Cause Yahoo is telling me that Sasquatch/Bigfoot is real.
'Bigfoot' DNA Sequenced In Upcoming Genetics Study - Yahoo! News
:eyebrow:
Printable View
Cause Yahoo is telling me that Sasquatch/Bigfoot is real.
'Bigfoot' DNA Sequenced In Upcoming Genetics Study - Yahoo! News
:eyebrow:
Everyday is April 1st to Yahoo.
Proof that Hobbits once roamed this earth.
It's on Wiki, so surely it cannot be disputed.
Well, small human-like creatures are likely to have existed. Calling them hobbits just makes it sound like nonsense. xD Which is what I think is going on here. Calling this new DNA they've found "Sasquatch" DNA makes them sound like complete lunatics.
This is why nobody takes science like this seriously. :colbert:
Also Fox "news"Quote:
Originally Posted by Futan
Possible species, nicknamed hobbit. Come on now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Otherwise nobody would care. Like calling the Higgs boson a "god particle." It's ridiculous and I hate it, but there's no way to get casuals to pay attention to it otherwise :mad2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Shauna
Anyway all the article says is that they just uncovered a new Hominini hybrid species. I wouldn't be surprised if it did turn out to be a sasquatch-looking creature, but I also wouldn't be surprised if all their data was complete bunk made up to get in the news or get more money, because that's the kind of world we live in now apparently. All we can do is wait for the peer review and see if everyone agrees on whether or not there is a Bigfoot out there somewhere. Hopefully there are no redneck or hillbilly rebellions based on "WE TOLD YOU SO" because a lot of that would happen just outside my city and I don't think I could handle a beef jerky embargo xD
Quote:
Originally Posted by A RealDoll EnthusiastAlso Fox "news"Quote:
Originally Posted by Futan
Possible species, nicknamed hobbit. Come on now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Anyway all the article says is that they just uncovered a new Hominini hybrid species. I wouldn't be surprised if it did turn out to be a sasquatch-looking creature, but I also wouldn't be surprised if all their data was complete bunk. All we can do is wait for the peer review and see if everyone agrees on whether or not there is a Bigfoot out there somewhere. Hopefully there are no redneck or hillbilly rebellions based on "WE TOLD YOU SO" because a lot of that would happen just outside my city and I don't think I could handle a beef jerky embargo.
Beat me to the Fox News :( Good show!
I don't know what's worse on Yahoo. The "news" itself or the people in the comments section.
Always love Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal.
Science is just something created by fundies so they have something to attack on weekends.
I'm pretty sure "science" editors (including those at Yahoo) are just trolling people at this point.
The devil and safe sex education doesn't already take up most of their time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunny
It doesn't say anywhere in that article where they've been finding DNA! Surely they aren't finding it in Texas. :colbert:
Because we all know there aren't vast areas of brush and natural forest in Texas that are uninhabited, or at least undisturbed for the most part. That's why people never find coyotes in their own backyards, or have deer occasionally strolling down main roads.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shorty
So what you're telling me is that Texas is an ideal an habitat for a bigfoot? :bigsmile:
Nutjobs around the world are rejoicing.
I think he's saying that most people from Texas are bigfoot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shorty
In that case, I can agree.