georgerm Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 Would be a good idea JDL, if the chain is short. Where does Sykes and Sartori go from here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted December 8, 2013 Share Posted December 8, 2013 Maybe Sykes could test some of the samples that were in the Ketchum study. There were at least 100 that she claimed tested positive for "forest people" DNA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 Maybe Sykes could test some of the samples that were in the Ketchum study. There were at least 100 that she claimed tested positive for "forest people" DNA. This makes good sense to me. Why reinvent the wheel if samples are shareable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted December 9, 2013 Share Posted December 9, 2013 (edited) There's been a few of the same samples tested already by various labs and they all turned out to be known species. The fact that half of the samples she collected turned out to be Bigfoot just seems very suspicious IMO. Edited December 9, 2013 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Is she sending out her samples or does she have the DNA testing equipment? Dr. Sykes stated he had a special method of washing human DNA off samples. Does Ketchum know this washing method? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 While we're on that: it seems to me that anyone eager to be vindicated and convinced she's right would be pushing Sykes pretty hard to validate her results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SDBigfooter Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 I don't think Sykes is one to be pushed. I do not know what motivated him to get into Human Genetics but if it was his priority to prove/disprove there is something else out there, I think he would have done so. Then again, maybe he already did. We can only hope that we learn the truth about Melba. Was she legitimate? Is she just really sloppy? Or simply an outright fraud? At this point, all we can do is wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucasJ Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 (edited) Ancient Humans Bred with Completely Unknown Species http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-evolution-human-origins/ancient-humans-bred-completely-unknown-species-001059#.UpKGhAmkH8U.facebook isn't this what M.Ketchum concluded? seems she was on-track after all with her results. Edited December 10, 2013 by LucasJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Interesting article Lucas, and thanks for posting. We open one door to the mystery and then 10 more locked doors appear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucasJ Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 (edited) Actually M.Ketchum posted the link on her Facebook page(she is taking 'friends' invites if interested)... https://www.facebook.com/melba.ketchum and she seems to occasionally answer questions. This new study kinda 'confirms' the 'unknown' DNA found in her study, most everyone was saying she is a 'quack', but now this new study is going in the exact same direction.... she caught a lot of criticism from people; but anyone going 'against the grain' is going to find it rough going. Sykes was all about dis-proving the existence of an unknown hominid, his conclusions are that for hundreds(thousands) of years all the locals & native people that have lived for in the areas for generations were all just seeing things and that they need eyeglasses. Those Bigfoot Files episodes from Britain really are just for the uneducated researcher. Sykes is your typical 'comfort zone' researcher. J.L. Edited December 12, 2013 by chelefoot Language rule 2B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 (edited) We can only hope that we learn the truth about Melba. Was she legitimate? Is she just really sloppy? Or simply an outright fraud? I think the answer is pretty obvious now. Edited December 11, 2013 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Maybe she's being guided by psychic communication, or BF Morse code, or oh, nevermind. I can't bring it off. It's gotten too silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SDBigfooter Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Obvious only to you my....friend. I've learned that with this subject, it is best to keep an open mind. Otherwise, I'm not sure what I would be doing here making comments. I do not know Melba personally, but she is the underdog. She laid some information out there and while interesting, only someone else's stab in the dark will show her true colors. And wonderful steering my good man. It's great to have you on board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Actually M.Ketchum posted the link on her Facebook page(she is taking 'friends' invites if interested)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts