Here is an excerpt from his blog posted on his blog, Beyond Highbrow.
"Dr. Bryan Sykes study may well prove that Bigfoots exist. From multiple sources, I have now received the news that not only will the Sykes DNA study publish soon, it will also prove that Bigfoots exist. None of the sources would tell me this in so many words, but they certainly implied that the findings would be positive. So I am looking forward to publication of the study. On the other hand, it is possible though not likely that the sources are all wrong and the study could be negative."
What it will find is , if it is negative as in Bigfoot was not proven to exist using the samples studied, he will likely report that it has not yet been proven to exist and by the same token it has not proven Sasquatch does not exist. This will leave us scratching our heads and wondering what the point of this truly was. Will the results point out that non-scientists do not know how to critically find real evidence? Will it point out that through hope and faith that reported evidence usually mistaken?
If there are positive results as in Sasquatch possibly existing, the only thing this study can prove is there is DNA of an unidentified species of primate that so closely resembles human there will be no way to tell that human contamination did not take place.
Either way I hope that nobody is disappointed by the resulting report on the data. If it proves the existence of an unidentified primate or unidentified human hybrid then the burden still falls on the Bigfoot community as a whole to prove they exist. Otherwise it is just data of something existing.
I do not proclaim to be a scientist or cryptozoologist like many. I just hope to bring a little common sense into the mix that will highlight some basic information needed to critically view what we're seeing in the bigfoot/sasquatch community.