Bigfoot DNA

[jerrywayne]

Link to Ketchum: http://dnadiagnostics.com/about.html

 

[StankApe]

and she has human DNA with a variance...wow, no wonder no journal would publish her meaningless data. Meldrum has offered to review it. Wonder why she has refused?

 

[jhunter1163]

I'm totally going to get skewed for asking this, but what if? What if the DNA thing comes out as "whatever"? Will it change anyones mind on the JREF?

BTW - I feel it would not really matter, need a type specimen, as I have stated for years.

If the DNA came back (assuming this kind of precision is possible) as "unknown great ape", I think a lot of skeptics would re-assess their positions. I know I would. But like you said, we'd still want a body.

 

[Muldur]

I'm totally going to get skewed for asking this, but what if? What if the DNA thing comes out as "whatever"? Will it change anyones mind on the JREF?

BTW - I feel it would not really matter, need a type specimen, as I have stated for years.

I am 100% confident there is no BF. They can fly balloons and do DNA tests for as long as they like, it won't change a thing.

Would either of you care to answer the question of exactly where DNA from an undocumented primate/hominid would come from OTHER than an undocumented primate/hominid?

 

[jhunter1163]

NOte to Mods - (not sure if this is the proper way to do this) - can we unmoderate this thread? The news is spilling into other threads as people want to discuss it in a more timely manner, lots going on.

Please confine your comments to this thread. I'll do my best to keep things moving along, as I am interested in this topic myself.

 

[StankApe]

I think if it comes back on Sykes' study as "unknown hominid or ape or wtvr" THEN we skeptics would consider it. Being that Ketchum's paper won't be published in anything but a rag makes anything she claims subject to ridicule.

I honestly can't wait to see Calwaterbear's response when he gets a chance to look it over.

 

[StankApe]

from a person Muldur.

She's obviously pushing modern human DNA as somehow "proof" of Bigfoot (or else it would have been published by now as we both know any legit journal would have been all over it IF the data was verifiable and true) But apparently her data is none of these things.

So ,as predicted, it's going to end up in a rag journal where hardcore footers will ignore the lack of peer review (claiming the global science conspiracy ) and make the grandiose claims that it's all true.

Meanwhile,Meldrum will come out against it ,pointing out that it's nonsense science. I'm hoping this causes a great rift in the footer world as I must admit that it amuses me!

 

[William Parcher]

Would either of you care to answer the question of exactly where DNA from an undocumented primate/hominid would come from OTHER than an undocumented primate/hominid?

DNA that didn't come from a body would be something like supernatural. It then becomes more likely that the DNA was planted by a God or Extraterrestrials.

Maybe you should try to answer where Bigfoot DNA comes from when it doesn't come from an actual creature.

 

[RedRatSnake]

Would either of you care to answer the question of exactly where DNA from an undocumented primate/hominid would come from OTHER than an undocumented primate/hominid?

If you are talking about Ketchum's finding, all I can give you for an answer is a Laugh.

Edited by jhunter1163: 

Edited for civility.

 

[MikeG]

Interestingly, this story from Ketchum exactly lines up with the entirety of the leaks from Richard Stubstad. mDNA modern human, NuDNA non-human hominid. But much more interestingly, Ketchum says the paper is still in peer review, so, yet more waiting........

Mike

 

[Muldur]

I think if it comes back on Sykes' study as "unknown hominid or ape or wtvr" THEN we skeptics would consider it. Being that Ketchum's paper won't be published in anything but a rag makes anything she claims subject to ridicule.

I honestly can't wait to see Calwaterbear's response when he gets a chance to look it over.

Science currently has a genetics study under blackout for next week. Would you dismiss it Science as a "rag", if it turns out to be the Ketchum paper?

 

[DennyT]

what if? what if the astronauts came back from the moon with green cheese? what if the Pope came out for our high school football team? what if...

"What if something that is not true, were suddenly proven to be true, then would you believe it were true?"
The answer is trivial.... yes. But that is not where we are.
So what is the point of that question? That Melba Ketchum can post a statement on facebook and the world stands on its head?

Edited by jhunter1163: 

Edited for civility.

the skeptics are not the issue. The issue is, THERE IS NO PROOF. There is no body, no fossils, no hides, no skulls, no bones, there is no DNA, there is no photograph.

the only reasonable conclusion: There is no bigfoot.

Don't be blaming that on the "skeptics." It's not the JREF. The world is all skeptics. That's based on the evidence. Blame it on the absence of bigfoot.

If you want to blame someone, blame a lot of your bleevers who claim to know where they are, but keep it a secret. Go talk to them. Either they are telling the truth or they aren't. If they are, get pictures. If they aren't telling the truth, well, congratulations, you are on the path to realizing you've been had by a bunch of sillies and con men.

 

[Jodie]

Would either of you care to answer the question of exactly where DNA from an undocumented primate/hominid would come from OTHER than an undocumented primate/hominid?

Let me answer the question, based on what very little we know about Dr. Ketchum's work, Stubstad alluded to looking at SNP's on the genome. If you care to do a little reading you would realize that every single living organism on earth has unique mutations along the SNP's and this is not a method used for identifying a species. If this in fact what she did, then her conclusions are erroneous. Do you know what methods she used to be able to defend her work? If so we would be happy to have you enlighten us.

 

[Muldur]

DNA that didn't come from a body would be something like supernatural. It then becomes more likely that the DNA was planted by a God or Extraterrestrials.

Maybe you should try to answer where Bigfoot DNA comes from when it doesn't come from an actual creature.

Obviously Bigfoot DNA would come from a Bigfoot. DNA comes from tissue/cell samples (blood, hairs, etc). Blood, hairs, etc come from an acutal creature. Therefore DNA comes from an actual creature.

Simple, straightforward logic.

If the dna does not come from any documented primate, then it is prima facie evidence of an UNdocumented (to that point) primate.

 

[clayflingythingy]

The press release jerrywayne linked to calls for government to recogonize BF as an indigenous people.

I smell another attempt to somehow use this as a way to fleece $ from bleevers by starting a BF protection society or other such nonsense.

I'm still skeptical that any DNA testing was even done, much less a paper written. The press release smells to the heavens.

 

[Muldur]

If you are talking about Ketchum's finding, all I can give you for an answer is a Laugh.

Edited by jhunter1163: 

Edited for civility.

Translation: You won't answer because you can't answer.

Undocumented primate DNA comes from an undocumented primate. It cannot come from anything else.

 

[Jodie]

Interestingly, this story from Ketchum exactly lines up with the entirety of the leaks from Richard Stubstad. mDNA modern human, NuDNA non-human hominid. But much more interestingly, Ketchum says the paper is still in peer review, so, yet more waiting........

Mike

And so what did all of the NDA's mean if she absolutely could not discuss her findings before publishing in a peer reviewed journal? According to Igor her paper was rejected numerous times, this is a last ditch effort IMO. I see as a way to generate income from the Russian front be that through Russian television specials, tourism, etc....

 

[jerrywayne]

Obviously Bigfoot DNA would come from a Bigfoot. DNA comes from tissue/cell samples (blood, hairs, etc). Blood, hairs, etc come from an acutal creature. Therefore DNA comes from an actual creature.

Simple, straightforward logic.

If the dna does not come from any documented primate, then it is prima facie evidence of an UNdocumented (to that point) primate.

Do you see a hint of an extraterrestrial father for Bigfoot in the press release? Or is it just my imagination?

 

[Jodie]

Obviously Bigfoot DNA would come from a Bigfoot. DNA comes from tissue/cell samples (blood, hairs, etc). Blood, hairs, etc come from an acutal creature. Therefore DNA comes from an actual creature.

Simple, straightforward logic.

If the dna does not come from any documented primate, then it is prima facie evidence of an UNdocumented (to that point) primate.

Explain to me how that is done in detail Mulder, what are they specifically looking at? Do you know?

 

[Jodie]

Translation: You won't answer because you can't answer.

Undocumented primate DNA comes from an undocumented primate. It cannot come from anything else.

Once again, I ask you, what are geneticists looking at to determine whether something belongs in the primate family? Do you know?