Bigfoot DNA

[MikeG]

Mike will say you are speculating.

Mike will speak for himself, thanks.

Mike

 

[Sonny2]

ftfy

LOL, thanks, GT/CS, you're right.

And Castro, so are you.

 

[GT/CS]

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.

Are the complaints submitted against her lab also a conspiracy by the BBB?

 

[William Parcher]

It would be nice to see a reputable journalist actually put some research into the story and uncover some facts for us.

Of course the Bigfooters must be allowed their say on whether this reputable journalist you propose is actually reputable, right?

 

[RedRatSnake]

It would be nice to see a reputable journalist actually put some research into the story and uncover some facts for us.

I don't think we need a journalist to uncover any facts for us, I am reasonably sure we already have a good chunk of them. The details of that are in the many threads we have running here about BF and the ongoing Hoax.

 

[Jodie]

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.



"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.

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.

Mulder might be able to help you out with some further references to support your argument. He is a member here and at the BFF.

I've never found journalists to be the most reliable source, even the reputable ones. I would however like to see peer review of her work by real geneticist instead of the ones alluded to but never named.

 

[Drewbot]

Reputable journalist's take:
http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2012/11/like-omg-scientists-have-sequenced-bigfoot-dna/

 

[LTC8K6]

So this is an even bigger joke than previously discussed?

Wow.

 

[jerrywayne]

I was not willing to write off Ketchum early on. However, I needed catching up. Now the good Dr. is endorsing John Edwards, the charlatan channeler of dead folks. We now know that Ketchum is beyond repair. Some hardy skeptics knew better all along.

So sorry for the folks at BFF. This is a trainwreck.

Eating crow? No thanks. Try it yourself.

 

[River]

I was not willing to write off Ketchum early on. However, I needed catching up. Now the good Dr. is endorsing John Edwards, the charlatan channeler of dead folks. We now know that Ketchum is beyond repair. Some hardy skeptics knew better all along.

So sorry for the folks at BFF. This is a trainwreck.

Eating crow? No thanks. Try it yourself.

Wellllll, it's bigfoot. You're pretty safe writing off any type of authenticity claims just based on that alone. Once you look deeper, the other signs of doom will appear

I doubt it will have any major impact on the footers. If it does, I wonder if any would be willing to reconsider other claims. (such as the PGF, and the other old school things) Even Krantz made such statements as this concerning claims of bigfoot evidence.

"The skeptics are under no obligation to disprove all or, for that matter any of the evidence. The burden of proof rests with those who think that the animals are real. The skeptics are not obligated even to look at the evidence....Science requires solid evidence for the existence of a new species...A "type specimen" must be obtained, which is then described in a scientific journal and continues to be available for other experts to examine."
Grover Krantz: "Bigfoot/Sasquatch evidence"(1992) p. 3 & 7

Baseless claims will never make it. So far, that's all there is. Time for the show n tell to happen soon. (will the "paper/results" ever see light?!) Should be funny

 

[Jodie]

You know, I feel sorry for them too because I hate to see people's hopes taken advantage of, and I can't see how this can play out any other way.

 

[mikeyx]

I was not willing to write off Ketchum early on.

I was

 

[Sonny2]

Like any cult, the Footers will come up with all kinds of ways to stay in denial. Usually these involve wild conspiracy theories because nothing less will work.

I think the real trainwreck is Ketchum's reputation and DNA business. Everyone else will recover.

 

[Drewbot]

Melba Ketchum appears live on a Houston news program.
http://www.click2houston.com/news/D...n-DNA/-/1735978/17568802/-/5pkab/-/index.html

Tell me if this is as messed up as I think it is.

 

[mikeyx]

Like any cult, the Footers will come up with all kinds of ways to stay in denial. Usually these involve wild conspiracy theories because nothing less will work.

I think the real trainwreck is Ketchum's reputation and DNA business. Everyone else will recover.

high priest meldrum has already positioned himself thusly. some of the other preist of the cobf are saying wait and see, for the inevitable flush you mean?

 

[The Shrike]

You know, I feel sorry for them too because I hate to see people's hopes taken advantage of, and I can't see how this can play out any other way.

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.

 

[RedRatSnake]

I think the real trainwreck is Ketchum's reputation and DNA business. Everyone else will recover.

Don't forget the Bigfoot Steaks/ Sierra kill story, I think that needs to thrown in the mix here, That's what got most of the BS started.

 

[River]

Straight from the cats mouth. Ketchum in a short interview.

 

[calwaterbear]

welcome to the forum superfly. You have some valid points here. I agree the journalist did not do his job properly. But since you are new here, I assume you may need a bit of "catching up" so allow me to correct the sloppyness/ laziness of the reporter.
First you wrote

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..

absolutely right - a red herring, so instead he should have stuck with the cold hard facts, instead of relying on a propaganda organization. So just to set the record straight, what the reporter should have focussed on are these facts:
1. Melba and DNA diagnostics has been sued multiple times by paying customers, for various reasons, minor things like, taking payment and never delivering results, delivering so called results that were impossible, etc.

2. At least one professional breeding organization have blacklisted DNA Dio / Ketchum and recomended to their members that they do not use DNA diagnostics.

3. DNA diagnostics in not in the bulding they list as their business address. the building is empty., backtracking, melba defaulted on a loan and gave the property back to the original owner. there phone number is also disconnected. And customers cannot seem to contact the organization.


next, you write:

"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.

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..

So maybe a time line review would help here. Ms. Ketchum claimed at least one and a half years ago, that her paper had been peer reviewed by a scientific journal, which she repeatedly refused to name, and that the paper had been returned for minor edits. When a paer is returned for "minor edits" it has essentially been accepted for publication, and just needs a final tweeking. This final edits normally takes 2 or 3 days tops. after which you send it back to the editor, and typically get an official acceptance, and an expected publication date. while depending on the journal, that publication date may be 4 months to 1 year away, once it is accepted, you arer allowed to cite that paper. 6 months later, and again several other times she has resurected the minor edits story, each time stretching her credibility more and more as promised publication dates slipped by repeatedly with no paper, or no explanation, just more minor edits promises.

and now this story breaks with exactly the same promises, but the added information that in fact the paper had not been returned for minor edits, but had instead been rejected outright. Mr. Superfly, that makes Melba a published liar! As for Peer review in a valid scientific journal, there will be none. When you start claiming DNA from Angels, that moves your paper beyond the relm of science (other that science coming up with valid rational explanations of her supposed results)

.
You can come in here on your assigned mission to protect the reputation of the Godess of BF DNA, I get that, but at least come here with some valid information, and a modicum of facts and historical background. sometimes, the willingly uninformed end up shooting themselves in the butt, much to the amusement of the evil skeptics!

 

[jerrywayne]

I was

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.