Bigfoot DNA

[DennyT]

She speaks.

 

[Sonny2]

I tried to watch that, but it was too painful.

 

[RedRatSnake]

Exactly the same as we have read in so many articles, She even had some footer emotion going on, It's up to the real science folks to jump in now cause this just makes it all look like something from Sesame Street.

 

[Jodie]

I can tell that the reporter is trying not to laugh by the look in his eyes.

 

[mikeyx]

When I first heard that there was a concerted effort to analyse the DNA of purported Bigfoot samples, I thought to keep an open mind. I know I don't know everything.

When it was revealed that the study was being conducted by a private practice veterinarian, I thought: "Well, I would have a lot more confidence if a university or prominent institution were involved." But still, maybe it will take an outsider to open this thing up.

I then heard the veterinarian was brought into this by a professional Bigfooter. Then I thought: "Uh oh!"

I read this professional Bigfooter's book where he tries to make the case that Bigfoot is human, or human hybrid. "Ok," I thought, "he is taking us back to where it began, with Burns and the "sasquatch people." Interesting take on it, against the grain of the Green-Krantz-Meldrum-Coleman "apes among us-true story of apes in America" storyline.

Then it appeared that the veterinarian was coincidentally validating the professional Bigfooter's human Bigfoot idea with her DNA study. "So a cop got the biology right?," I questioned in my mind.

Then, the veterinarian became the Bigfooter's wet dream. A toe-nail from Arizona, hair from Oklahoma bush country, hair backed by video in Kentucky, hair from a Bigfoot killed by a hunter in California, hair supplied by the cop professional Bigfooter, hair sent in from another professional Bigfooter in Oregon, the same pro who previously validated a elk lay as a sign that a Bigfoot laid its big ass down in mud, hair sent in from a guy in B.C. who previously photographed a stupid excuse for a Bigfoot, etc., were all apparently being validated by DNA analysis of this veterinarian in Texas. "Hmmm?," I thought to myself.

Then this veterinarian began telling folks she was seeing Bigfoot her own self, and more than one at a time. "Holy Shut the Front Door!" Then she said something favorable about Texas seceding from the Union. "Gulp!" Then, we find her publicists are habituating with Bigfoot families! "What in the Sam Hill?" Then, she says she likes slick spirit-medium John Edwards. "Good golly, Miss Molly!"

Maybe it's true: the Lord works in mysterious ways. I wouldn't put any money on it, though.

You forgot two:

1) Bigfoot are fallen angels the Nifflehimers (Deliberate misspelling so shut up)
2) The insinuation on FB a while back she may have be raped by BF.

I'm sticking with she was a plant early on to discredit the whole thing and make it as loony as possible. So far a job well done.

 

[catsmate]

You might google "BBB scam" for some additional research about the practices of the BBB. Most small businesses aren't members for a reason, and their ratings do suffer for it. The whole "F" rating by the BBB thing is a red herring.

No. A little basic research would show you why her company has a terrible reputation; dozens of complaints, including not performing tests paid for and delivering garbage results.
A quick email to some dog people in the US generated a number of accounts of problems with them.
Her behaviour regarding International Genetics and the patent lawsuits also doesn't reassure me.

"Not allowed" peer review? I wonder where the "journalist" came up with this claim? If the "journalist" bothered to read the press release or contact Dr. Ketchum I think they might see this as an over reaching statement.

And what supports the claims regarding peer review in her self-serving press statement? Given her record of prior claims nothing she says can be accepted unsupported.

All that being noted, until said paper is published we really don't have much to go on, and it does seem that journalists are getting lazy with their coverage of the "echo effect" about this story. It would be nice to see a reputable journalist actually put some research into the story and uncover some facts for us.

The same could be said for the bigfoot hunters/believers.

 

[fuelair]

gasoline-----fire

http://doubtfulnews.com/2012/11/melba-ketchum-announces-bigfoot-dna-results-without-the-data/

 

[mikeyx]

And some of footery's talking heads want to wait and see? Why when you can already hear the flush?

 

[calwaterbear]

She speaks.

Awsome. When questioned about what she would tell her critics? Melba says "they need to look at the data".

absolutely priceless!

 

[Jodie]

How many threads - or just thread derails - at the BFF 2.0 have concerned the reasons skeptics participate there? This is why I participate there. I have information and experience that I can share that can potentially keep people from falling victim to claims like Ketchum's. At best such claims can fill people with false hopes. At worst they can encourage people to subscribe to conspiracy theories and distrust of science that extends beyond healthy skepticism and can lead to antisocial behavior patterns and real risk to life, limb, or pocketbook.

I think that's admirable but I don't think they listen to you, and the others, Sas. I think it is much too late for reason. Just my experience in the last year but this goes way deeper than just understanding the truth of the matter.

I can't tell you how many Ketchum participants told me they had positive results over the past months despite their NDA's. And the supposed back story for why the samples got selected was cringe worthy in most cases.

Based on that and many other reasons, I have felt, and still feel, that this is a campaign to take advantage of a form of pathology for profit. I'm sure there are varying degrees of belief but those that are convinced that they have bigfoot on their property because of her DNA test results are absolutely the least reasonable and the ones most resistant. They also happen to be the steam that keeps the myth alive.

Whether she is proven to either be a fraud or have drawn erronous conclusions from her data, it isn't going to affect these people's opinion who participated in her study. They won't consider any other alternative for their reality.

The claims she is making are just rife with taboo topics, based on what she says, and they don't make biological sense speaking from my midwifery perspective, much less the genetics involved. It's simply a sick joke and no matter the outcome, I think it's done irreparable damage to the bigfoot community.

 

[Castro]

Matt Moneymaker on twitter:

Matt Moneymaker @MattMoneymaker1

@FatherBruceW When hoaxers and charlatans succeed it getting
news media attention, they can use the attn to swindle people
who want to help.


Matt Moneymaker @MattMoneymaker1

@JordonFlato Jordan, you dont understand. The results will never
be out. She has kept this situation pregnant for five years bcs
it's bogus!

I guess he knows what he's talking about.

 

[RedRatSnake]

The man has no Life Morals or Shame, everyone of those Tweets is an inflamed straight out lie, total BS & double talk.

You take a mortal man,
And put him in control
Watch him become a god,
Watch peoples heads a'roll
A'roll...

Just like the Pied Piper
Led rats through the streets
We dance like marionettes,
Swaying to the Symphony...
Of Destruction

Long Live The Gullible Footer​

 

[MikeG]

........But - surprise surprise - the person making the claim won't release evidence for independent review.........

You didn't notice that she stated that it is currently undergoing peer review?

Mike

 

[Trish Randall]

Quote from the article:
"So where's the evidence? Well, there is none. Not yet, anyway: Ketchum's research has not appeared in any peer-reviewed scientific journal, and there's no indication when that might happen. If the data are good and the science is sound, any reputable science journal would jump at the chance to be the first to publish this groundbreaking information. Until then, Ketchum has refused to let anyone else see her evidence."

 

[MikeG]

Trish, don't rely on second hand articles. Ketchum has stated officially that the paper is currently in peer review. Clearly, until it has been peer reviewed and published, of course no-one else will be allowed to see it. I think that is standard for any paper in peer review.

It may be rubbish. It may get trashed in peer review. It may be a hoax. But if the author says it is in peer review, then they probably know a little bit more about it than Yahoo. (I wonder if Yahoo know that their name is one of the traditional names for BF? )

Mike

 

[Trish Randall]

Mike, I thought your reply to the post I put up with the link to the bigfoot article was referring to a reference to peer review within the article I posted the link to. Where's the link to your source of information about the currently-underway peer review? Although I posted to this particular link, I did run the bigfoot DNA claim thru a search engine & didn't see anything about this claim being subjected to peer review.

I got my info about the climates primates live in from the National Geographic site.

According to this maphttp://www.blueplanetbiomes.org/climate.htm, Botswana is not temperate.

 

[WildBackdunesMan]

Trish, don't rely on second hand articles. Ketchum has stated officially that the paper is currently in peer review. Clearly, until it has been peer reviewed and published, of course no-one else will be allowed to see it. I think that is standard for any paper in peer review.

It may be rubbish. It may get trashed in peer review. It may be a hoax. But if the author says it is in peer review, then they probably know a little bit more about it than Yahoo. (I wonder if Yahoo know that their name is one of the traditional names for BF? )

Mike

The news article reports that she said it is being peer reviewed, but then clarifies that the review is not an independent peer review. My guess, she is having another bigfoot enthusiast review the DNA and not a major university or etc.

The news article also points out that she has refused to say how she got the DNA and has chosen to make this a secretive process.

Supposedly, she believes that she was raped by bigfoot and then she changed the story to that she was "mind raped" by bigfoot. She went to her pasture went unconscious, lost time, and awoke with a sore vaginal area, but still fully clothed. Her new spokesperson also claims that around 10 bigfoots live around her house and that she feeds them tasty treats on a daily basis, but doesn't have the evidence to prove their existence. I am a bit worried for her safety.

 

[MikeG]

.........According to this maphttp://www.blueplanetbiomes.org/climate.htm, Botswana is not temperate.....

No, but neither is it tropical. Nor is South Africa or Gibraltar. Nor are the Ethiopian highlands in terms of climate. You said that all large primates (bar the macaques in Japan) were tropical, and they just aren't.

I'd also remind you that you are a primate, and so am I. Humans are found all over the globe, as you know, further negating your "tropics only" assertion.

Mike

 

[MikeG]

Jeez, WBDM, careful with your links! I don't want to find myself on Robert Lindsey's site without having prepared myself mentally..........He is nauseating.

Mike

 

[foxholeatheist]

I think another intriguing question would be what does Bigfoot DNA look like? Back when I was one of the token skeptics on BFF tons of folks were pretty sure that Bigfoot was protohuman which if that is the assumption Ketchum is operating under than I am fearful of a long drawn out debate over DNA contamination. Most DNA testing is done via sample amplification and thus any contamination from a human source, anything, stray hair, skin flake, atomized saliva droplet in the sample may return a human or humanish result.

Kooks with 'hair' abound and when the hair is DNA tested the some of the results come back as 'inconclusive' when it doesn't come back as boar or bear or bison or some other known animal. The Footers jump all over that not realizing that an inconclusive test may indicate there is no biological material at all, eg, fake hair.

Many Footers theorize that Bigfoot is a species of Gigantopithecus whose closest living relative is the Orangutan. If so, the DNA would resemble Orangutan DNA which if I am not mistaken, has been sequenced along with the rest of the great apes.

The current story that I read today states that the preliminary results are showing that the sample is 'part human'. My sample contamination alarm klaxons are in overdrive. Hybridization between two species usually results in sterile offspring unless there is very little genetic drift which is inconsistent with a population of animals in every state (including Hawaii!!). The sources I have read state that the hybridization occurred 15,000 years ago further making it more implausible.

Unfortunately, good science is being drowned out by the chorus of tabloid headlines and general silliness.