The Sykes / Sartori Report - Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

Can I self-publish like Ketchum? 

[Guest Darrell]

Is Sykes going to "buy" his own "respected" journal to publish his report in?

[Cotter]

^Has Sykes done anything like that before?  Is it common for world renown geneticists to do this?

 

[Guest Darrell]

Ketchum did, wasnt she world "renown"? Now I dont think Sykes will do that. I would expect his data and science to be on the level. However, my own thoughts on this is that it will not prove or establish anything. Or if it will even publish.  Just like Ketchum, if this is the basket you are putting all your eggs in, you may want to find another chicken.

[southernyahoo]

I expect Sykes to write up what he has, but wonder what he would say about any human/hominin results. I'd be curious to see what there is to say about the hair morphology or if he is even documenting that. He seems open minded, but, I can only see it expressed as a tease to sell his book, if there is no resolution in his science paper.

[Guest Darrell]

I think the data will be pretty strait forward. It is what it is after all: Unknown or known. Im probably more curious to see the fall out and backlash after the report publishes, if it publishes..

[Guest]

Sykes' results will inevitably be compared to what Ketchum found. This community will hope that he finds something entirely different, but the odds don't look good to me.

I f his findings shows a unique species, they will run it through Blast and have 10 different people with 10 different animals like they did with this study.

Blasted, Blast!! It's going to Blast Bigfoot out of existence ! 

[WSA]

Ketchum, world renown[ed]?! Did I miss something? As far as I can recall, before she published her study, she was as obscure as one could be in this field, am I right?

[Cotter]

Ketchum did, wasnt she world "renown"? Now I dont think Sykes will do that. I would expect his data and science to be on the level. However, my own thoughts on this is that it will not prove or establish anything. Or if it will even publish.  Just like Ketchum, if this is the basket you are putting all your eggs in, you may want to find another chicken.

 

I'm not certain how Sykes and Ketchum and their actions are related?  Ketchum was not a world renowned gentecist, was she?  I don't know what he has or what he will attempt to get published, if I knew that I'd hit the ol' lotto store and get myself a ticket!

 

Darrell - are you privy to some inside info?  How do you know this is 'just like Ketchum'? 

 

As far as eggs go, I've got plenty of eggs for plenty of baskets.  Say, you seem to be some sort of insider on this, do you know of any other geneticists currently studying alleged BF DNA?  I'd like to follow their projects as well.

 

Thx.

Ketchum, world renown[ed]?! Did I miss something? As far as I can recall, before she published her study, she was as obscure as one could be in this field, am I right?

 

That's what I thought.  Kind of like Musky Allen "the biggest BF skeptic".

Edit - I believe the similarities between Ketchum and Sykes end at : They are both people studying (studied) alleged BF DNA.

[Guest Darrell]

Nope not an insider in any of this mess. Just have a decent dose of common sense. My only comparrison to Ketchum is that when she jumped into this the proponent gang made her the new bigfoot messiah and you couldnt question anything about her creds or work. I made some very common sense predictions on the Ketchum thing and guess what, I was almost 100% right. Lets see how I bat on this one.

[Cotter]

^ I look forward to the outcome as well.

[WSA]

I think Darrell, anyone with a curiosity about this (and I'm thinking that is all of us here) would naturally want ANYONE to analyze whatever evidence there is available, and that goes double for DNA evidence, no? You want the best people you can find to do that, absent anyone else willing to do it that is better. At the time Dr. Ketchum stepped up to do the study, and to make her findings public, she was in a field of exactly one, am I right?  Now, it looks like that effort may not have been wasted as I'm fairly sure Dr. Sykes' interest in this was amplified by all the brouhaha surrounding Ketchum's work, don't you think? He would have been my first choice to do something like this, if I were allowed to choose. Better late than never, I say.

 

If his findings are 4-square with Ketchum's, that is going to be pretty momentous, for both of them and all of us here. But,  if he contradicts her findings, but still lands on the side of proving this, Ketchum will be quickly forgotten and Sykes' findings will be the new standard. That is just a predicted fact, given his stature in the scientifc community.Ketchum will either be raised up in they eyes of all those who criticized her, or she is destined for obscurity, depending on what Sykes' publishes. 

[Guest Darrell]

Im curious as well and agree with you. However, I think its short sighted of anyone in this phenomina to take anything on the face value of the reputation of the person involved.  

[indiefoot]

I'm curious to find out what, if anything, he saw or experienced while he was in the PNW. IIRC, something happened and it was hushed up.

[southernyahoo]

 

I think Darrell, anyone with a curiosity about this (and I'm thinking that is all of us here) would naturally want ANYONE to analyze whatever evidence there is available, and that goes double for DNA evidence, no? You want the best people you can find to do that, absent anyone else willing to do it that is better. At the time Dr. Ketchum stepped up to do the study, and to make her findings public, she was in a field of exactly one, am I right?  Now, it looks like that effort may not have been wasted as I'm fairly sure Dr. Sykes' interest in this was amplified by all the brouhaha surrounding Ketchum's work, don't you think? He would have been my first choice to do something like this, if I were allowed to choose. Better late than never, I say.

 

If his findings are 4-square with Ketchum's, that is going to be pretty momentous, for both of them and all of us here. But,  if he contradicts her findings, but still lands on the side of proving this, Ketchum will be quickly forgotten and Sykes' findings will be the new standard. That is just a predicted fact, given his stature in the scientifc community.Ketchum will either be raised up in they eyes of all those who criticized her, or she is destined for obscurity, depending on what Sykes' publishes.

 

That's pretty much correct IMHO. From my perspective Dr. Ketchum did not appear to be the type to deliberately taint or tamper with her results. So I feel with 100+ samples demonstrating a consistent result, atleast to her, it will be predictive of what Sykes finds.

He supposedly has samples from other countrys and not just U.S. samples, and nobody can speak for their provenance, so I think we can expect some known animals in the mix, unless he does not intend to include the negatives.

I guess if he were excluding the negatives, then the fact he is writing up his results would tell us something.