Bigfoot DNA

Status
Not open for further replies.
Agreed, and I don't understand CWB's rant.

The "Ketchum" thread started in July 2011. I started posting in that thread in late July, long about page 6, and parnassus beat me by at least a few pages. He predicted that Ketchum had sequenced human DNA and would try to convince people that it was really bigfoot DNA. I predicted that, if that was the case, no journal worth it's paper (or even its bandwith) would publish it.

That thread is now 717 pages, and what have we learned since July of 2011? Ketchum wrote a paper claiming human DNA is actually bigfoot DNA and no journal would publish it.

So I don't get what this "breaking story" or investigative critical inquiry is that CWB is so disappointed that we haven't done but for which the critical thinkers at the BFF are to be lauded. Some of us have been hearing this crap for more than a year and half and the end result is pretty much what was predicted from day 1: no monkey and no paper.
 
The Shrike said:
Agreed, and I don't understand CWB's rant.

The "Ketchum" thread started in July 2011. I started posting in that thread in late July, long about page 6, and parnassus beat me by at least a few pages. He predicted that Ketchum had sequenced human DNA and would try to convince people that it was really bigfoot DNA. I predicted that, if that was the case, no journal worth it's paper (or even its bandwith) would publish it.

That thread is now 717 pages, and what have we learned since July of 2011? Ketchum wrote a paper claiming human DNA is actually bigfoot DNA and no journal would publish it.

So I don't get what this "breaking story" or investigative critical inquiry is that CWB is so disappointed that we haven't done but for which the critical thinkers at the BFF are to be lauded. Some of us have been hearing this crap for more than a year and half and the end result is pretty much what was predicted from day 1: no monkey and no paper.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Technically, we've been analyzing this paper and Melba's work all along. It's pretty much like what has already been discussed.

We had coyote skin and bear steaks, and ketchup on a paper plate, etc.
 
calwaterbear said:
Look, you guys are apparently missing my point.
1. You can NEVER PROVE the NONEXISTANCE of Bigfoot.
2. what you can do is look at specific claims made by believers, particularly those intent on "proving" their existance
3. when you look at the many claims made by Melba, what you CAN PROVE, is a long series of lies. So If she is lying about all of this stuff - that makers it much more unlikely that her claims are legit.
Click to expand...
And you're missing a major point. WTF do you need with a DNA analysis when you claim the monkey is right there! One can claim all sorts of nonsense with lab work; and a scientist like yourself can poke all sort of holes in that, and the believers will still believe the lie and we're still where we were.

Again, these folks claim multiple, specific observations of this cryptid; bring the monkey to us or take us to the monkey or stfu.
 
Last edited:
William Parcher said:
A new what? A new big ape in our forests? Or do you mean something like a new subspecies of chipmunk?
Click to expand...

It could be either if she doesn't have anything left to test. Personally, I don't think anything was ever tested to begin with.
 
calwaterbear said:
3. when you look at the many claims made by Melba, what you CAN PROVE, is a long series of lies. So If she is lying about all of this stuff - that makers it much more unlikely that her claims are legit.
Click to expand...

parnassus had already started that process by about page 4 of the 717-page Ketchum thread.

That's the mistake you're making - you're assuming that by presenting facts and appealing to reason you can make inroads with these people. You can't. It's not a level playing field when you apply skepticism and critical thinking to some of these woo claims. All you can hope for is to catch some of the newbies before they go head first down the rabbit hole. Near as I can tell, anyone holding out for a great Ketchum discovery after reading the first 7 or 8 pages of that thread is no longer using their brain the way you and I understand brains work.

Case in point, the PGF. Do you know what we know about Roger Patterson? It's incredibly damning, yet even Jeff Meldrum tries to base his "scholarly" bigfoot work on Patterson's film. These people don't care about facts or reason.
 
LTC8K6 said:
There isn't even a hint of a suggestion of anything "new" out there in Melba's work as far as I have read or heard.
Click to expand...

True, but I haven't spent 30 dollars to the read the paper either. From what I hear of those that have, my money was better spent on trollbeads.
 
The Shrike said:
parnassus had already started that process by about page 4 of the 717-page Ketchum thread.

That's the mistake you're making - you're assuming that by presenting facts and appealing to reason you can make inroads with these people. You can't. It's not a level playing field when you apply skepticism and critical thinking to some of these woo claims. All you can hope for is to catch some of the newbies before they go head first down the rabbit hole. Near as I can tell, anyone holding out for a great Ketchum discovery after reading the first 7 or 8 pages of that thread is no longer using their brain the way you and I understand brains work.

Case in point, the PGF. Do you know what we know about Roger Patterson? It's incredibly damning, yet even Jeff Meldrum tries to base his "scholarly" bigfoot work on Patterson's film. These people don't care about facts or reason.
Click to expand...

^^^this, ohhhh a thousand times this

do you really think you can use reason and logic with someone like Sasfooty or the poster who's name rhymes with "bulder?" No way, they will find way to weasel this into at least"plausible" regardless of the scientific merits of the "paper"
 
Yes they will continue believing, the study results never really mattered for those claiming to be witnesses. Only those that had their own sanity questioned ever cared.
 
The Shrike said:
parnassus had already started that process by about page 4 of the 717-page Ketchum thread.
Click to expand...
As you typed that, a poster over at the other place posited that yeah, the contamination was human, well half-human, just like Ketchum (DVM) claimed. So nyah-nyah stupid critics.

And so it shall pass that future footers will find this "paper" as convincing as many current footers find the PGF. Even though it is complete and utter garbage.
 
Like I said, those that need the validation will find the validation for their belief regardless.
 
calwaterbear said:
Obviously many here would rather postulate and posture , not really interested in pursuing the truth. No problem , just does not measure up to my definition of a skeptic, but then again, obviously I am in the minority here!
Click to expand...

I don't know what you are asking for anyone to do, I know **** about DNA or anything above what I have learned about BF over the years, I can't be an instant scientist, I know the thing don't exist period... no if and's or butts, it's a fact to me, maybe not so much to others but I post from the point that BF is not real so nothing about it can be, it's a hoax from the beginning to end, everything in between is just a game to me, they play it and I like to poke holes in it and make fun of them for believing in it, they don't use science so why should I, if they have a Monkey then show it, why the need for DNA or games.

Tim :)
 
And yet another good post from over there in which the claimant quotes a "field researcher" who submitted samples for testing. Blood, saliva, and a piece of flesh. A "cored" piece of flesh.

So where's the rest of the Bigfoot?

Seriously, pieces of flesh from a whole Bigfoot and the concentration is on that, rather than where it came from and went to? You had access to a specimen and all you retrieved was a core of flesh?
 
Last edited:
That's a good question, why didn't he just cut the feet off and bring them back?
 
Jodie said:
That's a good question, why didn't he just cut the feet off and bring them back?
Click to expand...

Anything. Hands, feet, jowls, all would be groundbreaking and important. It's a bunch of crap, all of it.

Also, Ketchum (DVM) stated on her Coast to Coast interview that she has photos that showed the individuality of her subject Bigfoots.

So where are the photos? And the Bigfoot they depict? She claims she wants protection for them things, so show the world wtf you want protected. Take the world to your monkeys and you'll have the world's ear.

See, it's all just a bunch of hooey; you don't have to dig into the dna to start shovelling ****, that's for sure.
 
Jodie said:
That's a good question, why didn't he just cut the feet off and bring them back?
Click to expand...

Bigfoot's start to dissolve immediately after death, best you can do is get a hunk of meat from deep within before the enzymes spread into the main body, first to go are the head hands and feet within the first few minutes, followed by the legs and arms, that's why no one has ever been able to bring in a body or any parts, they just melt away in a matter of a few minutes.

Tim :)
 
From a BFF post claiming to have transcribed Dr. Ketchum's statements on Coast to Coast Radio with George Knapp (characterized by one party as "paranormal" radio):
She says that she found a young journal that was leaning towards next generation sequencing. She says the editor of the journal (prior to acquisition by her) sent out the paper for peer review to those who were doing next generation sequencing. She got passing reviews (with revisions) and she was then told that the journal would be published. She had no idea who the peer reviewers were. Then just before she was going live with it, she gets an email from the editor. The editor says his lawyer doesn’t want him publishing this. The lawyer even says within the email to the editor that he will “quit” him if the editor goes ahead and publishes the paper. Also he was scared so bad it would ruin his career. (not positive if she is referring to editor or lawyer). So he back out….then she made acquisitions for the journal as she didn’t want the peer reviews to be lost. She didn’t want to take what she says another two years to get published or wait another five years to go through 100 journals that would be fair.


3. The people from the journal help to make changes to the new journal and get it up and running so she could get the paper out. She says that there are still some changes that need to be done to the journal.

4. She has nothing to do with the publishing. And again she says that the previous people on the journal help her get this new journal up and running.
Click to expand...

Once again Dr. Ketchum comes up with an even more contorted "lawyer ate my homework" story of how she got her paper into Two Crappy (really non-existent other than her paper) Journals and tells it in a fringe setting that only her ardent followers give any credence to, and where she won't be asked any hard questions, or to prove anything. Evidently she has no proof of her Tale of Two Shi++ies. I assume it is an elaborate fabrication designed to obscure the truth: She self-published without a real peer review.
 
Last edited:
RedRatSnake said:
Bigfoot's start to dissolve immediately after death, best you can do is get a hunk of meat from deep within before the enzymes spread into the main body, first to go are the head hands and feet within the first few minutes, followed by the legs and arms, that's why no one has ever been able to bring in a body or any parts, they just melt away in a matter of a few minutes.

Tim :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I can't read any more of that nonsense for awhile. I feel dumber for what I have read so far. Someone else can go over there and find more stuff to shovel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom