptards are also going nuts with this one, claiming it is “second hand word of mouth.” Correct, so far they have not published. But maybe they will. Anyway, all evidence must be reported, optimal or not.
Update on the Sierra Kills! I will not go into detail about the Kills, but you can look it up on the Net if you are interested. Briefly, Justin Smeja and an unidentified hunting partner shot and killed two Sasquatches on October 10, 2010 in the Plumas National Forest about 25 miles west of Sierra Valley. I am 100% certain that these kills occurred.
Yes, you heard of the Sierra Kills, but those were surely not the last Sasquatches to be killed by humans. An old friend of mine, in discussing the Sierra Kills case, admitted that it would never amount to anything for a variety of reasons, mostly because as he said, the people involved in the Sierra Kills both directly and peripherally (you know who you are) do not want anything to come of it.
Was Sasquatch flesh retained from the Sierra Kills? Yes. How was it retained? No one knows because Justin Smeja’s wild story about a dog digging through three feet of snow to find a piece of Bigfoot steak is now completely trashed by the fact that he has been carting around a piece of Black Bear to various DNA labs and having it tested and claiming that it is the same piece of “Sasquatch” that he sent to Ketchum. In doing this, Justin is in a sense negating his whole story, though I think his real mission is probably to make Melba look bad. I believe I know why Justin is doing this among other reasons, but I will not elaborate here.
We had a piece of Sasquatch (which was hilariously referred to as the Bigfoot Steak) that was retained from the Kills. This piece was proven to be a Sasquatch in one DNA study, which was then replicated by one scientist and two more teams.
Also we know that Justin (who I know fairly well) did not even believe in Sasquatch before this incident occurred. We know this because this is what all of his friends told us. In fact he openly ridiculed anyone who believed in it.
Until that fateful late afternoon in early October six years ago, when a large adult male Sasquatch and one his children, a juvenile Sasquatch, were shot and killed by Justin Smeja to the southwest of Mount Haskell in the Plumas National Forest in the Sierra Nevada.
What is the likelihood that someone who openly ridiculed those who believed in Sasquatches would concoct an insane story like this? Just about zero. For money? Justin hasn’t made a nickel off of this crazy story, and in fact, he told me that this incident had actually caused him to lose a lot of money. So what’s in it for him? Nothing. How about fame? Justin told me that the only fame he got was infamy, and that’s not the sort of fame that he wants.
Perhaps Justin is a crazy guy who just makes up crazy stuff. Well then, he had to get his very level headed hunter friend (Who refused to be shown on videotape – why if he is after fame?) to go along with this insane story. But I know Justin Smeja. Justin Smeja, whatever you think of him, and I actually like the guy, is probably one of the most level headed, no-BS men that I have ever met. If you were looking for the exact opposite of someone who would make up an insane story like this, Justin is your man.
Road to Damascus conversions of Sasquatch witnesses. Since the killings, my understanding is that Justin has been much of his free time and certainly much of his summers up in the Sierras looking for Sasquatches. He now knows that they are real, and he is out to in a sense be vindicated for all of the humiliation that he went through. Rick Dyer Redux, but with a much better lead actor this time.
Now let us suppose that Justin made this story up for whatever nutty reason. Why on Earth, if he made up a stupid story, would he spend almost every free minute for the next several years up in the mountains hoping to see another Sasquatch? No one would do that. That’s absurd.
You see this over and over with witnesses. They see a Sasquatch, and it’s a Road to Damascus conversion. Their whole life changes, and in quite a few cases, they dedicate the rest of their lives to proving that these things are real. Bobby Short, Don Meldrum, John Bindernagel, Adrian Erickson, and Derek Randles are some of the names of the greats of our field who saw these things, sometimes just once, and then went on to devoting the rest of their lives to proving that they exist. I have known or extensively studied the histories of all of these people. Two are actual scientists. Bobby Short was a nurse. Derek Randles is one of the most no-bullshit guys you will ever meet. Adrian Erickson saw Sasquatches four separate times.
The clincher from the Sierra Kills – juvenile Sasquatches with heads as big as five gallon buckets! One thing clinched the Sierra Kills story for me. When Justin first told a Canadian man over the phone about the Kills after his famous initial posting on Taxidermy.net, one of the things that he said was that the juvenile Sasquatch had a huge head, as big as a five gallon bucket. This fact is controversial in the community, but I believe it is true. You can see it in the Pancake Video from the ill-fated Kentucky Project.
Here a juvenile Sasquatch (a female named Matilda) is seen coming at night to grab some pancakes off of table where the pancakes were laid out for the Sasquatches at night. This may sound insane, but the female half of the couple at the site, Sissy, said she had been feeding the Sasquatches there for some time now. She learned this from her mother. Her mother had fed the Sasquatches for a long time, and she also fed them pancakes. So Sissy grew up as a girl with a mother who believed in Sasquatches and said she fed them on a regular basis. So when Sissy grew up, she knew the Sasquatches were still out there, so she continued the feeding.
The Erickson Project occurred when Adrian Erickson bought the Kentucky Project property on Mann Road in Crittenden, Kentucky where Sissy had been feeding the Sasquatches. He then stationed Leila Hadj-Chikh, who had a PhD in Ecology from Yale, along with Dennis Pfohl from Colorado at the house for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the Sasquatches that were there.
In the Pancake Video, a much ridiculed aspect of the video is that it portrays a child wearing a turban who comes up to the table at night to snatch the pancakes. However, that is no turban. It looks like a turban because juvenile Sasquatches for some reason have huge heads, as big as a five gallon bucket, as Smeja noted.
As soon as I heard that Justin had noted that the juvenile had a huge head, I knew he was telling the truth. That is because the fact that the babies have huge heads is known by almost no one other than a few Sasquatch experts. In fact, it is widely debated in the field, and some say that it is not even true that they have huge heads. But there is no way that someone like Justin, who did not even believe in Sasquatches, ridiculed anyone who did, and consequently had no interest in the ridiculous subject could possibly know this incredibly obscure fact about the juveniles having gigantic heads. Forget it. Not possible.
This photo is also very little known. I think it is from a video. The video is not very good quality and it was taken from some distance, but look at those weird, spindly, akimbo limbs again. You never see those in a hoax.
Bigfoot Steak or Black Bear Tenderloin – this is the question. Justin gave Melba a piece of what he thought was the Sasquatch that he killed. She tested it, and by DNA proved that it came from a Sasquatch. However, Justin and Melba then had a serious falling out. Justin then began carting around more pieces of what he claimed was the same flesh he gave to Melba to four DNA labs, all of which said the piece tested out bear.
The result of Justin’s DNA testing project? Melba Ketchum looks like a liar and an idiot for receiving a piece of bear and concluding that it was actually a piece of Sasquatch.
However, we now know that there are different pieces of flesh. The piece of flesh that he gave to Melba is not from the same flesh that tested out multiple times as Black Bear. The reports proving that we are dealing with two different pieces of flesh can be found here in scanned copies portrayed on Scott Carpenter’s great website, the Bigfoot Field Journal.
I believe the whole story of the Sierra Kills has not been told, which goes without saying, as Justin has been mysteriously toting around a piece of bear claiming it was part of a piece of Sasquatch he sent to Ketchum. However, I believe that there is much more to it than that, and in fact we will never know the true story of the Sierra Kills, in particular what happened after the Sasquatches were killed.
I will not elaborate further except to say that I heave dealt with my theories on this site a lot in the past, and all writing about it does is make people furious at me and call me a liar. There appear to be have been a number of Sasquatch killings in the last 200 years. Most of them are obviously clouded in mystery as all killings of unproven creatures are. I am quite sure that the Sierra Kills will fade into history as just one more Sasquatch killing story that is shrouded in mystery if not controversy like most of the rest of them. Enough of the Sierra Kills!
The loathsome trashing of Melba Ketchum by Big Science. When Melba’s study first appeared, the scientific community first tried to ignore her like a fart in a crowd that everyone hopes will dissipate and will hopefully not be spoken of. We all know it’s there, it stinks like Hell, but we have all agreed that this is so embarrassing that no one should talk about it. Which pretty much sums up Big Science’s initial response.
However, the Bigfoot community was going bonkers over this study, mostly beating Melba over the head senseless with a verbal cudgel. At some point, Melba was the elephant in the room that Big Science could no longer ignore, probably because by now it’s pooping on the rug.
First they ignored her. Then they ridiculed her.
When ignoring her didn’t work, Big Science went to Plan B: Ridicule.
A few articles were published here and there, and mostly the community laughed her off as a pitiful joke. But they all had a good sadistic laugh at the poor woman ‘s expense. However the truth is that not one single scientist who trashed Ketchum even read the study. They simply dismissed it out of hand, which is typical of Mainstream Science and is one of my beefs with them and their Scientific God or Gods that they worship in so fundamentalist a fashion. Nor were any attempts made to replicate her findings. They simply looked at the title and findings, started laughing, threw the study on the floor, and asked the bartender for another round please. They turned the Trashing of Melba into a big party.
Melba in a sense botched the roll-out of the study in a variety of ways, but much of it was probably not her fault.
The Bigfoot community had a big laugh about the study despite the fact that, like Big Science, no one even read it. The performance of some of these clowns was disgusting. One histrionic wag often off his much-needed meds called her “the cat doctor” because she is a veterinarian. He nearly spit the phrase out with contempt when he said it. Over and over it was said that a veterinarian could not know anything about genetics.
However, Melba has published several studies on animal genetics in genetics journals, and she ran (poorly) a now bankrupt DNA lab in Texas. The lab specialized in animal genetics.
Further, Melba was called upon to take part in the DNA project to find the remains of victims killed in the 9-11 terror attacks. DNA was needed because there was almost nothing left of many of the victims. Hence, pieces of human were wrapped up and shipped to the DNA lab, where geneticists tried to match the piece of human to one of the victims. In this macabre manner, most if not all of the 9-11 victims were identified. Only the best geneticists in the US were even asked to participate in this process, so the fact that Melba was chosen shows that she knows her stuff when it comes to genetics.
Further, before he died, Richard Stubstad told me that Melba, in addition to being brilliant, definitely knew her stuff when it came to genetics.
The saga of the Gigantic Sasquatch Lemur from 60 million years ago. The community had a huge guffaw over what they said was Melba’s claim that Sasquatches were actually gigantic lemurs from Madagascar that lived 60 million years ago. These lemurs actually existed way back then as we have learned from the fossil record. How these giant lemurs somehow leaped from an African island 60 million years ago to deep woods of the Pacific Northwest in our modern era without being spotted in the interim in either time or space is uncertain. Perhaps they rode some Sasquatch Lemur Time Warp. Who knows? See video below and say hello to Brad for me please.
Of course such a claim is absurd on its face, but her study was so poorly written (another botch, see below) that one could actually muddle through the fractured syntax and tortured prose to conclude that this was indeed the absurd claim she was making.
However, the truth is that Melba never said that Sasquatches were Giant Lemurs from Madagascar from 60 million years ago. That is a false reading of her paper. Instead she said that Sasquatches had a gene that caused their eyes to glow in the dark that traced back to these extinct Giant Lemurs from Island Africa. Got it? And yes, Sasquatches do have eyes that glow in the dark. There are many videos on Youtube showing this.
Melba’s roll-out of her study was heavily botched, as noted above. She could not find a journal which would print her findings. It was in peer review at Nature, the flagship journal of science, for some time but was rejected there. Editors at other journals openly told her that their scientific careers would be destroyed if they ran her study in their journals. So Melba bought her own journal and changed the name of it in a rather underhanded and sleazy way, lying continuously the whole time she was doing this.
Then she claimed she did her own peer review with a few scientists and it passed. She never showed us any evidence of this review. I doubt if the study was ever peer-reviewed. She probably just lied and said it was so she might be regarded as even slightly serious. Alas, it was all for naught, as the study was rejected out of hand, peer review or no peer review. In addition, her rather sleazy shenanigans with the frankly vanity journal that she bought in order to run her study added to the ridicule and derision from the scientific community, not that I blame them, as the whole thing seemed pretty amateurish and had a bad smell to it.
The thing is that if your scientific study cannot pass peer review at a real scientific journal, you can always go out and create or buy a vanity journal, make it your own journal and then print your own stuff. You can even claim that you did your own peer review. In this sense, dubious findings which fail to even make it through peer review at refereed journals can be published by any scientist, amateur or professional, with a bit of cash and a lot of nerve and gall.
On the other hand, almost no one will take your vanity journal study seriously, similar to the way almost no one reads or takes seriously vanity books that are published on their own by authors in a similar fashion when they can’t find a real publisher. Vanity journals and publishers are the last refuge of throwaway studies and books that the industry thinks are so bad that they won’t even print a single copy. They are regarded as a joke category for, well, losers who can’t make it in publishing or science. Sort of, “If no one else thinks your work is any good, just publish it yourself!” Embarrassing.
Nowadays with self-publishing this is all changing somewhat, but still self-published books often have horrible layout, typeface, photos and proofreading no matter the quality of the actual writing, which is sometimes quite good. These books scream amateur so loudly you want to throw them across the room. So self-publishing, while a step up from the vanity presses of yore, continues to suffer from much the same credibility gap as the old presses.
Sad Erickson Project press conference. There was a nearly pitiful press conference held with in Texas with Melba, Adrian Erickson, Dennis Pfohl, and some other superstars of the scene. The presser was poorly handled. A few shocking snippets of Erickson’s Sasquatch videotapes from the Erickson Project were shown, but my sources tell me that a lot of the best material was withheld. For what reason? No one seems to know. Supposedly for a TV show starring Erickson which has not yet come to pass.
Melba rattled off her DNA findings. Nobody showed up for the presser, and it received almost no media. Adrian’s videos, including the fascinating one of Matilda, the young female Sasquatch from the Kentucky Project sleeping on the ground that could not have been faked, were laughed off again. There were also a few new videos, but they were not nearly as impressive as Sleeping Matilda. Erickson looked glum through the whole thing. Melba was earnest. Pfohl tried his best. The whole thing was embarrassing, but I think they tried their best.
Adrian Erickson, failure and fool? Not so fast now! Adrian Erickson saw Sasquatches four separate times. After the last time, he reportedly said, “I am getting tired of seeing these things. I am going to prove that they exist.” Hence he spent $3 million of his own hard cash in an attempt to prove that they exist. The Erickson Project is typically regarded as a failure in which Erickson wasted his money.
However, he used that money to shoot some excellent Sasquatch video which was not faked, and he helped fund Melba Ketchum’s Sasquatch DNA project which not only proved that Sasquatches exist but has now been replicated by three separate scientific teams. Adrian, like Melba, has been heavily trashed by this episode (Melba openly states tragically that it ruined her career), however I believe that in the end, both will be vindicated and will come to be regarded as among the Greats of our field, up there with Roger Patterson, Bob Gimlin and the rest.
Bryan Sykes DNA study. Here is Ketchum commenting on Brian Sykes going on Coast to Coast radio and attacking Melba’s DNA study:
I received a copy of the nicest email from a guy that wrote C to C. I wanted to share it. It humbles me when people are so gracious. It’s all of you here and people like this who sent this to my public page that make all of the hate bearable. I just want to thank all of you for your kind words, support, and encouragement. I love y’all! I haven’t heard back from George K. yet. I’ll keep you posted.
Hi George and George,
I’m a huge Coast fan and Coast Insider, and I literally listen to the show everyday. Usually, I am very happy with Coast, but today after listening to the show with Brian Sykes, I must say I am very upset. During his appearance with Dave Schraeder this weekend, he seriously and unfairly badmouthed Melba Ketchum and her amazing ground-breaking DNA study of Bigfoot.
Sykes was totally arrogant throughout the show and was obviously very ill-informed about Melba’s work, nonetheless he proceeded to trash talk her and her study. It was disturbing and unworthy of Coast. I know neither of you hosted the show, but I wanted to ask you to please give some airtime to Melba Ketchum to refute the baseless accusations that Sykes leveled against her and her study. Melba deserves a chance to address this. Thank you.
More posts from Melba about Sykes, all from her FB page:
Normally I just let all the garbage go, but Sykes is a scientist and has been nasty about our study, yet he’s not been at Oxford for many years (quote from Oxford) ,and without keeping up with the technology, you’re a dinosaur within a year or so at the rate technology is developing. He makes up an “institute” at Oxford to publish his paper, which you NEVER do (once again quoting Oxford as saying there is no such institute).
He disses bioinformatics, which is the most cutting edge analysis method for whole genomes known to mankind, preferring the “golden age of genetics”. His paper was proven wrong about the bear genetics by other geneticists, and they wrote a published response to the Royal Academy. All of this can be found in the UK press and the Royal Academy, so I’m not saying anything that’s not public knowledge.
He’s a mtDNA scientist, so he’s not skilled in all of the disciplines in our paper.
I’m not either on all of it – that’s why there are numerous authors in our manuscript. Each scientist wrote according to their discipline. Like the bioinformatics was written by the bioinformaticist. The electron microscopy by the head of that department at Texas A&M and so forth. I’m only the lead author and therefore responsible for answering the questions and correspondence for it, writing my part, and putting it all together.
We used 12 labs and they used one US mtDNA lab, not Oxford and only tested a small portion of the mtDNA loop. No other genetic testing was done..
And after all of this, he has the audacity to diss our work. How unprofessional and naive. Bless his heart. I can prove ours is not contaminated by human or other mammals. I did a video on it. He forgets I’m a forensic scientist, and all crime scenes are subject to contamination, so I know how to make sure it’s not there.
One more thing. SYKES CONTACTED ME before his paper, and I offered him full access to samples, research and even offered to take him to the habituation site. I have the emails. Then he contacts me back and says he’s not coming. He didn’t even have to come here to have access to everything, but he blew me off after I offered everything. So that speaks a lot for his wanting to get to the truth. I don’t say anything I can’t prove, and I have the emails to back this up. If he had worked with me, he would know why the seven Sasquatch samples in his study wouldn’t run. It took us months to figure this out. In his paper he says he doesn’t understand why they didn’t run, but I know…
I think it would be very interesting to figure out why those seven samples would not run at all.
Reason Bryan Sykes study failed. Sykes was given a very large number of all sorts of samples. Apparently a number of them were from Sasquatches, but quite a few others were from known animals or even people.
My contact at Ketchum’s study gave me the rundown on her group’s opinion of what went down in the Sykes study:
Sykes used a hair specialist to look at his samples before he used them. What the purpose of this hair specialist was is not known, since he didn’t appear to screen much of anything. The Ketchum camp believes that Sykes’ hair specialist knew what Sasquatch hairs look like. They do have a characteristic quality that makes them look like no known animal, nor do they appear human, though they look more human than anything else.
Ketchum’s people felt that the hair specialist had specifically weeded out all of the Sasquatch samples and only sent samples of known animals and humans to Sykes, possibly disposing of all of the Sasquatch samples. Why he would do this is not known, but the contact told me that there are a number of researchers who are either professionally jealous of Ketchum or for one reason or another want to discredit her study. The contact implied that Sykes or at least his hair specialist was one of those.
“The fix is in,” he told me in relation to this and a number of other professional attempts to sabotage or discredit Ketchum’s findings.
Major proponents of Ape Theory know they are wrong! A war has been going on for a long time in the scene between proponents of the Ape Hypothesis, which states that Sasquatches are apes, and believers in the Hominid Hypothesis, which states that they are a type of people, albeit prehistoric men.
An anonymous source who is very deep into the scene has told me that a number of the major proponents of the Ape Hypothesis know that they are wrong and know that Sasquatches are a type of hominid, but they feel that if they change their theory now, their careers will be over. He named a few names, but I am not going to repeat them here. Suffice to say that they are people that everyone in the scene has heard of. Now don’t any of you big proponents of the Ape Theory go writing me angry mails now! I didn’t name any names, right? Could be anyone, right?
But this sure is shocking news!
Are Ape Theory proponents sabotaging Hominid Theory people? According to a source very deep into the scene, sabotaging is really the wrong word to use. Instead, the Ape Theory people systematically ignore all evidence that does not fit in with their theory. They dismiss Ketchum’s DNA study on hazy or shaky grounds, and when on TV, they simply never mention it. They more or less act like Ketchum’s paper does not even exist.
However, I have good evidence that well-known Ape Theory proponent Matt Moneymaker has sabotaged a number of sighting reports in his database by removing witness accounts that describe the Sasquatch as looking human. Richard Hucklebridge was run off the BFRO because he confronted Matt over his alteration of data. Wow! Matt Moneymaker altering scientific data to fit it into his pet theory! Sleazy or what?
Sasquatches actually cloak! I know this sounds completely insane, and for a long time, I laughed at the people who believed in cloaking, as I thought they were were woo types. However, now an anonymous source who is also an excellent researcher presented me with some evidence that Sasquatches actually do cloak. He showed me a photo of a cloaking Sasquatch and outlined the Sasquatch in red ink. You could indeed see an indistinct shadow there.
He told me that Sasquatches cloak by using their infrasound to bend light waves, making them appear to be somewhat invisible. They’re not actually invisible, but they look instead like an indistinct light shadow that could be anything. Apparently via infrasound you may be able to bend light waves to produce this effect. It’s quite amazing, and this is a scientific explanation that could theoretically actually make sense.
This clears up so many things. Remember all the reports of Sasquatches vanishing into thin air, even in the Arizona and Texas desert? I always thought that was completely insane, but there have been so many reports that you start to wonder. There was once a page up called Desert Sasquatch that included a lot of these weird reports along with a lot of other very woo stuff. However, the female author was scientific minded and offered possible scientific solutions (highly speculative of course) for how the Sasquatches could be doing some of these woo things. She also had a theory for the “Sasquatch disappearing into thin air” observations.
Notice how many times people report that these things are impossible to see? Maybe that’s because they cloak much of the time they are around us! Notice how many people say you only see them when they want you to see them? Well, maybe we only see them when they take their cloaking off in order to be seen for some reason!
Another thing that I have noticed so many times is that people take photos of videos where they can’t see much of anything in the background or at least there are certainly no Sasquatches. They just shoot a video of a hike, the forest outside their cabin or the field next door. It is only when they go in to look at the photos or video that they shot that they notice the Sasquatch that they somehow could not see at the time! Now I am wondering if this cloaking only works on the human eye and not on cameras. After all, eyeballs and photo lenses work in completely different ways.
Perhaps the human eye is subject to this light-bending effect but cameras are not? If that is so, then that is an excellent explanation for all of the cases we have of people shooting photography with nothing in the background but landscape and only seeing the Sasquatch after they are looking at the film or video later on. That’s because the Sasquatch was invisible to the human eye but not to the camera lens. It’s just a theory, but it would explain a major problem in Sasquatch sightings which is how Sasquatches unseen at the time of the photographing suddenly show up later when you are looking at the film.
This is one of the most fantastic Sasquatch videos I have ever seen. It is from Sasquatch Ontario. The fellow who runs that organization is named Mike and is despised by most everyone in the scene because he refuses to cooperate with other researchers and fights with almost anyone. Apparently he is a complete SOB.
But this video is simply incredible. Notice the obviously cloaking Sasquatch in the background speaking and singing to the researcher. This has been called a hoax, but how in the Hell do you hoax that? How do you make that perfectly-shaped thing in the background, and why would you make it so indistinct like that? Is Sasquatch Ontario a special effects studio? I don’t think so.
I know someone who is familiar with Mike and has been out to his habituation site. This man told me that Mike is 100% real, and he is not hoaxing at all.
Now once you accuse someone of hoaxing, shouldn’t you prove it? OK, people say this video is hoaxed. Got any evidence that it’s hoaxed? Can you prove it? Well if you have no evidence, then be quiet about the hoaxing charge!
The bizarre method of Sasquatch speech. As you can see in the video above, that thing is speaking in the strangest way. The latest theory for why Sasquatches sound so damn weird is because they speak on the inhale instead of speaking on the exhale as we do. That thing in the video is speaking and singing on the inhale! No wonder it sounds so weird. Try speaking on the inhale if you can manage it, and see how it sounds. Isn’t that weird? Why the Hell do they speak on the inhale?
And one more thing, if you were going to hoax a Sasquatch talking, why in God’s name would you record the human hoaxer speaking on the inhale of all things? No one would do that. Further, some of the sounds being produced by that thing seem to beyond the range of the human vocal tract.
Possible Sasquatch seen on Survivorman! Les Stroud did a Survivorman show for a couple of years on TV. The show was broken up into a number of parts, and then the parts were further broken up into Parts 1 and 2. There were at least eight separate Survivorman Bigfoot portions. The labeling looked like say Survivorman Bigfoot 7, Part 1, for example.
No one knows what is in this video. Some are saying it is a tree, a stump, a shadow or a rock. It could not have been hoaxed because Stroud does not hoax. Not only that, but this possible Sasquatch was not seen until the show appeared on TV! It was only then that watchful viewers noticed the possible Sasquatch in the background. Stroud and the camera crew didn’t even know the thing was there! Of course, once again we see a case where the humans at the scene saw nothing, and the Sasquatch only shows up later on the camera. This may be due to cloaking, but that’s just my theory.
I do think this is a Sasquatch because that is exactly what they look like. Not only that, but nothing else in the background is the same shade of black as that object. Most importantly, the black object has a sheen to it. Rocks, trees, stumps, and shadows don’t have a sheen, especially on a cloudy day with no sun out. But true Sasquatch videos often have sheen. This is because as I noted above, real Sasquatches have oils on their skin under their hair.
This gives them, and presumably any other living thing with such skin oils, a sheen to their coats. It’s notable that not one single proven hoax has even had sheen to it, nor have hoaxers even tried to replicate this sheen, maybe because they can’t. Obviously suits will not have sheen because they are worn over a clothed human body. There’s no skin oils for the suit to contact, and the suit’s not real hair on a real body anyway.
Survivorman Bigfoot show at the Alberta Habituation Site! There was one portion, Show 7, shot at this famous site which only I have written about. Show 7 has Parts 1 and 2. It’s labeled Nordegg, Canada. If you have been reading me, that is almost exactly where I implied that the AHS was! Stroud went out to the AHS with Todd Standing. It’s been Todd’s site for some time now ever since the weasel deceived other researchers to find out where the secret site was and then stole it from other researchers and claimed it for his own. It was here at this Nordegg site that Jeff Meldrum saw what may have been his first Sasquatch walking across a clearing in the middle of the night.
A lot of people say I am full of it, but I wrote about this site for a long time, describing approximately where it was. I also told the story about how Todd stole the site from other researchers and how it was now his site. Then Stroud goes out to Nordegg, Canada with Todd Standing, presumably to the AHS. So all of my reporting on the AHS has been vindicated as true!
I haven’t watched this episode yet, but if you want to see some real footage of the AHS, here it is!
The terrible tale of the Alberta Massacre! Some absolutely shocking news from Todd Standing. As noted above, Todd has finally had a good habituation site after all these years. The nice thing about that is that now that Todd has a nice site, he doesn’t have to hoax anymore. Why hoax when you have a great Sasquatch habituation site sitting right at your heels. Why bother? I am not sure what sort of work Todd has been able to do out there, but he did bring Survivorman out for a couple of episodes and he also brought Jeff Meldrum out. It was on this occasion that Meldrum saw what may have been his first Sasquatch.
Now the stunning word in from Standing is that most of the Sasquatches at the AHS have been killed! A source reports that Todd said recently that he was out there at the AHS one night when some military helicopters flew in with guns blazing away. They flew around for some time firing their machine guns at the forest below, and then they flew away. Todd said after that, most of the Sasquatches were gone except for one young male who had become very shy. The assumption was that somehow the Canadian military had killed a number of the Sasquatches with helicopter-mounted machine guns.
If it’s true, it’s an incredible story, up there with the Sierra Kills. First the Sierra Kills, next the Alberta Massacre! If anyone has any more information about this incident, please contact me.
I would like to say that it is my personal opinion that the militaries in North America may do this from time to time. I believe that some Sasquatches become nuisances, possibly due to excessive aggression or killing and eating people (Hello David Paulides). In these cases, I believe the military may be called out to kill the problem Sasquatch. Unfortunately, I have no evidence to prove this, and it is just a hunch on my part.
If this is occurring, it would be nice if we could gather some evidence about it. I am aware of one incident where a Sasquatch was seen in a national forest. I forget the details. Anyway, the witness said that soon after the Sasquatch was seen, a US forest service helicopter was flying low over the forest where the Sasquatch was seen firing a machine gun. The exact same scenario that Todd reports here.
Of course, Todd has a history of hoaxing going back some time now, from his stupid Tiki doll puppets to his made-up lie about “Sylvanic,” the secret valley that does not exist that he accessed through a hole in a mountain where he was attacked by Sasquatches one night around his campfire. There is even a video of this made-up incident out there that you can watch.
Well, Todd is a filmmaker and filmmakers, well, they make films! So Todd likes to make movies. And he has quite an imagination.
However, Todd gets mixed up between fiction and nonfiction and what really happened and what didn’t. This nonsense leads to lots of unnecessary confusion, and it’s borderline immoral if not worse. Blair Witch Project anyone? How about Megamouth Shark? How about fakeumentaries?
I figure there is way too much lying masquerading as truth these days as it is without throwing in all this fakeumentary garbage. What’s the point? Don’t we get lied to enough all day long in this idiotic country? As it is, if you want to be informed, you have to spend about half your day figuring which of what you got told today were lies and which were facts. It’s not easy at all to disentangle them, and it’s very annoying to say the least that we have to play Lie Detector all day long anyway. I thought this was some great “democracy?” If it’s this great democracy, then why do we get lied to all day? Huh? Riddle me that.
Anyway I doubt if Todd made this up, as he stopped hoaxing as soon as he finally got a real habituation site if not before. Now Todd had this nice comfy habituation site, one of the best in North America, with a number of Sasquatches that I was told “aren’t going anywhere.” In other words, they were not going to leave the AHS barring extreme circumstances.
So I doubt if they up and left. So if they are still there, why make up a story about them getting killed? Why not stay out there and study them? I guess you could say that they left for some other reason, so Todd made up this massacre lie. But I was told that these Sasquatches were not going anywhere for much of any reason. So they didn’t leave. But they’re not there, otherwise Todd would still be studying them. So where did they go? Well, they didn’t leave as I said. So maybe they did get killed.
Todd suffers from Boy Who Cried Wolf Syndrome like a number of other researchers. It’s a real problem when you shoot some real stuff, then you hoax, then you shoot some more real stuff. People see you hoaxing and write off everything you did. Todd’s a jerk for hoaxing in the first place, but I think this story may be true.
When we set Black male IQ’s at 113, the Black and White crime rates are equal. Now isn’t that interesting?
So if all Blacks were just as smart as Jews, they would be no more criminal than Whites. But sadly that’s not case.
Now this is very interesting. Let’s look at this group – the Whites with 113 IQ and the Blacks with 113 IQ. Were their life experiences different? If so, how? If the Black experiences were worse, then why were the Blacks immune to them? Let’s look at the genes. Whoa! Genes are not the same. 113 IQ Blacks had a number of high risk repeats and whatnot that can definitely raise the risk of crime. Yet in them, it didn’t raise it one bit. Wow that is interesting! Why not? How were they immunized?
I actually suspect that the answer here is twofold but both answers deal with the same thing – intelligence.
Theory 1: First of all, it is possible that 113 IQ Blacks have some general background criminal tendency risk common to the race. So they were sort of born with their mind wanting to go in these directions. My theory: At some point, IQ is so high that is swarms out your bad genes. At 113 IQ, perhaps the high IQ might enable Black men to “swamp out” their antisocial tendencies like a tidal wave washing over a village. The intelligence just overwhelms the bad drives and renders them moot.
There might be something to that because I am convinced that a lot of low crime people want to act bad too. Bad men do what good men dream. This has always been my thinking. There is one maniac running around raping and murdering women while 100 men are only dreaming of it. The role of repression in human behavior is severely underestimated.
I hate to say it, but I have had all sorts of criminal urges in my life. The overwhelming majority of the time, I was simply able to suppress or repress these urges and forget about them. My superego would come in and say You might get caught, it’s wrong, what about the person, how could you do that to them, what about jail what about prison, imagine what that could be like, you would never handle it, it would ruin your life, don’t do it. They few times I gave in, I decided it was not a bad thing to do and anyway, the victim deserved it. So it was more paybacks and revenge than anything else.
The take home point here may be that as IQ rises, we can suppress more and more of our nasty and antisocial impulses, not to mention our stupid impulses. IQ might be the Great Suppressor or the Great Repressor.
Theory 2: Another possibility is that the genes that elevate criminal tendency in Blacks are not evenly distributed in the Black population. Alpha and Tulio act good because they simply never got dosed with these repeats. And perhaps, as Black IQ rises, genes are connected with this IQ rise. And the higher the IQ, the fewer antisocial genes one is dealt because these traits sort of run together genetically. Conversely, as IQ descends, perhaps the frequency of high crime risk genes increases because these genes are tied in genetically with low IQ.
Anyway it is figures like this, where the “high crime race” commits exactly the same amount of crime as the “low crime race” and discovers just why it is that this is so that makes race realist research so interesting, even from a point of view of progressive motives.
We know full well that Blacks commit crime at something like 7-8X the White rate.
We can debate this factoid.
If Blacks are genetically tainted somehow, then one would assume that most Blacks would be like this. I do believe that the Black crime has an elevated tendency towards crime and this is biological. But I doubt if all Blacks have this tendency. I doubt if Tulio, Alpha, Jm8 and Phil do. Or do they?
This is one of the great things about race realism.
Crime is such a problem with Blacks that it needs to be studied. By doing this, we should study that ones who act good.
Why is it that they act so good? Do they have the same genetic tendencies as the criminal Blacks but have somehow overcome them? What is the life history of these good behaving Blacks? Make some figures. Now compare to the criminal Blacks. How did the life history including upbringing home environment, etc. of the well behaved ones differ? Was there something in the life history of the ones that act good that protected them from criminal behavior. What factors are those? Let’s isolate them. I would imagine that the environments of Blacks who act good and criminal Blacks might be pretty different. But how different? What specific events/histories raise the risk of crime for this group and which ones act as crime preventive?
Now suppose we could isolate this thing, whatever it is, that makes Blacks more susceptible to crime. It’s a gene or some repeat or whatever. OK and if you have this, you are four times more likely to be a criminal. OK, now let’s look at Alpha and Tulio, etc. What if they have this exact same risk-raising repeat? See? Wow! Wouldn’t that be interesting? How come this genetic thing raised the risk in these guys but somehow Alpha and Tulio had the exact same gene, but it didn’t raise their risk at all. It was like it didn’t happen. Now why would that be? Did Alpha and Tulio have some protective experiences that kept them from this route. What might those have been? We have so many studies we could do here.
I would think that certain things might set off the gene or cause it to express more. We know that genetic expression is a new field. It’s not so much your genes but the extent to which they express – not at all, a bit, moderately, a lot or fully. So maybe Alpha and Tulio got this repeat but they had these protective experiences such that the gene simply never really expressed all that much in them or expressed so little that they were able to deal without a problem. And we may even be able to measure the degree to which genes express nowadays. So what might those protective experiences have been that kept the gene from expressing in these two but not in others.
A common complaint about this thinking, “Why are you studying Blacks? Whites commit crime too!” Yeah, but in Blacks it is so out of control that it is almost a public health emergency.
Anyway, whatever data we get out of these studies of Blacks, perhaps a lot of it might carry over to Whites. If something raises crime risk in Blacks, it might just do so in Whites, too, right? Sure. But what if it didn’t? Wouldn’t that be interesting? This particular life experiences raises Black crime risk by 4X but Whites with that same experience are not affected. Whoa! Now why would that be? Or suppose some experience raises the risk my Blacks by 7 times but in Whites by only 3 times. Or suppose there was some experience that raised the risk in Whites but somehow Blacks were sort of immune. Wouldn’t that be interesting.
You see there is a lot of really cool research we could be doing with race realism but we can’t even study it because the Cultural Left. And studying this stuff could really help us to ameliorate some difficult and terrible problems. Race realist research could maybe help us to ameliorate some of the serious problems Blacks have, and society has for that matter. So race realism could even help NAM’s and maybe help the rest of us too. Sure it is a dangerous tool but so are most things. In the right hands, we could do some great progressive research along race realist lines.
Matt: I always assumed that the inhabitants of Anatolia were basically just Islamicized Greeks and other descendants of the indigenous inhabitants. But I was reading a history of the Byzantine empire, and apparently the Turks did at one point efficiently ethnically cleanse Anatolia of Greeks and others. This was in medieval times. We aren’t even talking about the post World War I unpleasantness. I always understood that Turks qua Turks were closely related to Mongolians, Siberians, even Native Americans, but yeah, a lot of them look totally European. So where do they think that came from? What does the genome say?
The Turkic Turks, an Asiatic people who brought their language with them from the Altai over 2,000 years, only make up a small % of the Turkish genome. The Turkish genome is only 7% made up of this Asiatic Turkic core. The Asiatic Turks brought language and religion but not much else. Apparently not many people. The natives were simply native Anatolian Christians who were Islamicized religiously and Turkified linguistically by the invading Asiatic Turks. Nevertheless, over 90% of the genome is made up of Anatolians, Greeks, Slavs and other Whites.
If you look at Turkish genes, they line up very well with Ashkenazi Jews, Kurds and Armenians, the three groups of people the Turks hate the most. It’s really one race – Turkic-Armenian-Kurdish-Ashkenazi Jewish. They’re all one people, but they speak different languages and some have different religions so the Turks hate all the rest of them.
I have gotten a lot of crap from my enemies for being on the Academia.edu site in the first place, but really anyone can join.
The following was posted by one of the reviewers in an Academia session by one of the leading lights of the Basque-Caucasian theory. As you can see, the mythological and multiple lines of genetic evidence are starting to pile up pretty nicely too. This is neat stuff if you are interested in the Basque-Caucasian link in addition to work going on into the remains of the Neolithic Farmers who were subsumed in the Indo-European waves. It turns out there is quite a bit left in different parts of Europe, especially in terms of Neolithic Farmer mythology.
From a discussion among academics and independent scholars on a paper on the Basque-Caucasian Theory in Historical Linguistics during a session in on Academia:
I am not a linguist but interested in the topic as it proposes a linguistic correlation between Caucasic languages and Basque, as it parallels my own current research on reconstructing European Paleolithic mythologies using ethnographic analogies constrained by on archaeogenetics and language macrofamily correlations.
Tuite (2006, 2004, 1998, 1997) has pointed out the hunter-gatherer beliefs and myth motifs shared across a ‘macro-Caucasic’ area to the Hindu Kush and into Western Europe. Basque deities Mari, Sugaar, and Ama Lurra and their associated mythologems have striking similarities to the macro-Caucasic hunter mythologies (not found in Finno-Ugric or Middle Eastern ancient mythologies.)
I am currently writing a paper identifying many examples of Southern/Western Gravettian art in Italy, Spain, southern France that appear to depict imagery only explicable by analogy to Macro-Caucasic religious myth and ritual.
With respect to mtDNA fossil genetics, three skeleton samples are from Paglicci Cave, Italy, ~25 cal BP: one is macro-N-mtDNA (homeland Caucasus/Caspian/Iran; currently highest frequencies Caucasus, Arabia), and two skeletons, RO/HV-mtDNA (homeland northern Middle East; currently highest frequencies, Basque, Syria, Gilaki, Daghestan).
During the later Magdalenian another diffusion occurs apparently by a similar route: HV4-mtDNA emerges in Belarus-Ukraine (~14±2 ka) and under Late Glacial Maximum HV4a (~13.5 ka) moves south and splits in the three refugia: southern Italy, southern Russia (HV4a1, ~10 ka), the Middle East (HV4a2, ~9 ka), and Basque area (HV4a1a, ~5 ka, suggesting full emergence of distinct Basque culture and language), (Gómez-Carballa, Olivieri et al 2012).
These studies further support the existence of a Macro-Basque-Caucasic mythological stratum as well as shared language substrate.
The cutting-edge liberal theory is that Basque (and some other odd far-flung languages) is part of the Caucasian language family. In other words, at one time, the Basques and the peoples of the Caucasus like Chechens were all one people.
What this probably represents is the ancient Neolithic farmers who covered Europe before the Indo-European invasion replaced almost all of the languages of Europe. All that is left is Basque and the peoples of the Caucasus. Everything in between got taken by IE except for some late movements by Uralic and Turkic speakers. Up in the north, the Lapp Uralic speakers are, like Basques, the last remains of the Neolithic farmers. The Sardinians also an ancient remaining group of these people, but their language has been surmounted recently by a Latinate tongue.
As it turns out, the Basques and Caucasians also share a number of cultural similarities. There are also some similar placenames. And there is some good genetic evidence connecting the Basques with the Caucasian speakers.
It’s all there, but the conservatives are balking, to put it mildly, about linking Basque with the Caucasian languages.
I have long believed in this theory.
I read a book over 20 years ago comparing Basque to the Caucasian languages and a few other distant tongues and thought the case was proved even via overkill by the book. And recent work is so super that one wonders why the conservatives are still winning. I feel that the link between Basque and the Caucasus languages is now proven to an obvious and detailed degree.