Erickson Project

[Guest]

Wow. Those subtle differences add up to a LOT. This latest Silver Fox post is much closer to my prediction for the whole thing than the hyper-bowl and propaganda we've seen in this thread from the very beginning.

The whole thing will amount to just barely enough BS for this board and the BF community to argue about here and there throughout the next couple of years. Nothing groundbreaking, no lids blown off of anything.

And I think I know why: Bigfoot ain't a living breathing creature.

From post 880 in this very thread:

Wise words. I've already sprained my shoulder patting myself on the back.

You had to, no one else was going to (unless you went "over there", and you could probably find someone).

You haven't even seen the results, and already you are trying to diminish, demean, and dismiss the results...is it any wonder why Skeptics get accused of being uninterested in honest debate and/or unreasoning bias?

You're People's Exhibit #1 (of many) in that case.

[BobbyO]

Wow. Those subtle differences add up to a LOT. This latest Silver Fox post is much closer to my prediction for the whole thing than the hyper-bowl and propaganda we've seen in this thread from the very beginning.

The whole thing will amount to just barely enough BS for this board and the BF community to argue about here and there throughout the next couple of years. Nothing groundbreaking, no lids blown off of anything.

And I think I know why: Bigfoot ain't a living breathing creature.

From post 880 in this very thread:

Wise words. I've already sprained my shoulder patting myself on the back.

[Guest Silver Fox]

Update on peer review process. They are very close to completion, but there is no exact time on when it will be done. Author is confident it will be worth the wait as the data is very complete.

[Guest Silver Fox]

With no disrespect intended Silver Fox, I just wanted to make sure that everyone here knows that not all that you read on this forum is correct, including the information above. You can all speculate as you wish but until the official press release from the Erickson Project please don't assume that what you have "heard" from the rumor mill is fact.

This info is not correct, eh? All of it or some of it? What about the info above that I got from you? Is that also not correct?

[BobbyO]

Update on peer review process. They are very close to completion, but there is no exact time on when it will be done. Author is confident it will be worth the wait as the data is very complete.

Good stuff, thank you.

[Guest]

Update on peer review process. They are very close to completion, but there is no exact time on when it will be done. Author is confident it will be worth the wait as the data is very complete.

If it is "Homo sapiens", they will have a very hard time getting it published, IMO.

Sasky, are you a member of Erickson's team or Ketchum's team?

[BobbyO]

If it is "Homo sapiens", they will have a very hard time getting it published, IMO.

I agree, completely.

[Guest Silver Fox]

Those look like normal sized skulls to me. Nothing suggests giant at all.

And you said that you heard from Melba K who said Richard Stubstad has it all wrong. So why does he write so 'knowledgably'. And if he were 'in the loop' at one time or another and he hasn't got it all wrong....what he up to by pre-empting any anouncement?

either a) he's full of bs or they fell out over something, he knows all and he'll do anything to spoil the anouncement party

my moneymakers on a)

The bone is in the pdf after you click, click here. Not on the page with the skulls.

Stubstad has cleared this up in some statements on the web recently in response to my piece about him.

1. He is not leaking any private info about the Erickson Project. I misunderstood.

2. He was only involved in the project at the early stages. He did work with a couple of samples from back East. What Stubstad says is surely accurate as far as an early snapshot of the project. Now, the question is were those samples useful for Ketchum in her final analysis? Maybe yes, maybe no. We just don't know.

3. I don't agree with (a). He is reporting what he knew at the very early stages. Apparently that snapshot is quite a bit different from the later and final stages of the project, for which he was completely out of the loop.

4. Richard says that after the initial phase of the project, he and a number of others were run out of the project by Ketchum on the advise of her attorney. He and others paid for more samples and more DNA work from Ketchum, for which they never received any product for their money. He says, "She smelled blood." I guess he is implying she wants to make $ off the DNA somehow.

He says that Ketchum wants to make this a "one woman show." As you can see, Stubstad and apparently others did have some falling out with Ketchum as they were run out of the project for whatever reason. Now, there may be other reasons they were run out. Perhaps they would not sign an NDA? Who knows. I am not spilling dirt here, all of Stubstad's statements in (4) were recently stated on the web.

5. Stubstad feels that Ketchum will have a hard time publishing her paper as she is apparently the sole author. He says a number of others were supposed to be co-authors, but they were all run out. He says a paper should have one or more co-authors. A "one woman show" will have a hard time making it through peer review.

6. Stubstad decries all of the infighting in Bigfootery.

7. Is he trying to spoil their announcement party? Dubious, but I get the impression he would not mind a bit of fame himself. When you get to players this big, they do have to have large egos.

[bipedalist]

4. Richard says that after the initial phase of the project, he and a number of others were run out of the project by Ketchum on the advise of her attorney. He and others paid for more samples and more DNA work from Ketchum, for which they never received any product for their money. He says, "She smelled blood." I guess he is implying she wants to make $ off the DNA somehow.

If above is the case, and I'm not sure it is, this might be a business decision to "simplify" things; call it "she smelled blood" but it's the American way.

5. Stubstad feels that Ketchum will have a hard time publishing her paper as she is apparently the sole author. He says a number of others were supposed to be co-authors, but they were all run out. He says a paper should have one or more co-authors. A "one woman show" will have a hard time making it through peer review.

I will say, if this is true, and I emphasize if true, I would be not only surprised but disappointed and not as hopeful in my appraisal of the potential for this project but not for reasons that it is simply a scientific paper by one author. If the paper was properly constructed by that sole author there should be no problem on it's face though; so it may not be fatal.

Yes, I'm thinking I will temper my opinions based on "in-fighting" arguments and personalities I don't know though.....so this is seemingly more like "gossip" and what is being decried is in fact being sustained, jmho and all that.

[Guest tracker]

My bad. Apologies.

Hey no worries i don't take this forum stuff serious. Some people get bent, this is just talk after all.

JMO tracker

[Guest]

The bone is in the pdf after you click, click here. Not on the page with the skulls.

Stubstad has cleared this up in some statements on the web recently in response to my piece about him.

1. He is not leaking any private info about the Erickson Project. I misunderstood.

2. He was only involved in the project at the early stages. He did work with a couple of samples from back East. What Stubstad says is surely accurate as far as an early snapshot of the project. Now, the question is were those samples useful for Ketchum in her final analysis? Maybe yes, maybe no. We just don't know.

3. I don't agree with (a). He is reporting what he knew at the very early stages. Apparently that snapshot is quite a bit different from the later and final stages of the project, for which he was completely out of the loop.

4. Richard says that after the initial phase of the project, he and a number of others were run out of the project by Ketchum on the advise of her attorney. He and others paid for more samples and more DNA work from Ketchum, for which they never received any product for their money. He says, "She smelled blood." I guess he is implying she wants to make $ off the DNA somehow.

He says that Ketchum wants to make this a "one woman show." As you can see, Stubstad and apparently others did have some falling out with Ketchum as they were run out of the project for whatever reason. Now, there may be other reasons they were run out. Perhaps they would not sign an NDA? Who knows. I am not spilling dirt here, all of Stubstad's statements in (4) were recently stated on the web.

5. Stubstad feels that Ketchum will have a hard time publishing her paper as she is apparently the sole author. He says a number of others were supposed to be co-authors, but they were all run out. He says a paper should have one or more co-authors. A "one woman show" will have a hard time making it through peer review.

6. Stubstad decries all of the infighting in Bigfootery.

7. Is he trying to spoil their announcement party? Dubious, but I get the impression he would not mind a bit of fame himself. When you get to players this big, they do have to have large egos.

That makes some sense, i'll admit (standard caveat notwithstanding: If true). Thanks SF

Edited June 14, 2011 by megatarsal

[Guest]

This info is not correct, eh? All of it or some of it? What about the info above that I got from you? Is that also not correct?

You got very little information from me Silver Fox and my warning above specifically said not to believe ALL that you read on this forum which is different than saying that ALL of your information is incorrect. I am surprised, as a journalist, that you haven't checked your sources for credibility before you post.

[Guest]

If it is "Homo sapiens", they will have a very hard time getting it published, IMO.

Sasky, are you a member of Erickson's team or Ketchum's team?

Erickson's team.

[Guest Silver Fox]

You got very little information from me Silver Fox and my warning above specifically said not to believe ALL that you read on this forum which is different than saying that ALL of your information is incorrect. I am surprised, as a journalist, that you haven't checked your sources for credibility before you post.

Don't have to. I'm not writing for a fact-checked publication here, or for money.

It's perfectly acceptable for journalists to report what they hear or what they find in the way or research via others' writings, etc. In the case of the Erickson Project, it is so locked down, that we have no alternative but to report anything we can find by way of sources or writings. Otherwise there's nothing to write.

And I do try to check them for credibility as best I can.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Silver Fox

[Guest]

Silver Fox, FYI, the Olympic Project has donated a lot more than just saliva. A hell of a lot more.