It takes just a moment to join our fantastic communityRegister
So we all know there is not a body yet. how much more proof do you need without a body that we all know has not been presented scientifically yet.So you stayed up all night to bring us a paper that is:
- Unpublished (academically speaking)
- Peer review rejected (although there is no rejection letter, just an appeal letter from the author)
- Where the appeal moans that another new species of monkey was accepted with less DNA evidence, but have provided living examples
- Where the website hasn't been updated since 2015
- Seems to suggest somebody mated with a satsquatch to produce these human hybrid DNA samples... are you not telling us something Shane?
So if I had 177 people sign an affidavit legally that would not be acceptable?Shane, go out and find one, shoot it if you must and then you will have scientifically acceptable proof. Until then you don't have enough evidence to meet either scientific or the legal standard of proof. Video alone doesn't prove ****.
Their are people that claim to have seen Elvis alive since his drug OD too!
A peer accepted journal paper would be a start. You've presented the ramblings of one guySo we all know there is not a body yet. how much more proof do you need without a body that we all know has not been presented scientifically yet.
I literally gave you DNA proof which has not been excepted as you state because theres no body.
How can I present any more proof without a body? And in which case I would no longer need to provide proof as it would be a knowen species if there was a body presented for scientific examination.
So I provide some proof of DNA and just like I thought. You're trying to find any way possible to not accept the evidence. I told you, you would do this.A peer accepted journal paper would be a start. You've presented the ramblings of one guy
I could construct what's in that website for a flying teapot in orbit of the sun (paper, fake peer review notes, pictures of "evidence" of the teapot....
Have you heard of Russell's teapot?
Edit: lots of proof has been found of astronomical objects without physically seeing it. It's just the evidence is actual evidence, reviewed by recognised experts. What exacg evidence have you given, did you read the DNA paper?