Guest Quatch water Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 So what would be the benefit for Dr. Ketchum to be involved with Biscardi or Paulides whether it was a scam or otherwise? Are you sure about everyone's relationship or is this just an assumption? How are they involved with each other exactly? I actually begged my boss to call and ask her about this and she probably would not be happy knowing I am posting this but I wanted to share. Having worked for my boss, Dr. Ketchum called her back. This is what she found out. 1. She had no idea who any of the people were when this started and the samples started coming in and she hadn't followed "Bigfoot gossip" and the test results will be valid irregardless of the submitter since the DNA speaks for itself. 2. There are a bunch of samples from a number of people. 3. She doesn't have the time to answer a lot of e-mail or phone calls so that is why the referral on Coast to Coast. It seems that they are having a lot of call volume concerning this as it is. 4. She would not give specifics but the overall project is going very well. I hope this answers some of the questions. It was a one-time thing with my boss, but at least I got this much. I really hope we find out what is out there, if anything. I find the whole DNA thing about this fascinating. I am excited about it and even if it doesn't turn out, it is fun to talk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vilnoori Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 (edited) That's awesome! Yes, I understand $200 is about standard for that type of test. Probably samples can be sent directly to her lab, vs. Paulides or whomever. I'd say take your own credit for a find if you have one, rather than sending it to some other purported researcher. I wouldn't trust Disotell, he has a closed mind on the issue. He is using DNA testing only, she is using a panel of tests including microscopic examination. He's just making money off these tests he does for people and then using it as a joke in his lectures. If I had a good sample there's no question who I would avoid. However, I might send it to someone completely different, just to keep things honest, or split the sample and send it to two different labs as a sort of control, such as Paleo-DNA Lab in Canada and Dr. Ketchum. And personally I wouldn't mention sasquatch or bigfoot at all, simply request the type of testing you want. Try to get as many types of DNA testing as possible, and a chromosome count if you are able to (need fresh, good sample of tissue like blood or skin). Hair microscopic examination is a must. Consider the lice issue as well, lice are DNA tested for species identification so if there is lice in your sample, then Bonus! Contact info: ----------------------------- Paleo-DNA Laboratory Genetic Testing Service 1294 Balmoral St. 300 Thunder Bay, ON Canada P7B 5Z5 ancientdna.com ---------------------------- Dr. Melba Ketchum DNA Diagnostics, Inc. d/b/a Shelterwood Laboratories PO Box 455 569 Bear Drive Timpson, TX 75975 Phone (936) 254-2228 Fax (936) 254-9286 http://www.dnadiagnostics.com/staff.html Edited October 11, 2010 by vilnoori Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 wow Quatch water, now that is some great follow up!!!!! thank you so much for checking this out, now I really cant wait for what ever info to come out!! thanks again!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted October 11, 2010 Share Posted October 11, 2010 "Bigfoot Gossip"....... I love it. Thanks Quatch water Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 I actually begged my boss to call and ask her about this and she probably would not be happy knowing I am posting this but I wanted to share. Having worked for my boss, Dr. Ketchum called her back. This is what she found out. 1. She had no idea who any of the people were when this started and the samples started coming in and she hadn't followed "Bigfoot gossip" and the test results will be valid irregardless of the submitter since the DNA speaks for itself. 2. There are a bunch of samples from a number of people. 3. She doesn't have the time to answer a lot of e-mail or phone calls so that is why the referral on Coast to Coast. It seems that they are having a lot of call volume concerning this as it is. 4. She would not give specifics but the overall project is going very well. I hope this answers some of the questions. It was a one-time thing with my boss, but at least I got this much. I really hope we find out what is out there, if anything. I find the whole DNA thing about this fascinating. I am excited about it and even if it doesn't turn out, it is fun to talk about. Why thank you! I figured it was a loose association, at best, and much ado about nothing. I figured she and Kitakaze had a little bit in common, she's an evolution nerd only better educated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest River Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 (edited) snip And personally I wouldn't mention sasquatch or bigfoot at all, simply request the type of testing you want. /snip Thumbs up! Best advice ever for testing suspected sasquatch evidence through any lab. Labeled: "unknown specimen" Edited October 12, 2010 by River Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 That might seem like the best thing to do River, but the truth is that the average layman trying to get a hair tested isn't going to know exactly what test to ask for beyond an ID test. If the sample is from something uncataloged the lab will be confused by the results and either ask questions where it came from, or make hasty assumptions like "contaminated sample" and or "inconclusive". Without complete confidence in the provenance of the sample and good reason to consider it could be from a new and never before catologed primate it could be dismissed and the submitter left without his official report on what it is. The quick ID test would only be the beginning of the process in placing it on the phylogenetic tree of life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vilnoori Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 (edited) The average layman these days, if they're about to spend 200 bucks on something like that, will be smart and get on the internet to do a little bit of research. They should at least know to get a microscopic hair analysis done, if they have a hair sample, combined with a mit-DNA test, not simply a species comparison test. If they have the right tissue they should also try for a look at the chromosomes, try to get a chromosome count. In this argument even if it came back "unknown species" in the m-DNA test if you got a firm 46 chromosomes you'd be somewhere, knowing your sample is human (or a species of human). If you had 48 then that would be something else! Of course you'd need a very fresh sample for this test, but it would be very very helpful. List of organisms by chromosome count: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organisms_by_chromosome_count Edited October 12, 2010 by vilnoori Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nycBig Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 why do some animals have a high number and others a low number? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vilnoori Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Other great apes than humans have 48 chromosomes, but humans have 46. This is because two chromosomes fused at some point in our past. Perhaps it is part of what makes us human. http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 That's awesome! Yes, I understand $200 is about standard for that type of test. Probably samples can be sent directly to her lab, vs. Paulides or whomever. I'd say take your own credit for a find if you have one, rather than sending it to some other purported researcher. I wouldn't trust Disotell, he has a closed mind on the issue. He is using DNA testing only, she is using a panel of tests including microscopic examination. He's just making money off these tests he does for people and then using it as a joke in his lectures. If I had a good sample there's no question who I would avoid. However, I might send it to someone completely different, just to keep things honest, or split the sample and send it to two different labs as a sort of control, such as Paleo-DNA Lab in Canada and Dr. Ketchum. And personally I wouldn't mention sasquatch or bigfoot at all, simply request the type of testing you want. Try to get as many types of DNA testing as possible, and a chromosome count if you are able to (need fresh, good sample of tissue like blood or skin). Hair microscopic examination is a must. Consider the lice issue as well, lice are DNA tested for species identification so if there is lice in your sample, then Bonus! Contact info: ----------------------------- Paleo-DNA Laboratory Genetic Testing Service 1294 Balmoral St. 300 Thunder Bay, ON Canada P7B 5Z5 ancientdna.com ---------------------------- Dr. Melba Ketchum DNA Diagnostics, Inc. d/b/a Shelterwood Laboratories PO Box 455 569 Bear Drive Timpson, TX 75975 Phone (936) 254-2228 Fax (936) 254-9286 http://www.dnadiagnostics.com/staff.html Vil: You say that Todd Disotell is making money off these tests; what would be your evidence for that? he is not in a for-profit organization; he can't pocket any fees. The two labs you cite are for profit, and they are forensic labs which don't have Disotell's expertise in distinguishing primate DNAs. Who is more likely to be in it for the money, and who is more likely to come up with the right answer? You seem to put a lot of importance on microscopic examination. Can you provide any good evidence that a microscopic examination of a hair could provide any definitive evidence of a particular primate species? Here is what Disotell said recently in Texas: I've tested 50 samples. I've said over and over, "I will analyze credible data because I either do good science and debunk it, or I have the find of the century." Either way, as a scientist, it's no lose. Tenure helps. You are making recommendations about Ketchum and this Paleo DNA lab. What track record are you basing this on? What results have they gotten to make you recommend them? what experience/training do they have in distinguishing various primate DNA? Have you used either one? Do you know the people personally? I take it you don't have any business connection to either one? Do you have any evidence that Dr. Disotell is a corrupt or unethical scientist who would lie or conceal his findings? Do you not think he realizes the potential importance of his finding, to his career? Do you have any evidence of him being associated with scammers or fakers? Do you question his expertise in the area of concern? Thanks, p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 12, 2010 Share Posted October 12, 2010 Parnassus, maybe you could provide in detail, just what we can expect from Disotell as proof of what is sent to him, is in fact what he says it is. No official results in print with his name on it = waste of samples and time. What is he willing to do for us on his own dime for free? The purpose of morphological exam, is to tie the morphology to the actual sequences of DNA, they belong together and form the chain of evidence. If in fact the samples are from a new species, biologists will then be able to ID the new species by the morphology of the hair and document it's distribution wherever that type of hair is found. I might be tempted to test Disotell with a sample, but it will be well after I allready know what I have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Well what lab would people recommend? If I ever had anything like hair, I was going to send mine to the University of South Carolina and let them send it out to the right place. Like Vilnoori, bigfoot would never be mentioned, I thought I would just say it was a deceased relative with an unidentified genetic syndrome that passed away and the family needed some answers, if possible. God knows what I would do if the CDC showed up on my doorstep with a court order to draw my blood........ Anyway,even if an institution is non-profit, it doesn't mean they don't charge fees for their services. I've worked for places like that before, that is just a way to change a facility's tax status. I don't know about Dr. Disotell's specific situation but I can't imagine that his facility provides services for free unless it is some kind of special funding for specific research projects. I doubt hair balls that might belong to bigfoot would fall into any of those categories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vilnoori Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Parnassus, I have seen what he has said about his testing of bigfoot samples, and it did not convince me he was on the level. He may be a specialist for testing primate DNA but I have no guarantee that he is as good with human mtDNA and Y-chromosome testing. He doesn't seem to combine his DNA testing (and just what test is it) with any other sort of test. If sasquatches exist and, based on foot morphology and other behaviour, they are actually a descendant of H. erectus, or H. sapiens neanderthalis, or simply some large undiscovered tribe of H. sapiens sapiens that happens to have giantism and be extra hirsuit, how can we distinguish them from modern populations? We have nothing at this point that says definitively what these creatures are. It all comes down to the preconceptions of the person doing the testing as to what tests to conduct, and his preconceptions seem to lie with a possible non-human great ape such as Giganto. He doesn't seem to be testing for anything else. And as for cost, well, "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch." And if there is, I would highly suspect it. As far as I know with Dr. Ketchum, she got DNA results that pointed to human (as I would fully expect based on foot morphology from the tracks), and yet the hair morphology was way too large. That got her attention and she decided to investigate further. I have no business connections with any of these, I wish I did have a sample to parcel out but no such luck. Yet. It would be fun to send a sample of anything really promising to all of the above and compare what each one says. It would take money though, and I'm afraid I probably couldn't afford anything like that anyway. Jodie I'm not sure about the deceased relative idea, though at least they would be thinking human and going that route which would be good. Do you have to give a provenance/reason for a sample? Just leave it a mystery. I like the idea of saying it was on a native mask, or something, and you want to know if it is human, what type of human, or animal, or, it was on your damaged RV or property or something and you want to find the culprit. I don't know. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 13, 2010 Share Posted October 13, 2010 Hi Vilnoori, I think I see your point, so allow me to paraphrase and please correct me if I go astray. As a hypothesis, you are suggesting that "bigfoot" may be in fact be modern Homo sapiens, but of a subspecies or race that has developed some form of gigantism and hairiness and completely eschewed technology? If so, I'm sure we can agree that the divergence between that form and the rest of us modern humans must have occurred some time ago, resulting in perhaps (at least) tens of thousands of years of reproductive isolation. Thus, I would expect that DNA from such individuals might come back "human" from only a very coarse test, as in "more human than this rhinoceros to which we compared it." But shouldn't a level of testing to distinguish between say chimps and humans be able to produce a result like "human, but really odd human"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts